Critiquing Descartes

metroatheists's picture

When Descartes investigated the implications of skepticism, i.e., that because we can cast doubt on any supposition, we can never be certain that our supposition is correct, he proposed that doubting ones own existence necessarily affirms it and, thus, of at least one thing a person can be certain beyond any doubt; that they exist. In order for an entity doubt anything at all, even that it exist, it must first exist to do so. Descartes proposal is immune to the skeptics doubt because the very practice of doubt confirms it to be true. Although I would not describe myself as a rationalist, as I agree with Kant’s interpretation of a priori knowledge, I do think it solves that problem of skepticism. In considering Descartes’ proposal, I find myself wondering if it is possible to contemplate ones own existence having never experienced the reality that existence must either define or be a constituent of.

I would argue that doubting, or any other form of thinking, is dependent up experience. When I think of what defines an experience, the first things that come to mind are the physical characteristics of the world that inspire my biological senses. Our biological sensations are of real, tangible qualities such as taste and smell. However, to experience such things is dependent on the passage of time. Just as active sensory perception is dependent upon time, so to is thinking. Try to imagine what it would feel like if time stopped completely. I doubt you would even notice because the beginning of a thought is not instantaneous with its end. Denying my claim would require that a thought both exist and does not exist simultaneously, thereby violating the law of non-contradiction. In fact, by that same reasoning, no beginning can occur simultaneously with and end.

The rationalist would assert that the knowledge of ones own existence can be reached by reason alone and is independent of our empirical experience. However, as I have attempted to show, it is required that we experience time if we are to apply reason at all.

So, like the empiricist and unlike the rationalist, I believe that knowledge requires us to experience our reality, even if our existence is the sum of all things logically knowable. Unlike the skeptic, though, I do not believe this dependency on experience casts doubt on certain absolutes. While my perception itself may be flawed, that I perceive at all can not be logically denied.

 

- Chalmer

My mom and dad told me

My mom and dad told me growing up, I and all is god, all is one, all is god. As a young kid I challanged them only to come to the realization they were right. I am god. It was much later in life that I began looking seriously at religion god separatism dogma. Soon after, I proclaimed openly that I was god and and therefore atheist.                                     NO MASTER CAN EXIST, except in make believe

metroatheists's picture

All is one

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

My mom and dad told me growing up, I and all is god, all is one, all is god. As a young kid I challanged them only to come to the realization they were right. I am god. It was much later in life that I began looking seriously at religion god separatism dogma. Soon after, I proclaimed openly that I was god and and therefore atheist.                                     NO MASTER CAN EXIST, except in make believe

 

This brings up the question of free-will and determinism.  As God over your own fate, does natural law really grant your the freedom to make your own decisions? 

darth_josh's picture

metroatheists wrote:I AM GOD

metroatheists wrote:

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

My mom and dad told me growing up, I and all is god, all is one, all is god. As a young kid I challanged them only to come to the realization they were right. I am god. It was much later in life that I began looking seriously at religion god separatism dogma. Soon after, I proclaimed openly that I was god and and therefore atheist.                                     NO MASTER CAN EXIST, except in make believe

 

This brings up the question of free-will and determinism.  As God over your own fate, does natural law really grant your the freedom to make your own decisions? 

I would ask what prompted you to ask that question. lol.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.

metroatheists's picture

I am my Own God

darth_josh wrote:

what prompted you to ask that question. lol.

 

The proposition that "I am My Own God" seems to imply something about the nature of our experience; weather we determine our fate our not.  Non-determinism places fate in the hands of the indavidual, the God.  The opposite places our fate in the hands of natural law, I.e., cause and effect.  If God does not exist, does this somehow imply that you control your existence, or does science and natural law dictate that your decision is ultimately an illusion.  The lack of God says nothing about your control over your own life.  So, the assertion that we control our own fates is a positive assertion that natural law arrests itself to accommodate our desires.  Have you replaced one control with another, without ever asking yourself "is control even a factor?"  Perhaps control is an illusion?  Perhaps we are all subject to our temporal past?

Free-will and Determinism

Free-will and Determinism are pretty much worthless solipsism and sophism. When all is one, what's the point of that ?

No fate , no control , no

No fate , no control , no beginning , no ending. All is NOW. Only the NOW exists.

metroatheists's picture

Alternative?

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

Free-will and Determinism are pretty much worthless solipsism and sophism. When all is one, what's the point of that ?

 

If self-absorption is the production of one, and the abandonment of ethics is the product of another, what option is left?  I realize that determinism vs. free-will is possibly a false dichotomy, so what other options do we have?

Science, Thermodynamics, all

Science, Thermodynamics, all is one ....    WE are god, this is the shit , this very moment .... No way out.

darth_josh's picture

metroatheists wrote:I AM GOD

metroatheists wrote:

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

Free-will and Determinism are pretty much worthless solipsism and sophism. When all is one, what's the point of that ?

 

If self-absorption is the production of one, and the abandonment of ethics is the product of another, what option is left?  I realize that determinism vs. free-will is possibly a false dichotomy, so what other options do we have?

Reason, my friend, we're left with reason.

I think using my past experiences as reference and I exist ergo my obscure concepts of being would be secondary.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.