Rene’ Descartes was a rationalist French philosopher, mathematician, and scientist. He is very well-known for being one of the first philosophers to expand his reasoning into doubt. Descartes influenced the method of doubt as he sought to truly determine how he could find out for certain what was true and what was not. He decided the way to accomplish this was to doubt the truth in all his beliefs and past experiences that he had acquired throughout his life. Once he reached a certain age, Descartes decided to travel the world and mix with various types of people, culture, and ranks in which he gathered a multitude of experiences, “Several years have now elapsed since I first became aware that I had accepted, even from my youth, any false opinions for true, and that consequently what I afterward based on such principles was highly doubtful; and from that time I was convinced of the necessity of undertaking once in my life to rid myself of all the opinions I had adopted, and of commencing anew the work of building from the foundation”(Descartes 1).
By doing so, and expanding his horizons he was able to test his self and reflect personally, in which he was able to find some type of prophecy from it all that demonstrated how we do not only have to search for knowledge in books, or authority, but that we can actually find it within ourselves. Descartes was considered a rationalist at the time because most continued to back up their theories, appeals, and reasoning by God, but he chose not to do so. Descartes spent his life justifying how one could and should find the truth and knowledge within themselves because he truly believed that we did not have to find it within God because we also hold the very parts within our self. Descartes practiced his philosophy and life tasks by breaking down big problems, questions, and things into smaller parts, he believed that by doing this one could better understand the questions, which is what he called “The Method of Doubts”, which he once compared to having a barrel of apples consisting of good and bad, then examining each apple to ensure only the good ones are left. Descartes believes consciousness is the essence of thinking and the core of which we can explore our existence.
Descartes spent his life trying to answer the ultimate question, how can one know that one truly exists without thinking they are a dream or fantasy? The one thing that he stated he did know and could trust was that he was thinking, he went on to explain how existence could be proved by a “trick”. He used the term Cogito ergo sum which defined and translated means, I think therefore I am, and explains that he could not be thinking or wondering if he existed if he did not exist to begin with, and this thought and defined term was the proof of his existence that he used to explain his argument about consciousness and self. He wanted humans to know how our minds could allow us to discover more and realize that much of what was wrong with the world was because of how we misuse our mind. He believed that life was an attempt to teach us to better equip our minds to think rather than just to exist. Unlike Descartes, there were many philosophers that completely disagreed with his methods and argued against him.
127 our experts are availableright now
David Hume was a philosopher that belonged to the traditional British empiricism, which included philosophers like John Locke, which he gained insight from and used in his philosophical teachings, though he disagreed with some methods of those before him. The traditional view is that knowledge is founded using sense-perception, but Hume disagreed and believed that knowledge is limited to sense-experience. He argued for his approach by explaining what sense-experience consists of first distinguishing the difference between impressions and ideas, “Impressions, which include all our sensations and passions, are more forceful and lively than ideas, which are the faint images of these in thinking and reasoning” (Hume 1).
Hume goes against Western philosophy as he states that it is not possible for humans to know the “cause”, or why something happened because our experiences are not based on reasoning. He also argued that “we ultimately have no idea what the “elf is because our ideas of it are based off of impressions, therefore if we had an actual idea of what the self is it would be an impression, which it clearly is not based on his definition of an impression” (Owens). Humes’ basis of his argument that we have no idea of self consists of: “But self or person is not any one impression, but that to which our several impressions and ideas are supposed to have a reference. If any impression gives rise to the idea of self, that impression must continue invariably the same, through the whole course of our lives; since self is supposed to exist after that manner. But there is no impression constant and invariable.
Pain and pleasure, grief and joy, passions and sensations succeed each other, and never all exist at the same time. It cannot, therefore, be from any of these impressions, or from any other, that the idea of self is derived; and consequently, there is no such idea” (Hume1). Humes’ view on personal identity follows his view on the self, it is impossible to find, define, or have an idea of what it is : “The whole of this doctrine leads us to a conclusion, which is of great importance in the present affair, that all the nice and subtile questions concerning personal identity can never possible be decided”( Hume 7), we can not obtain our identity through our memory or impressions :“Identity depends on the relations of ideas; and these relations produce identity, by means of that easy transition they occasion. But as the relations, and the easiness of the transition may diminish by insensible degrees, we have no just standard, by which we can decide any dispute concerning the time, when they acquire or lose a title to the name of identity” (Hume 7). Humes’ approaches are unique and skeptic compared to others, and due to its complexity, it may be confusing for some to understand, which causes them to disagree with, and argue against his views.
There are many ways in which Descartes and Hume differ from one another, the first being that one is a rationalist and modern thinker, and the other belongs to a traditional empirical view. Descartes went against those before him as well as nature when he established the differences between the mind and body, he believed that there is a unity between the mind and body because there are conjoined physically, but they are different, “Descartes’ philosophical account gives a solution according to his dualistic view on human nature in which mind and body are distinct from one another – mental and physical substances respectively. According to him, the personal identity or ‘self’ is a mental substance added to a physical or bodily substance constituting the so-called ‘entire self.’ Descartes’ view embraces changes as long as the non-physical substance remains the same” (Behrens).
Whereas, Humes’ strictly disagreed and criticized Descartes view on many matters including the personal identity, “Hume criticizes this view in presenting the self as a fiction created by philosophers in attempt to bridge the gaps such theories leave behind” (Jessop and Cranston). Descartes clearly believes that the problems concerning the self or personal identity can be found through intense rational and critical thinking within ones’ self. He looked to teach that rather than abandoning our passions, perceptions, feelings, and impressions as if they are nothing, if instead we could be taught or learn to understand and control them we would be able to reach for more self-attainment and external realization.
Descartes believed that even those with the weakest souls could master their passions if they were willing to train them and ultimately gain an independent vision of their personal existence. Another difference between the two greatly known philosophers were their definition and thoughts on what an idea was, Hume believed ideas derived from impressions while Descartes believed there were three types of ideas, which were, innate, adventitious, and our imaginations. To me, the ultimate difference between the two were their theories on thoughts on self, Humes’ believed that since our consciousness is constantly changing that there could be no self, because it should be the same and unchanging, while Descartes followed the modern view of allowing one self to somewhat start over and change their mindsets, passions, and impressions in order to develop them so one could truly think and acquire knowledge for themselves.
I prefer Descartes’ view, because, as someone who has had lots of doubts and struggled with mental illness I take comfort in his approach on deep self-reflection and its’ ability to solve the most complex problems we face and alter the mind in a positive way. During his philosophical inquiries, he decided that there was no need for teams, spectators, experiments, data, scientist, traditions, and complicated definitions or vocabulary but he believed and practiced how one could obtain more knowledge in just a quiet room alone with a reasonable and open mind. Growing up, I was raised to follow many traditions and rules that shaped my views, thought, and actions, and I am now at the point and age where many of what seemed and I believed to be true are doubtful, and I am interested in exploring myself and my external world as well. Descartes encouraged those to deeply reflect within oneself to find the doubt in which we were taught and the truth in the new to help explain ourselves and the perplex questions that cause the confusion in human nature and the second guessing we face every day.
Hume followed the traditions of empiricists thoroughly, using observations and experience in his approaches as well as a great deal of skepticism. He was not afraid of arguing those before him and making it clear as to why their practices, views, and approaches were wrong and should not be used to obtain the truth to existence. His bundle theory that states, “the effect that the mind is merely a bundle of perceptions without deeper unity or cohesion, related only by resemblance, succession, and causation” (Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopedia), which directly opposes Descartes theory on the self and his, I think therefore I am, approach. I disagree with Humes’ approach and think that there is more to the self than just its properties and experiences, there is a deeper understanding to knowledge for ones’ life that one can only find within their selves.
Reasoning and critical-thinking should be used as a method of finding the truth, we should not doubt something from the beginning just based on others’ observations without having our own grounds and reasons for doubt. If we were to believe that each of our beliefs were automatically false there would be nothing for us to look to explain and try to understand. Hume has many arguments about the self, one thesis being, that we have no soul because our consciousness is always changing and believes that any idea we have of our identity can not be supported by reason because it is made up of our reality. Our reality is what we can use to make reason of everything not only in our own individual world, but also in others. If we were to doubt without reason and not even attempt to make reason and find the knowledge within ourselves and the world we would go our whole lives believing that we have nothing to base our identity off of which would ultimately take away from our ability to form relationships with others and be aware of ourselves whether in a specific time, moment, our memories, or our future.
Works Cited
- Behrens, Katja A. “A Question of Hume’s Theory of Personal Identity.” The Oxford Philosopher, Ddddd1 July 2014, theoxfordphilosopher.com/2014/07/01/a-question-of-humes-theory-of-dddddddpersonal-identity/.
- Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Bundle Theory.” Encyclopedia Britannica, dddddddEncyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 18 Nov. 2016, www.britannica.com/topic/bundle-theory.
- Descartes, René, 1596-1650. Discourse On Method ; and, Meditations on First Philosophy. DdddddIndianapolis :Hackett Pub. Co., 1993. Print.
- Hume, David. “A TREATISE OF HUMAN NATURE.” Gutenberg, Project Gutenberg, www.gutenberg.org/files/4705/4705-h/4705-h.htm.
- Jessop, Thomas Edmund, and Maurice Cranston. “David Hume.” Encyclopedia Britannica, dddddddEncyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 5 May 2018, www.britannica.com/biography/David-Hume.
- Owens, David. “SCEPTICISMS: DESCARTES AND HUME.” White Rose Research Online, ddddddSage, 2000, eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/1211/1/owensdj3.htm.
- Tim. “Descartes: Philosophy Summary.” Philosophy & Philosophers, Philosophy & dddddd dddddddPhilosophers, 17 Apr. 2013, www.the-philosophy.com/descartes-philosophy-summary.
- Watson, Richard A. “René Descartes.” Encyclopedia Britannica, Encyclopedia Britannica, dddddInc., 6 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/biography/Rene-Descartes
