Erwel jay Arenas

Xaverian missionaries

Topic: Cartesian doubt: philosophical method for searching the reality.

Question: How can Cartesian doubt help a faithful to recognize the existence of
Supreme Being?

I. Introduction
Cartesian doubt also known as methodic doubt was formulated by Rene Descartes as one
of his philosophical inquiry in searching for the ultimate stance of reality. In the first half
of 17th century, the French rationalist Rene Descartes used methodic doubt to reach
certain knowledge of self-existence in the act of thinking, expressed in the indubitable
proposition cogito, ergo sum (I think, therefore I am)1. Rene Descartes addressed this
methodic doubt to the prior way of searching the ultimate truth that of which most of it
are dubitable. The Cartesian doubt comes in a certain process in dealing with things that
which leads a person to a certain doubt that the only Idea he may have in mind is that the
I exist which is indubitable. The First step of the Cartesian doubt is the
SENSATION in this process the person will eject those microscopic and telescopic
things and constitute only the reality to those things conceivable by the senses, Moreover
Descartes was not satisfied with what the senses tells him. However, he rejected it for
according to him we cannot trust what are senses tells us for we are just dreaming. The
second step of Cartesian doubt is the IMAGINATION. This step addressed the
problem of the first step which is about dreaming. The imagination explains that there are
times in a persons life that he thinks that what is inside his mind is certain truth not
knowing that it is only an imagination and that this imagination is brought by our
corporeal body. This corporeal body is composed of the different general sciences such as
PHYSICS, ASTRONOMY, and Medicine which Rene Descartes refuted for according to
him those sciences are to generalize. GENERALIZTION is the third step of Cartesian
doubt which Rene Descartes addressed to the problem, of the general sciences. According
to him it is MATHEMATICAL truth which gives us certainty and it gives us the simple
truth. INTELLECTUALISM is the fourth step which tells that if a person still doubts
this mathematical truth which was given by GOD then probably God is deceiving us. The
fifth step is the INFINITUDE, this addressed the problem of Gods deception,
According Descartes if God is good then he cannot deceive us if he cannot deceive our
thinking then there must be an EVIL GENIUS, the sixth step is the ANALYTIC
KNOWLEDGE, this analytic knowledge claims that it is the Evil Genius that
supplies our thinking, and that this evil genius is source of knowledge.

1
Htttp://www.britannica. com/topic/methodic-doubt
II.

Josiah Royce- contra position

Idea of truth is essentially a social idea. There is, of course the idea that a man can define by
himself; a man therefore can think of truth by himself alone, but even, through his to do
that the distinction between my past and my future self must be recognized. This is a fact
which has a very interesting reflection. The meaningless ideas cannot be true. In order to
possess truth, you have to be intelligible, when a person suppose his words to be an
expression of ideas that are intelligible, that intelligibility has no meaning unless there are
at least possible hearers to whom his words would be intelligible. Here the idea of
Descartes EGO COGITO ERGO SUM is questioned. Josiah Royce claim of idea sap
that ideas are meaningless or not true/ unintelligible unless there would be hearers who
will accept this intelligible. The philosophy of Descartes starts with the undebatable
certainty which is the ego or I, according to him he can build indubitable reality
through this I which is for Josiah Royce is questionable for she relies on this social idea
which a thing could be true or certain if someone would accept it as intelligible or true.
Because of this the problem of solipsism arises. Truth has a character of social reality. It
belongs to the character of being viewed as at least possibly by more than one individual
and not just by one. When I imagine any entity, I can observe that I myself am presently
along with this object as the supposed knower of it so, that whenever I try to conceive my
world, I am the center of it. My ideas are viewed as essential to asserting that world is.

Stuart Hampshire- Pro (the age of reason)

Descartes shows his method in action in the discourse and meditations, applying his method of
doubt until he arrives at the indubitable proposition I think, therefore I am. He also
shows that he cannot doubt the existence of God. Using these two indubitable truths he
proceeds to show that we have reason to believe in the existence of the external world,
although our ordinary judgments of perception are in themselves fallible and our senses
may deceive us. We cannot disregard mathematics in philosophy of Descartes, in fact this
is his model of clear and certain knowledge, which advances step by step from one
 indisputable conclusion to another. His method of doubt is also a product of his
mathematics through the use of deductive mathematics.

III. Assessment
The critique of Husserl to Cartesian doubt solipsism rings a bell for basically Cartesian doubt
portrays like what solipsist do. Solipsist says that the self is the only thing that exists;
hence the existence of all reality is a self-dependent. But the Cartesian doubt does not
claim that way through there is a particular stage in the Cartesian doubt that talks about
the EGO as the indivisible certainty it does not end there for there is still following
stages that go beyond that ego that leads to the existence of GOD as the cause of the
ego. Therefore, the critique of Husserl is no other than refutable for it only argues with
the particular stage of Cartesian doubt and later on generalizes is as if is solipsism.

I do not believe Descartes could properly be considered a solipsist. Husserls critique of

Descartes must be understood in the context of formers phenomenological project and,
in turn, on how he would understand the latters conception of mind. From the stand-
point of a phenomenologist, the cogito is an inescapable box, a Houdini-proof water chamber,
from which there is no prospect of moving outward a robust description of the full body of
experience. As Husserls interest is centered on Descartes conception of the mind and not
Descartes epistemic project, it is not surprising that he might draw that conclusion.

On the other hand Descartes, being trained in geometry and the methodology of mathematics, is
far more concerned with the foundation(s), if any, of knowledge itself. The fact that he is
profoundly influence by his deep interest in geometry is not unimportant, for it explains
two thing: (1) his concern for axiom-like foundations for knowledge; and, (2) his
assumption that truths must be apodictic. In line with those interest he decides to turn
skepticism to his advantage by applying it systematically to determine if he can get to
some propositions or belief that cannot doubted whatsoever. Clearly, he believed that if
he could locate such a belief or set of beliefs, then he would have discovered the
foundation upon which he entire edifice of knowledge is predicted.
The path Descartes takes is not unproblematic, at the beginning of the second meditation
Descartes summarizes what he has done and challenges, among other things, the veridical
quality of his own memory. (Of course we all know, much better than Descartes could,
that memories are often false; thats not in dispute.) Among the items in all of his own
memories is the cogito or, if you prefer, the I that is remembering. So, among the items
he is doubting is that very item he later discovers as something that cannot be doubted.
The very fact that he doubts the veridical character of his own memory raises issues for
Husserl, insofar as Descartes is losing access to essential features of conscious
experience: the subjective experience of time and the temporality of consciousness. There
is also the fact that his method is not merely systematic, it is serial: it moves from
categories most susceptible to skepticism to those that might appear least susceptible. In
doing, it fails. The very items Descartes doubts or thinks could be doubted (the existence
of his body, for instance) require assumptions the truth-value of which has already been
doubted (in this case, the reliability of sense-perception). That he must invoke a due ex
machina to escape the prior hypothetical of an evil genius reveals, at least to some, that
Descartes skepticism inevitability leads toward solipsism. So, whether Descartes is a
solipsists is not so much in dispute. What I think is on the table is whether Descartes is a
solipsist is not so much in dispute. What I think is on the table whether Descartes
method must inevitably direct us toward solipsism (rather that a foundation for
knowledge) 2

The Cartesian doubt is the center of my topic; hence I am more favorable to it.
The Cartesian doubt is an inquiry that claims we need to philosophically doubt so as to
know the reality. Its process seems so deceiving for it goes down to many schemes such
as the imagination, generalization, sensation, intellectualism, infinitude and
the evil genius but when we focus to its main concern (doubt to know) it gives us an
indubitable outcome, it is doubt by digging into the extent of finding the ego as the main
foundation. In

2
Dr. Brian Cameron, philosophy community, google, debate against the critique of Husserl.(accessed, December
07, 2015)
Accordance with the Cartesian doubt, when we are in search of reality it always depend to a first
person account that deals with Descartess starting from scratch, it claims that in order
to reality a person must somehow start from a very beginning of creating it and that
beginning starts from the ego which is the certain indivisible reality, we must begin
with the indivisible certainty and that is our ego, this ego will be the main foundation
of our digging to ascertain the reality.

I began this paper with a question How Cartesian doubt can helps a faithful to recognize the
existence of Supreme Being? indeed, Cartesian doubt is an inquiry that helps faithful to
recognize the existence of the Supreme being that of which they believed as true. As
faithful they believed that their existence is caused by Supreme Being that of which they
believe as the creator and the source of all being in this world. They ascertain this belief
through the help of Cartesian doubt. Faithful can use the Cartesian doubt to recognized
the existence of the supreme being by doubting all his world and the universe and world
itself such as Big Bang theory and etc. and after doubting and arrived on the
indivisible certainty which is the Ego he will dig again and rebuild those knowledge
that he demolished through the ego as the main foundation. After arriving on the ego a
Faithfull might question its existence and of where this ego came from and thats the time
when Innate ideas play its role, a faithful believe that this ego that he has comes from
the Supreme Being or God.
IV.

Appropriation
Cartesian doubt is a method of inquiry which comes in manner of critical thinking
is needed to understand it. It all starts with doubting which tells me how important it
is to assimilate things around me and not just accept ideas that come from others. The
doubt of Rene Descartes is one of a kind inquiry that will helps us fight foolishness
and make use of this ego that we have in building a knowledge leading to certainty.
This method is very interesting and convincing for this would tell us the basis of
reality can be found in our way of thinking. I must think for me to live.
Ego Cogito Ergo Sum tell us that trough thinking we define ourselves as living for
it is our nature. In comparison to Aristotle he once said All men by nature desire to
know which knowing starts from man himself. As student of philosophy the
Cartesian doubt is really an enormous challenge, it brings me not only an idea of how
will I face my everyday combat with my academic endeavor but how can I articulate
things which is new such as making my own Philosophy claims. The Cartesian doubt
helps not only my intellectual capacity but also my spirituality for it helps me to go
deeper of my understanding of my faith.