René Descartes – the inner experience.

Notes for my tutorial – any feedback is always most welcome.  

 

Introduction

René Descartes (1596 -1650) is regarded as the father of modern westernised philosophy. His Cartesian (Latin translation of his name ) philosophy is that  ‘I am certain that I can have no knowledge of what is outside me except by means of the ideas I have within me.’

Hence Descartes' theory of ideas have contributed immensely to influence philosophical enquiry from the seventeenth century but are difficult to pin down.

But he is more famously known for his statement I think therefore I am. His influence permeated philosophical enquiry to be largely unchallenged for nearly 3 centuries.  He talks about the immaterial mind which is our consciousness where our soul resides. According to Descartes our consciousness is an essence arising from the perfect substance attributable to GOD, distinct to that of the body. Hence the minds ascension over the bodies’ senses is the GOD given means we need not be deceived by our senses. The immediate reaction you may have is to query what he means in this context by the use of word substance.

Substances

Note the 17^th century philosopher’s use is quite different to its meaning today as it was meant then to denote the ultimate constituents of reality.

Descartes draws a distinction between a substance which is a thing that doesn’t depend on any other things (a material thing such as a rock) and the created substance which do depend on other things.  GOD therefore is the perfect substance, so that the body is an extension as he call it, only guided by the senses.   

Later on Descartes ignores the distinction between GOD and creation to define a substance in a more general way. A substance is subject to varying modes but can’t be a mode of anything else. 

In summary then there are 2 types of created substance—thinking substances and extended substances.  So that each created substance has one attribute to constitute its nature and essence. Descartes means thinking substances are ‘mind’ and hence the body is an extended substance.

Influencing factors 

As a scientist Descartes wanted to develop a foundation in philosophy that was based on rational scientific theory that could not be doubted. At that time religious thinking was supported by Plato’s idea that a virtuous life was a happy one. But one first needs to have a knowledge of how one is to live a virtuous life. Aristotle expanded upon those circumstances with additional categories and an elaborate system of logic.  But as to how one has that knowledge and the nature of a belief in GOD, that was a matter for the church and the ecclesiastical bodies that represented its dogma. 

But as new ideas and discoveries permeated the landscape a growing disquiet and doubt grew as many found issue with religious beliefs.

Galileo had narrowly avoided the ‘rack’ by renouncing his views whilst others were less fortunate such as Giordano Bruno. He was influenced by Copernicus 1473-1543, who refuted the idea the earth was the fixed central point of importance in the universe. This was at odds with the strict biblical interpretation of Creation: ‘GOD fixed the Earth upon its foundation, not to be moved forever’

Bruno embraced an expended world view that made room for ancient wisdom streams. In 1600, Pope Clement VIII and the congregation ordered his works be prohibited and found him guilty of heresy. Appeals from his monastery were ignored and with a metal bit rammed into his mouth he was stripped, tied to a stake and, accompanied by the chants of the Confraternity, burned alive. 

This no doubt was to have a profound impact on Descartes, who mentions in his letters the need to avoid any theological controversies. 

But nevertheless in his Discourse on Method he argues against Aristotelian logic. For anyone wishing to peruse this matter Spark Notes provides a reference point.

https://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/discoursemethod/

However what emerges out of Aristotelian logic in modernity today may not have been what was taught at university to Descartes as a Jesuit student.

For some philosophers suggest he appears to argue erroneously against Aristotelian logic. For what was written by Aristotle over a thousand years previously could have misinterpreted or even corrupted by those in power at the time of Descartes.

Descartes meditations

He begins by asking the question how one can be sure of anything. Due to his training as a scientist, he wanted to formulate a scientific philosophy predicated on a logically reasoned basis that avoided being deceived. 

He decides that he cannot doubt his own existence as a thinking thing. His conclusion is that the mind is better known to him than the body which is just governed by the senses. The mind represents his consciousness which is where the soul resides. 

GOD is the perfect substance and its pure essence is represented in the mind to ensure we are not fooled by the senses.  That is the only place where learning can take place. Hence, like a skilled craftsman GOD stamped his pure essence in the mind in order that one would not be deceived by the senses.

In summary the central theme argued is a mind body dualism that proposes the mind is separate to the body. But it is difficult to know just how far Descartes wants us to believe the body is entirely separate and distinct to the mind. How could one exist without paying close attention to the sensory signals and learning from an environmental perspective?

A critique and conclusion

Although Descartes acknowledges the secondary role of the senses he doesn’t seem to leave room for the emotions.

Descartes attributes the senses as a kind of sub strata to the minds essence which have no influence over it. Therefore he does not entertain the idea of any central role that feelings might play in prompting us to think about things in general or in prompting learning. One might also say we simply see things differently in a material sense as between physical objects as opposed to mental representations for nonphysical things.

Modern day evidence of what must happen when a human brain is damaged by way of severe trauma, demonstrates that mental powers are always effected. This points to the idea that the brain and the mind are not separate. However there is plenty of room left for mystery in our amazingly complex human brains. 

But one might conclude about what we do know is our consciousness is represented by a whole of body experience, brought to clarity in the frontal brain lobes. The question of a Cartesian separatism seems unlikely but remains open to debate.