Descartes Belief in the Self and His Consciousness, Hobbes and Kants Views - Essay Example

? I think therefore I am. That is a philosophical ment that shows Descartes’ belief in the self and his consciousness. The ment is an English translation of the Latin Cogito ergo sum. This particular statement became the foundation of the Western philosophy. It is believed to be the base of understanding knowledge. Descartes statement indicates that he believes in the notion of consciousness and the self. When one thinks about himself, that is proof enough that there is a consciousness as he is able to think. And with that, he proves to himself that his self is in fact existing as he is able to prove his own consciousness by thinking. His proposition, I think therefore I am, is based on clarity and self-evidence of the statement. It is not based on inference, assumption or abstract thought. His statement in itself proves his point that since he is thinking, he is existing. How can one not exist when he is thinking about himself? Kant is one of the critics of Descartes’ idea of the self and consciousness. Descartes believes that the reason for the existence of one’s consciousness is something else that is external to the mind, like a physical world or a God. Kant does not believe so. He does not accept that there is another object that causes consciousness. He believes that the consciousness is both the subject and the object. This means that the consciousness in itself is the reason or the cause, and the effect or the result of its existence. It does not need anything outside of it for it to exist. Kant’s theory of judgment tries to explain the connection between the unity of consciousness and awareness of an object, the subject and the object association. His coherence theory explains that the relationship of an object to its consciousness is a necessary connection. This is to link the different aspects of one’s consciousness. Descartes does not have a differentiation between consciousness and self-consciousness. The object of consciousness for him is everything that takes place within our minds. This indicates that Descartes believes that the object is what happens within our minds. They are the thoughts, concepts and information running across our minds. Kant believes that the subject and the object of consciousness are the same, meaning they are united and something outside of one’s consciousness is just a necessary connection to make one’s consciousness function. Kant believes that one’s consciousness is both the reason and the effect. How can one know that he is conscious when he is not conscious of himself. Kant’s perspective just goes to show that Descartes’ opinion about the consciousness is incorrect. Descartes believes that there is a cause and effect process that happens in defining one’s consciousness. As he implied in his philosophical statement, his consciousness is existing because he is thinking. He is real because he is able to think. There is a cause and effect process that is happening between thinking and realizing or believing that he exists. Kant rejects Descartes’ view of the self and the consciousness because he believes that one’s experience is one’s own. This means that if he knows he has experienced something then he is conscious of it that the experience is his own. It would be strange to say that you know something happened to you or that you experienced something but that experience was another person’s. With Descartes, consciousness and self-consciousness makes no difference. They have the same impact and meaning to the individual. With Kant, he distinguishes consciousness and self-consciousness. Having a conscious experience is different from being conscious that you are experiencing something. The first scenario shows only that you are conscious but the second situation indicates your acceptance that you are conscious of your own consciousness. I believe that Kant’s view of self and consciousness is better. How can one not be conscious of one’s own consciousness? There is no cause and effect between one’s consciousness and even if you are not thinking, your consciousness is still there. Hobbes’ view of free will is quite radical. He believes that it is something senseless. He defines free will as having no constraints in whatever one wants to do. Free will, then, means that one can do whatever he wishes to without fear of being restrained. When a person is able to do something that he wants to do, he has the free will or he is free. There is no option involved. Just being able to do what he wants to do. But this is exactly something that Hobbes says that is senseless. We, as humans do not have a free will. Our will is dictated by our needs, our passions, our unconscious. It is limited by our heredity or status or specific criteria of the society. It can be affected by our environment. The act of freedom refers to one’s ability to do what he chooses to do but not choosing in itself. It is the freedom of action, acting on what one chooses to do, but not to the choice of the act. Meaning we can be influenced by many other things, and with this, there is no free will. There is just freedom to act upon our choices. But the act of choosing is devoid of free will. As explained earlier, the choices we make are always influenced by something. We don’t choose something just because we chose to do it. There are always factors taken into consideration, even factors we don’t realize that are working to influence us, just like our unconscious or the society’s moral codes. For Hobbes, the influences in the choices that human make are all but natural and relevant but entirely mechanical in character. The processes involved in thinking and acting are all determined and defined. For him, the will is the last process involved in making humans act. To explain further, there are external objects or factors that set everything into play. These external factors cause motions that initiate pleasure or pain or whatever other feeling there is. These feelings generate our likeness or aversion towards the external objects presented to us. The will is the likeness or aversion that determines our choices and sets us into motion or action. If we like something, then we do it. If we don’t like it then we choose to do another thing or the opposite thing. That is free will for Hobbes. Hobbes’s perspective of free will lies more on the belief that it is the man who is free rather than the will. There is no free will but there may be free man since it is the man who chooses to act upon the colored or influenced choice he made. Understanding Hobbes perspective, I strongly agree with Hobbes that there is no free will. But I disagree with him that there is a free man. If our choices are always influenced by different factors, then there is nothing free with that. I agree that we are only free in choosing to act upon our choices, as our choices will forever be affected by different things. But free will is not senseless. The idea of free will, or being able to do what you want to do, allows man to push forward to develop himself. The concept of free will enables man to keep going in the hope that they will succeed in the choices they make. And that eventually, they will be free from the constraints that the society placed on them. Read More