Rene Descartes was a French philosopher in the 17th century who focused on the most common aspect in life: doubt. Where does doubt come from? How can we know if what we were lectured is sure or unsure? What is true and what is false? According to Descartes, the answer to these questions is that doubt comes only within our mind and that doubt has no right or wrong answers.
In his work Meditations on First Philosophy, published in 1641, Descartes said, “Granted, it is altogether true that we must believe in God’s existence because it is taught in the Holy Scriptures, and conversely, that we must believe the Holy Scripture because they have come from God.” Descartes was saying that those who believe in God are also taught by Him because He is the lecturer of life. This is not always true. To some believers, God may provide them truth of the nature He created albeit it is not necessary. Those who are non-believers follow science rather than religion and science has about the right amount of truth as well as creation. Believers and non-believers can doubt against the information or opinion by their opposing beliefs; to decipher this, science doubt religion and vice versa. This is the main point of doubt to Descartes. In this essay, I will argue that Descartes’ conception of doubt in Meditations on First Philosophy can provide knowledge of truth, no matter if it’s science or religion and how doubt works for both our mind (souls) and bodies.
What is doubt? Descartes’ most notable quote is “Cogito ergo sum,” which translates to “I think, therefore I am.” To interpret his famous quote, Descartes is saying “To doubt it, we have to prove it”; “I can’t be wrong, so I have to be right.” Generally, doubting is a thinking method whereas one would have to logically prove what is accurate and what is inaccurate. In order to doubt methodically, one must take a belief first, then isolate it, specify it, and then finally doubt it. One of Descartes’ examples is to prove God’s existence. First, he would believe in God. Next, he would isolate his conundrum from everything else and start focusing on his conundrum of whether if God exists or not. Then, he would specify if God exists only in our minds or in our senses; do we see God’s appearance ourselves with our senses? Or is He only in our minds? Lastly, he would start doubting; he said in his Meditations, “I have observed that not only do you and all other theologians affirm that one can prove the existence of God by natural reason…” Descartes thinks that believing in God’s existence is not within our senses. God exists within our minds and our human minds are prone to perception; we gain our information by watching and listening to what we really see and hear from God’s nature. Therefore, Descartes’ doubt led him to believe that we can be lectured by God if we perceive Him.
Descartes’ focus on doubt is partially successful. I said “partially” because it doesn’t necessarily succeed one hundred percent. Descartes was right when we learn from our perception, but what if our perceptions aren’t always right? Descartes said, “I [Descartes] am beginning to know little better what I am. But it still seems… that corporeal things–whose images are formed by thought, and which the senses themselves examine–are much more distinctly known than this mysterious ‘I’ which does not fall within the imagination.” This regards to the mind. It’s very common for our minds to imagine things more differently than others. An example of this is the Chimera, a mythological creature. A Chimera can be different things. The majority of us know that it’s a fusion of three different animal species, and many of us would doubt one another about what the original creature is meant to be; painters paint what they see, therefore, we imagine what we see. For instance, one would say that the Chimera is the fusion of a lion, snake and eagle. The other disagrees and he would say it’s a fusion of a tiger, ram and snake. Another disagrees and he would claim that it’s really a lion fused with a dragon and a ram and it has large dragon wings. Overall, Descartes was presumably saying that doubting with our and each other’s minds can lead to a debate about the accurate imaginary perception. Opinionated ideas are not always correct and it’s doable it will affect those who are being lectured. Students would be prone to being taught by the wrong knowledge and false truths. Despite that perception may be wrong, our minds can still learn what is the truth if we doubt something we think is wrong.
The method of doubting is a good thing. We’ve already recovered the mind and perception of God’s appearance and our imagination. Now let’s get to Descartes’ perspective on science and the body. In Meditations on First Philosophy, if Descartes believed that religion comes within the mind, then science comes within our senses: Descartes said, “…namely the bodies we touch and see. Not the bodies in general… for these general perceptions are apt to be somewhat more confused, but one body in particular.” Then, Descartes used wax as an example of using our senses to learn science. Wax is a substance of either a liquid or a solid, depending on its hot or cold temperature, and one would feel unsure if it’s the same object even though it changes differently. In order to really doubt if the wax is the same, we must use our senses thoroughly on the substance. We use our sight to see its color; it could be golden or ivory. Then, we use our sense of smell to figure out its scent; it could be honey scented, flower scented or nothing at all. Lastly, though more likely optional, we use our sense of touch to feel the texture and temperature of the wax; if it’s cold, it’s a solid; if it’s hot, it’s a liquid. Using our senses to know the traits of the wax substance and then thinking whether if it’s the same substance as the candle is another way of using the method of doubting because we can be sure or unsure if it’s accurate or not. Our bodily senses are also associated with perception, just like the mind, and we often use them to learn science. Therefore, Descartes’ idea of doubting on science and body works as well as religion and mind, and that doubting can provide the knowledge of truth.
Descartes’ method of doubt may be complex to understand albeit it really depends on what we truly believe in the most. If one believes in science more than religion, he can doubt the truth created by God is wrong in his perspective. If one believes in religion more than science, he can doubt that a body’s sense is not entirely right. One opposes the other by doubting, which is natural. Perception is not always right because if we happen to dream, how do we know we’re in reality? Not all senses are right as well because what if we’re blind and/or deaf and cannot know the science’s truth? If we continue to use the method of doubt, thanks to Rene Descartes, we can still know the truth if we omit what we think is wrong and gain what we think is right. Otherwise, the conception of doubt will always provide the correct knowledge and it never matters if it’s science or religion. Everyone has their own beliefs and there is no way we can ever change them.
-Written by Nicole Cheng, 2015
Special thanks to Professor Clayton Shoppa, St. Francis College.