From Aristotelian Tradition to Cartesian Philosophy and Everything
Je pense, donc je suis
René Descartes, the French philosopher famous for the idea of cogito ergo sum, lived and worked at a moment of “paradigm shift.” It is a period, according to Thomas Kuhn, where one way of thinking (“worldview”) is being replaced by another. The old worldview was centered around the Aristotelian philosophy of the mind, knowledge, and science. The Discourse on the Method is thus a rather interesting book, because it was part of a movement in its early stages. There was an increasing discontent towards traditional philosophy inherited from Aristotle and the need to understand knowledge, its value, and how it could be learned. While Descartes’ work still exhibits characteristics of the old mode of thought, I will try to identify key old ideas or figures — which you might cleverly refer to as authorities — that Descartes wished to challenge or reinforce when writing the Discourse on the Method.
One of the clear themes of Descartes’ work is its diversion from the Aristotelian form of philosophy which governed Western scholarship for hundreds of years. According to the old Aristotelian tradition, the human mind is limited to reason and understanding. There is no distinction between what is “out there” and what we actually perceive. As such, according to this worldview, our sensory perception and our imagination is limited to things outside the mind and so are not purely mental. This view suggests that scientific conclusions can be deduced from sensory experience and is based on absolute certainty. On the other hand, one of Descartes’ most significant contributions to modern scientific thought is the concept of skeptical doubt regarding sensory experience and imagination. In Part 4 of his book he suggested that “…everything else of which you may think you are more sure — such as your having a body, there being stars and an earth, and the like — is less certain.” He draws a sharp distinction between what we perceive as true and what is “out there” — that sensory experience and imagination should be just as much subjective as reason and understanding. In suggesting that we may be dreaming or otherwise deceived, Descartes argues that sensory experience is not necessarily a faithful report of what is actually in the world. This different way of thinking is a complete departure from traditional philosophy. In other words, Descartes’ effort to redefine the concept of the mind shakes the foundation of Aristotelian scholasticism. Essentially, Descartes suggests that scientific observation is not purely an objective act of seeing the universe as it is; it must be an interpretive act undertaken with great care and discretion.
Descartes’ main goal is to sweep away the philosophical foundation of the past two millennia and start afresh. While he introduced the idea of doubting things that our minds perceive, he believes that one must be something in order to doubt. He asserts that doubt requires thought, and with this thought confirms one’s existence. As such, he adopts the principle Je pense, donc je suis (“I think, therefore I am”) as an infallible truth. With this principle he sets out in Part 4, perhaps the most important part of the Discourse, to prove the existence of a God. While it is possible to doubt that external things that we see such as the trees, the moon, light, and so on are deception of the mind, he believes that the same thing is not possible for God. These other thoughts are imperfect and as such they could easily be created by an imperfect mind. It is not conceivable that an imperfect mind could invent the idea of God because that would mean that the existence of a perfect being would depend on an imperfect mind. In Part 4 he wrote, “… whatever we conceive very vividly and clearly is true, is assured only because God exists and is a perfect being, and because everything comes from him.” He concludes that God is a perfect being and all perfections in himself are due to God’s perfection. While a significant portion of his work attempts to shake the foundation of Aristotelian philosophy, in this regard the Discourse attempts to prove the existence of God (or “a God”) and in turn builds more credibility to the authority of the Church.
We should note, however, that Descartes’ proof (or if I may, I will cleverly call it the “Cartesian proof of the existence of God”) are neither original nor satisfying by any standards. Most of it have been borrowed from medieval philosophy, unlike his revolutionary ideas about mind and certainty. His proof claims that God, an idea of perfection, must be caused by something as perfect as God himself. This way of proving the existence of God relies on the basic notion of causation that are, to say the least, questionable. If Descartes “proved” the existence of God in this manner, what then is the foundation by which Descartes builds upon? The ideas presented in this part of the Discourse represent a particular worldview, both with the method by which Descartes stated his claims and in their conclusions. It is important to note the extent of the influence of the Roman Catholic Church at the time of the writing of the Discourse. I think that while Descartes’ intention to prove the existence of God was put forth in good faith, he might as well have decided to remain loyal to the Christian doctrine and not to contradict any teachings of the Church so as not to provoke disorder.
The maxims presented in Part 3 in the Discourse are clear evidence of his Jesuit education. One of Descartes’ strategies is to win over Catholic scholars and Aristotelian philosophers by paying lip service to their traditions. Descartes owes most of his education to the Jesuits. It goes without saying that if his method has to have any impact in philosophical circles, it must be convincing to the Jesuits. It may be open to argument as to what extent the teachings of the Jesuits influenced Descartes, but it would seem that he is genuinely impressed with the Jesuits and his maxims stay in line with their teachings.
In his first maxim, Descartes states “…obey the laws and customs of my country, holding constantly to the religion in which by God’s grace I had been instructed from my childhood, and governing myself in all other matters.” It is clear in this maxim that he does not abandon the customs and teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. Notice that this seems to be contrary to his stated purpose of abandoning all his old opinions. However, Descartes has been careful in his writings here. He allows his actions to be guided by customs and traditions, whilst making a clear distinction between his thoughts and his actions. This frees him (at least in theory) from the necessity to question the existence of God and the authority of the Catholic church meanwhile insuring that this doubt will not offend his fellow countrymen.
Descartes’ philosophy contributed critically to the origins of modern science, even if we have taken his methods many steps further. Today, we conclude that we cannot have absolute certainty in the sciences. The skeptical doubt that he introduced in his methods raised important philosophical questions and redefined Western philosophy ever since. He successfully attempted to rethink the idea of mind, knowledge, and science. While the main theme of his writing attempted to shake Aristotelian tradition, he effectively paid lip service to the Church and to the Aristotelian scholars. Descartes frames the questions that have preoccupied what we now call “modern philosophy.” At the end of the day, our scientific paradigm owes a great deal to Descartes.
