In his Meditations on First Philosophy, Rene Descartes proposes the argument:
“Nothing further now remains but to inquire whether material things exist. And certainly I at least know that these may exist insofar as they are considered as the objects of pure mathematics, since in this aspect I perceive them clearly and distinctly” (451)
Essentially Descartes is putting forth the assertion that only the mathematical characteristics of objects can be clearly and distinctly perceived as being manifest of the true nature of them.
The first premise of his claim is that I can infer mathematical qualities exhibited by objects are existent due to our systematic and regular perception and I cannot conclude that the non-mathematical properties I perceive …show more content…
On the topic of pain, Descartes describes his experience with amputees who, even though are no longer presently connected with the missing limb, still “sometimes seemed to feel pain in the part which had been amputated” (453). This is otherwise known as Phantom Limb Syndrome, and this contradiction, to Descartes, brings into question to him his own certainty of whether a certain body part that produced a painful sensation was actually the member that was exhibiting the sensation even though he could clearly feel pain there.
Pain and heat from flame can be perceived as being received from the flame but not residing within the flame itself. I can hold my hand over a candle flame and recoil in pain as the flame burns my hand. I can rightfully believe that the flame is the cause of the burn and pain but it would be unreasonable to believe that the sensation of pain and heat emanated from the flame. …show more content…
Both experiences touch on the mathematical properties of extension (i.e. shape and size) with the former depicting the property of shape and the latter depicting the property of size. Even though from a distance the objects were not as they appeared to be they still retained within them those certain mathematical properties even when displayed to our eyes as being different than what it actually is.
Descartes concludes that since our senses deceive us constantly that he cannot be certain of the sensational information regarding objects that are provided to him and through that conclusion he observes that the only things he can be certain of the items displayed to him are the mathematical properties that definitively reside within them.
ALSO MAKE SURE TO FIX SYNONYMS AND OTHER
“Nothing further now remains but to inquire whether material things exist. And certainly I at least know that these may exist insofar as they are considered as the objects of pure mathematics, since in this aspect I perceive them clearly and distinctly” (451)
Essentially Descartes is putting forth the assertion that only the mathematical characteristics of objects can be clearly and distinctly perceived as being manifest of the true nature of them.
The first premise of his claim is that I can infer mathematical qualities exhibited by objects are existent due to our systematic and regular perception and I cannot conclude that the non-mathematical properties I perceive …show more content…
On the topic of pain, Descartes describes his experience with amputees who, even though are no longer presently connected with the missing limb, still “sometimes seemed to feel pain in the part which had been amputated” (453). This is otherwise known as Phantom Limb Syndrome, and this contradiction, to Descartes, brings into question to him his own certainty of whether a certain body part that produced a painful sensation was actually the member that was exhibiting the sensation even though he could clearly feel pain there.
Pain and heat from flame can be perceived as being received from the flame but not residing within the flame itself. I can hold my hand over a candle flame and recoil in pain as the flame burns my hand. I can rightfully believe that the flame is the cause of the burn and pain but it would be unreasonable to believe that the sensation of pain and heat emanated from the flame. …show more content…
Both experiences touch on the mathematical properties of extension (i.e. shape and size) with the former depicting the property of shape and the latter depicting the property of size. Even though from a distance the objects were not as they appeared to be they still retained within them those certain mathematical properties even when displayed to our eyes as being different than what it actually is.
Descartes concludes that since our senses deceive us constantly that he cannot be certain of the sensational information regarding objects that are provided to him and through that conclusion he observes that the only things he can be certain of the items displayed to him are the mathematical properties that definitively reside within them.
ALSO MAKE SURE TO FIX SYNONYMS AND OTHER