I have determined that I will write a series examining one of the most influential and foundational works written by Descartes, his infamous Meditations on First Philosophy. But before I inspect the contents of the work itself I want to clarify something illuminated in a letter attributed to Descartes included in my copy of the work. In recent times a person whom I now, with definite vehemence, ideologically clash with during conversations we share, claimed that Descartes was not a Christian. I instantly recalled having read in a letter placed prior to his Meditations in which he did indeed identify himself as a Christian. With the goal of preventing further misrepresentation of Descartes, I will devote the first of my posts on his renowned Meditations on First Philosophy to clarifying what a letter signed by Descartes says, a letter I found at the beginning of my copy of Meditations.
Before diving into the meat of Meditations in later posts and affirming and criticizing the arguments and conclusions of Descartes as logic dictates, I will quote Descartes' Dedicatory letter to the Sorbonne:
"I have always thought that two topics--namely God and the soul--are prime examples of subjects where demonstrative proofs ought to be given with the aid of philosophy rather than theology. For us who are believers, it is enough to accept on faith that the human soul does not die with the body, and that God exists; but in the case of unbelievers, it seems that there is no religion, and practically no moral virtue, that they can be persuaded to adopt until these two truths are proved to them by natural reason.
. . . It is of course quite true that we must believe in the existence of God because it is a doctrine of Holy Scripture, and conversely, that we must believe Holy Scripture because it comes from God; for since faith is the gift of God, he who gives us grace to believe other things can also give us grace to believe that he exists. But this argument cannot be put to unbelievers because they would judge it to be circular. Moreover, I have noticed that both you and all other theologians assert that the existence of God is capable of proof by natural reason, and also that the inference from Holy Scripture is that the knowledge of God is easier to acquire than the knowledge we have of many created things--so easy, indeed, that those who do not acquire it are at fault . . . in Romans, Chapter 1 it is said that they are 'without excuse'.
. . . Hence I thought it was quite proper for me to inquire how this may be, and how God may be more easily and more certainly known than the things of this world." (3-4)
First of all, here Descartes seems to explain his intentions in writing the Meditations--he seeks to demonstrate that knowledge of the immaterial mind and of God can be obtained without resorting to blind faith in a particular religion. Descartes' eventual rationalism (not that everything he wrote in his Meditations on First Philosophy is logically sound or true!) seemingly did not prevent him from commitment to Christianity (as with myself).
Now, I will comment on the actual claims of Descartes here. He seems to say that it is entirely acceptable from an epistemological standpoint for believers in Christian theism to simply accept the claims of Christianity because they come from God and to accept the existence of God because it is attested to by the Christian Bible. No, faith is not an avenue of or to knowledge. Faith is belief in or trust in something beyond what can be proven [1]--and logic alone can actually prove things, meaning that it takes faith to even believe that a discipline like science tells us anything about how the external world really is, considering that science cannot even prove that our senses are perceiving the external world correctly, and neither can logic. Thus only a true and consistent rationalist can rightly claim to not base his or her beliefs on faith of some kind.
Also, I want to add that must be careful not to credit a religion or religious text with being true simply because it claims to be or because of some subjective inner conviction--if one does this with Christianity, not only has one failed to secure actual knowledge about the matter and settled for fallacies instead, but one cannot muster any legitimate defense against the same claims of other religious works and the people who believe in them on the same grounds. Yes, Descartes himself admitted that this type of belief is circular and that nonbelievers would likely reject it. Using such an argument to contend for Christianity is just as circular and fallacious as using such an argument in favor of Mormonism, Islam, or any other religion. That is, emotional experiences, private conviction, and appeals to having been enlightened by some unverifiable "grace" not only do not demonstrate to people with beliefs different than one's own that one's beliefs are true, but they also do not even demonstrate to oneself that they are true.
I simply wanted to address the issue of Descartes' claimed religious beliefs before proceeding into inquiry about his philosophical arguments, partly to avert the error displayed by the person I mentioned in the opening paragraph, and partly to emphasize that intense rationalism and commitment to Christianity can reside in the same person. I hope that readers can see not only what Descartes claimed to hold to regarding religious beliefs but also why some of his statements about religious epistemology are fallacious.
Summary of observations:
1. Descartes identified as a committed Christian.
2. His Dedicatory letter to the Sorbonne specifically mentions the existence of God and the existence of the soul, which he goes on to investigate in Meditations.
3. Descartes, like contemporary Christian apologists in the modern day like William Lane Craig, professed belief in Christian theism on grounds of some sort of special grace from God and that faith in a worldview is sufficient grounds for declaring it true. Such conclusions are logically erroneous.
Meditations on First Philosophy with Selections from the Objections and Replies. Descartes, Rene. Ed. Cottingham, John. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Print.
[1]. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-impossibility-of-faith-in-reason.html
No comments:
Post a Comment