Descartes Responses

RESPOND TO THESE 3 STUDENTS

 

 

Tyler Zagarella

Posted Date:

April 16, 2023 10:25 AM

Status:

Published

I believe there are many ways in which we acquire knowledge. The most profound way in which we acquire knowledge is experience. What kind of experience? That can vary. There are physical experiences such as learning not to get close to a fire because it burns. That in a way is knowledge through experience. Then there are deeper ways in which we acquire knowledge through social connection. The first time we are lied to in life we learn not to trust everyone or everything all the time. These are just a few ways in which we acquire knowledge. Descartes took a much more drastic approach to the question of how we acquire knowledge. He essentially started from scratch, meaning he took all things he thought to be in existence off the table, including himself. He identified through deep thought that the fact that he is even able to question his own personal existence, means he must actually exist. Following this he theorized that geometry is undeniably real as well. The example he uses is that an object with four equal sides is always a square no matter what. George Yancy, Dean Moore, and Derrick Jensen would have varying ways to approach Descartes’ theories. George Yancy would argue that existence could be more identified through shared struggles, understanding, and experiences of individuals who viewed the world differently then Descartes, specifically African -Americans. Jensen disagrees with Descartes focusing on mathematics and geometry being the easiest things to prove existence, Jensen believes experience is more profound. If we experience something then it must be real. Jensen use the example of being tossed around on a ship, and the body’s reaction to this event would prove through experience, not geometry that that is a real experience and not a dream. My counter argument to that however is that even when we dream, we can feel things that are not really happening, and while we dream we often do not realize it is not real until we wake up. However a dream is still an experience.  Moore would argue the point that we can’t possibly know everything but what we are capable of imagining and feeling in our minds through experience and consciousness is what proves existence. He uses the example of wishing Descartes could be there to imagine how an animal breathes and exists the same as he does. I agree with all of these individuals but I mostly identify with Moore. Moore’s belief that existence is experience based and consciousness based. Believe what we can see and be open to the possibilities of what we can not.

 

 

 

MallaidhGartlan

Posted Date:

April 12, 2023 12:24 PM

Status:

Published

After reading Descartes’ Meditations 1-3, it is safe to say that Descartes believes that we acquire knowledge from certainty and not from our senses. Descartes has a unique approach to the question of “What can I know?” For instance, in order to truly understand what you know, Descartes believes that we should first demolish our opinions and start over again. This is stated in the beginning of Mediation one when Descartes states, “I realized that it was necessary, once in the course of my life, to demolish everything completely and start again from the foundations if I wanted to establish anything at all in the sciences that was stable and likely to last (Descartes, Meditations On First Philosophy, 76).” This approach fits in with his idea of doubt because he believes that by doubting your opinions and previous thoughts, you are searching to find certainty. Descartes knows that demolishing all of your opinions can be a daunting task, however he believes that if you establish a bit of doubt in them, you begin to demolish the entirety of your opinions. This is proven when Descartes states that “For the purpose of rejecting all my opinions, it will be enough if I find in each of them at least some reason for doubt (Descartes, Meditations On First Philosophy, 76).” While using his method of doubt, he shows how many of his beliefs do not pass his test of doubt. Eventually, one passes and Descartes reaches the conclusion of “I am, I exist (Descartes, Meditations On First Philosophy, 80).” He later changes his statement to be “I think, therefore I am.”

 

Derrick Jensen would critique Descartes’ approach by saying that his approach is narcissistic and that you should trust experience. For example, Jensen states that (Descartes’ approach), “Is representative of our culture’s narcissism. This narcissism leads to a disturbing disrespect for experience and a negotiation of the body (Jensen, 2000).” Jensen also brings up the point that Descartes places the world into two groups, the thinker and that which he thought. This means that the first group matters and the other does not. This is the philosophy that was used to oppress various groups of people throughout history.

 

George Yancy would critique Descartes’ approach by saying that his approach to philosophy is entirely different to the African American approach to philosophy. For instance, Yancy states that “Unlike Descartes, Black self-understanding grows out of a social matrix of pain and suffering; a site where the Black body is a site of marked inferiority, difference, and deviance (Yancy, 197-198).” Descartes’ approach is a Cartesian abstraction that is only good for people who have not experienced prejudices or assumptions about themselves. Yancy states that “Sociality is the matrix within racist action takes place. It is within the mundane everyday world that Black people struggle to be and attempt to make sense of their existence (Yancy, 202).”

 

Katheleen Dean More would critique Descartes’ approach by saying that he is naive. For instance, Descartes believed that humans have minds and have the thinking substance while plants and animals do not. Therefore, he believed that we are superior to plants and animals. Dean More states “I don’t know for sure what animals are thinking, but neither did Descartes, and that seems like a good reason not to rush to judgment about what’s on an animal’s mind (Dean More, 2021).” Kathleen Dean More would like us to realize that our world does not only revolve around us humans.

 

I agree with Katheleen Dean More and George Yancy. I agree with Kathleen Dean Moore, because I think that humans use the thought process  that humans have minds and have the thinking substance while plants and animals do not, to destroy the earth and not feel bad about it. This is proven when she states, “If they are going to reduce owl nesting sites to toilet paper and convince themselves that this is not a problem, then they will need to believe that humans have minds but other animals do not. But this is a matter of convenience, not truth (Dean More, 2021).”  I agree with George Yancy because he states that “Sociality is the matrix within racist action takes place. It is within the mundane everyday world that Black people struggle to be and attempt to make sense of their existence (Yancy, 202).” African Americans are faced with the attempt to make sense of their existence everyday and many struggle to do so because our societal philosophy is based on Cartesian beliefs.

 

Niouma Gassama

Posted Date:

April 15, 2023 5:52 PM

Status:

Published

We acquire knowledge through our experiences, so based on what we see, hear, touch etc. Based on our experiences we end up learning things about the world around us in our own way. However, Descartes goes on to state that he doesn’t really know anything or can rely on his own knowledge. He feels that people can’t trust their sense enough since we can be deceived by our senses to the point where we can’t distinguish reality from an illusion, therefore making our knowledge unreliable. So Descartes would doubt whatever knowledge he had based on his senses, but since he was able to think that way he believed in “I think, therefore I am ( a thinking thing)”. This statement is a complex statement that emphasized how Descartes believed that knowledge had to either have clear evidence to be accepted or has a logical reasoning to be accepted. However, there were philosophers that disagreed from George Yancy, Kathleen Dean Moore, and Derrick Jensen. Moore would critique Descartes’ approach by stating how human centered his approach is to the point that it makes humans believe that they are better than everything/the world around them. He might also state that his approach is an approach that brings out the arrogance of humans. Jensen would critique this approach by stating that his approach on how he separates his physical body from the nonphysical, meaning the mind. He might say that this approach is one that would be the reasoning behind why a person is narcissistic to the point that they would not associate themselves with any other living thing or nature itself and would only focus on themselves and isn’t a realistic approach to existence. Yancy would critique this approach by stating how specific it is and how it is not a statement that everyone can relate to, especially African American who Yancy feels would not have had the right to think in the sense that Descartes thought since for most of their lives they have been broken down to only their bodies being their existence/focus for many years. So, it wouldn’t make sense for the body to be separate from the mind. Yancy would most likely say that Descartes thoughts are too centered on an individual who would not have the same experiences as other races leading to a thought process that isn’t understanding of other races or groups. Out of these philosophers mentioned, I  think would agree the most with Jensen because I feel that Descartes ideology seems self-centered that it doesn’t make sense to truly deny anything in existence just because it seems that our senses can be deceiving, I think that doubt shouldn’t be the main focus when pertaining to knowledge, thoughts alone shouldn’t make up a person’s knowledge or the basis of their existence and that there are more  aspects that should be incorporated which also include senses, which is something the Descartes constantly doubts and something that I think Jensen talks about in his view of Descartes’s Meditations 1-3.