Rene Descartes' Evil Genius Argument - Essay Example

Philosophy 9th May, Rene Descartes’ Evil Genius Argument Descartes’ evil genius argument is the argument that he advanced to demonstrate that all sensory knowledge can be doubted. In the evil genius argument, Rene Descartes argues that al the knowledge that we hold as true is nothing but deception of an evil genius. In the evil genius argument, Rene Descartes imagines that an evil genius, supremely powerful and clever, has directed all his energies in deceiving him. In the argument, Rene Descartes regards the heavens, the air, the earth, the colours, the shapes, and all the external things as nothing but deceptions of the evil genius. Descartes says the following of how the evil genius may have deceived him to believe in false things, “I will regard the heavens, the air, the earth, colours, shapes, sounds, and all external things as nothing but the bedevilling hoaxes of my dreams which he lays snares for my credulity”(Cahn, Descartes’ meditation: meditation one). Descartes goes in the argument to regard his hands, eyes, flesh, and his senses as the illusions that the evil genius has made him to believe are real while in actual sense are mere illusions. In conclusion, Descartes argued that since it is possible to imagine that all his beliefs and all external things, including his own body, are illusions that he has been to believe by an evil genius, all knowledge that has originated from the senses can be doubted. The main thesis of this paper, therefore, is that all sensory knowledge can be doubted. The main purpose of Descartes’ evil genius argument was to show that sensory knowledge can be logically subjected to doubt. Descartes advanced this argument in his attempt to lay a foundation of his philosophy which was based on subjecting everything to doubt. The evil genius argument, therefore, serves to logically demonstrate that it is possible to logically doubt all sensory knowledge. Having proved that it is indeed possible to doubt sensory knowledge, Descartes proceeding in the next meditations to look for an indubitable basis upon which he could base his philosophy, the evil genius argument has proved for Descartes that he could not base his philosophy on sensory observations. The evil genius argument, therefore, is a very important argument for Descartes because it marks an important point in Descartes’ meditations. Even though Rene Descartes had already given two more arguments to show that sensory knowledge can be doubted, the evil genius argument, however, is necessary to decisively prove that all sensory knowledge can be doubted. In order to understand why the evil genius argument was necessary despite the fact that Descartes had given two similar arguments to prove the same point, it is instructive to look at the other two arguments that Descartes had given. An analysis of the other two sceptical arguments will help us to understand why the evil demon argument was necessary even though Descartes had given the other two arguments. Firstly, let us look at the dream argument. In the dreaming argument, Rene Descartes argues that it is possible that we think that we are awake, while in fact, we may be dreaming that we are awake, Descartes says thus, “Let us assume then, for the sake of argument, that we are dreaming and that such particulars as these are not true: that we are opening our eyes, moving our head, and extending our hands”(Cahn, Descartes’ meditation: meditation one). Descartes argues in the dreaming argument that, when we are dreaming, we think that we are wakeful and that whatever we see is the reality, and for that reason it is possible that all our beliefs and all our sensory knowledge may be illusory products of dreams. Descartes argues that we may be thinking that we are opening our eyes, moving our head, and extending our heads, while in actual fact all these may be false illusions of the dream that we are in while thinking that we are wakeful. Descartes went on to argue that since we may be dreaming while thinking that we are wakeful, it is possible that we may not have such hands or anybody at all. Descartes, however, realized that, although it is possible indeed to imagine that all what we know and all what we see are products of our dreams, it can be objected that dreams are based on real things. Descartes compares the things observed or experienced in slumber or during sleep to painted images; painted images can only be produced in the likeness of true things. For this reason, therefore, Descartes argued that since dreams are based on actual things, it is possible that even if things like our eyes, our hands and our heads, are the products our dreams, these things, however, must be based on actual things. For this reason, therefore, Descartes concluded that our body parts may not be imaginary things, but are true and exist. The main limitation of the dreaming argument lie in the fact that while it is possible to imagine that all sensory knowledge is a product of a dream, the products of dreams (sensory knowledge), must, however, be based on factual things; a dream has to be about something factual as we have already seen. Descartes argued that there are some basic facts that are true even if we may be unconsciously dreaming, Descartes says, “For whether I am awake or asleep, two plus three make five, and a square does not have more than four sides”(Cahn, Descartes’ meditation: meditation one). Having shown the limitation of the dream argument to prove that all sensory knowledge can be doubted, Descartes advanced the deceiving God argument to increase the scope of our doubts. The deceiving God argument is meant to overcome the limitation of the dream argument and to shows that all sensory knowledge is indeed doubtful. In the deceiving God argument, Descartes argues that our sensory knowledge and our beliefs may all be deceptions of a deceiving God. Descartes began this argument by arguing that in his mind he has an idea who can do all things and who created him. Descartes went on to ask himself whether indeed the ideas of heavens, extended things, shapes, size, and place, may not be all deceptions of a deceiving God who created him, Descartes says the following about the deceiving God, “How do I know that he did not bring it about that there is no earth at all, no heavens, no extended shape, no size, no place, and yet bring it about that all these things appear to exist to me precisely as they do now? ”(Cahn, Descartes’ meditation: meditation one). Descartes goes on in this argument to ask himself whether, just as he believes that other people make mistakes in things that they know well, it is not possible for him also to make mistakes and to be deceived that he is right when he engages in activities like adding two to three to make five, counting the sides of a square or when he is engaged in other similar operations. Descartes reasoned that it is quite possible that a deceiving God has allowed him to make such mistakes and to think that he is right. Descartes, however, realized that since God is generally understood to be supremely good, some people would object to the idea of a deceiving God. For this reason, Descartes argued that perhaps a supremely good God would not allow him to be deceived in this way. For this reason, therefore, Rene Descartes realized that the deceiving God argument had limitations and for that reason it could not decisively prove that all human sensory knowledge is doubtful. For this reason, therefore, Descartes advanced the evil genius argument so as to prove that all sensory knowledge is doubtful. The evil genius argument, therefore, is necessary because the dream argument and the deceiving God argument are limited and not able to sufficiently prove that all human beliefs and human sensory knowledge can be doubted. Unlike the deceiving God argument that assumes that a good God can allow human beings to be deceived, the evil genius argument does not make this assumption and contends that it would be in conformity with the nature of an evil genius to deceive human beings. The evil genius argument, therefore, is able to decisively prove that all human beliefs and all human sensory knowledge can be subjected to doubt. In his meditations, Descartes made an attempt to overcome the evil genius. In trying to overcome the evil genius, Rene Descartes regards himself as having no hands, eyes, head, flesh, blood, or any other sense, and to convince himself that all these body parts are illusions that an evil demon has made to believe; Descartes resolved to remain steadfast and resolute in his meditations and to withhold his accent to whatever he felt may be a deception of the evil demon. This in essence means that, in trying to overcome the evil demon, Rene Descartes resolved to distrust everything, including his very own body because even his own body could be a deception of the evil demon. In conclusion, Descartes attempt to overcome the evil demon, however, wasn’t successful. This is because Descartes found it practically impossible to live a life in which he distrusted everything, including his very own self. As Descartes says, he found his attempt to distrust everything a very demanding and arduous task; Descartes says that certain laziness kept bringing him to his customary way of living. What this means in essence is that Descartes had to continue trusting that some of the knowledge that he had, about the world and about himself, simply because it was practically impossible for him to believe that everything he knew was a product of deceptions by an evil genius. Owing to this fact, Descartes had to start looking for an epistemological basis upon which he could base his theory of knowledge. This led to the second meditation in which Descartes finally argues that, although he could doubt everything around him, he could not, however, doubt the truth of his existence; this is because for him to doubt all the other external things, he had first to exist- existence for Descartes was a precondition for doubting. Work Cited Cahn, S.M. Classics of Western Philosophy.8th edtn. Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, 2012. Read More