This paper is about the discourse on the method of conducting one’s reasoning as well as seeking the truth in science in relation to the reasoning. René Descente’s attributes many different aspects in doubt and faith rebukes and tries to explain them with science. This paper looks into the different attributes.
The meditations of the first philosophy, written by Rene Descartes’, subtitled ‘’ in which the existence in God and immorality of the soul are demonstrated is on the balance of doubt and faith in discourse. René’ considers that the existence of God has to be proven through demonstration of philosophy. He attributes that believers use circular reasoning as a concept for their theological believe.
He bases his argument on the fact that believers believe in God because of the scriptures and according to the scriptures as inspired by God but the same scriptures also assert that the mind of man is enough to discover God. René’ also speaks concerning the soul. He believes that there s no there is no existence and immortality of the soul. However, many philosophers have begged to differ with this concept. (Descartes, 1983) They assert that if there was no existence of the soul, then human being s would not exist.
This is because human beings are spiritual being who were created or have souls in order to exist. May bible scholars use the bible as reference to their arguments? For example, the bible speaks of losing of the soul in the eternal fire. Thus the bible clearly asserts that human beings are spiritual beings that can only exist if their soul is alive. Rene’ further lies across a pattern of thought that is also known as a representationalism. This thought is in answer to the thoughts laid out in his book on mediation. He states that humans only have access to the world of ideas, and that the things in the world are only accessed indirectly. This has however, attracted many different criticism on the same. If this concept is true, it means that humans the only way that human beings can access the world is through ideas, many scholar and philosophers have differed on this concept. They suggest that there are many other ways that humans access the world apart from ideas.
Ideology, according to the critics can be one way to access the world but not the only way to access the world. The other concern of the human mind according to Rene’, was that ideas are understood to include all the concepts of the mind. These include the perception, memories, images, concepts, believes, intentions and many more. This concept has also drawn a lot of criticism on the same. Many critics see this as a limiting concept which does not explain in totality the concept of the mind. The mind, according to the critics, is an entity on its own with the ability to memorize, create, visualize, analyze, compare among many other functions.
The other point Rene’ outlined was that ideas and the things they represent are separate from each other. Many critics also found this concept a limitation to the ability of the mind. He also asserted that things represented things were external from the mind. He argues that the representation of the things disconnect the world from the mind. The main question is how is this possible? How can he prove this point? He uses the first plank to construct this bridge. This states that he is convinced that there is nothing in the world, no sky, no mind, and no minds. He attributes and accuses a deceiver, for making these things what they are not. In order to make him thing he is nothing when he is something. In simple terms Rene’ is stating that one’s consciousness implies that they exist.’’ I think therefore I am’’ is a famous quote from his book which holds the same meaning on this concept. This however is very confusing and not many people quite understand the meaning of the quote and concept. Through this method of analysis, Rene simply tries to trace the balance between doubt and faith in the discourse.
The rational that Rene for each believe are; Reasoning, this is the justification or rational for thinking. This simply means that if a person knows something it means that he believes that this thing is true. This justification can be given by intuition, reasoning and sense experiencing. The other rational is certainty. It is developed for the criteria of developing the claims of people that they know something. The other rational is used to determine whether knowledge as opposed to opinion is possible .This rationale focuses on the reason and sense experience.
A rationalist theory on the same claims that knowledge as opposed to opinion can only be possible if it is based on the reality or absolute and certain principals. This notion asserts that these principals are not learnt through experience but are learnt through the ratio of reasoning. This simply means that experience can not guarantee the certainty of what is said to be true. In this case, reasoning is a more recognized basis that can be relied on in determining if the opinions are justified true believes. What can be deduced from this principal? Knowledge can be deduced from this principal to be otherwise undoubtable. This simply implies that a thing can not be and be at the same time. It has to be one of the two. Either it is or it is not. Rene; on the other hand claims that believing that reality is fundamental is useless or pointless.
This suggests that the only way to determine the justification of our believes is if they are traceable back to its roots. In this case the roots include; statement, belief and proposal that can not be doubt at any cost. A proposal according to Rene’ can provide a firm with an important foundation that can not be doubted. The application of the principal of truth on which knowledge can be based, Rene’ developed a principal or method that merely suspends the confidence on what many people have been taught over the years. He simply suggests that in order to know if what we know is true, we first have to doubt what we know in order to determine whether it is true. This method brings doubt in all that many people to have believed as the truth fir many years. However, this is a very confusing concept which is not understood by many.
The many questions that are asked about this method are; how can one doubt every thing in order to determine if it is true? How does this method relate to the determination of the truth? These questions have tried to be answered by many analysts and critics over the years but no corporate answer have been found on the same. (Willy, 2006) René’ asserts that experience is very deceiving and should not be relied upon, other scholars see it the other way around and instead suggest that experience is not deceiving and can be relied on. Rene’ also suggests that we can not be sure if we have real bodies, he asserts that we only believe we have bodies because a n evil and deceiving power has caused us to believe so. He also claimed that the human body was not an important part of self because its existence can be doubted but the existence of the mind can not be doubted. However, this method has raised many questions like how can existence of the body be doubted, if the body is real in all aspects of this life? This does not only put in doubt his doubts but his truth as well.
There were two objects in Rene’s rationalization. The first object was a self evidence of ideas that has been rejected and criticized in the later or modern days. This simply means that there is no general agreement amongst philosophers on the idea of self knowledge. The second object was that the self evidence ideas provided no knowledge about the world. The argument was that sense experience may not be certain but it definitely provides information that is reliable. On the other hand, knowledge cannot be qualified on the basis that it is not certain.
Rene’s purposes are based on the theory of justification. This tries to justify and understand the propositions and believes on the same. The most important features of belief are based on the ideas of justification, warranty of justification, rationality of justification and the probability of justification. Rene’s arguments and believes, or his doubts and faiths may be confusing and conflicting with each other but these are his believes. However, believes need an amount of evidence for the belief to be justified. (Habermas, 1990) In Rene’s case, most of his beliefs were not justified by any evidence but on reasoning, assumption and on knowledge. If Rene’ would have shown evidence on the same, it would have been a way to justify his beliefs. This simply means that Rene’ believe remain as beliefs that have not been proven. The justifiable tools that Rene’ used were adductive reasoning, deduction, empicism, induction and the probability theory. The question is’ was this enough to justify his beliefs and claims?
In this case the only reason or Rene’s purpose for this premise was to outline and share what he believed with the world. He also tried to instill his believes by the use of adductive reasoning deduction and the probability theory. This was merely based on the assumption of what really is and what really is not. In some instance he is seen to doubt his very own existence and the existence of his body. If he did not exist, then how come he existed? If he did not have a body but a mind, then what medium was he using to move around? These beliefs made an impact in the premises for doubt and believe but still left a doubt in the doubt and belief in his premise. Rene’ discourses on the method for conducting one’s reasoning well being was therefore not justified by evidence but by assumptions, reasoning and self knowledge.
Rene’ was one of the people who have made an impact on different aspects of science .He tried to explain, in relation to his own believes, the discourse in the methods of conducting one’s reasoning .His concepts were a great challenge to many philosophers. Though many did not agree with his believes and concepts on the same. He still made the impact that he intended to. He created a theory that will be remembered from his time and to the many generations to come.