Part 3 is such a strange section of the Discourse. Some of it is just commonsensical—it’s useful to emulate those wiser than you—but some of it has to simply be irrelevant—why does it matter if one “hold[s] constantly to the religion in which by God’s grace I had been instructed”? This raises the point one (it seems) can always raise with Descartes. Why isn’t believe in God subject to the same scrutiny as the rest of his beliefs? Why isn’t theism the first thing the rationalist rejects, rather than the last?
I can’t help but think that the fear of Galileo’s fate plays a role.
“...I chose only the most moderate [opinion]”, says Descartes, when given a choice: he reasons these are usually superior since excess is “usually bad”, and, if he chose wrong, at least he wouldn’t have to come back very far to right things. Kooky. I think these are bad arguments, the sort of thing one comes up with because an editor or a referee (or a professor) insisted on such-and-such a discussion. His heart’s not in it. Or maybe mine isn’t.
The rules, then: follow local custom, have conviction, master oneself rather than the “order of the world”, and choose the best vocation.
Descartes does offer something to the reader who senses in him a mystical streak. He admires the one who has “mastery over their thoughts” that is “so absolute” that they are led to think of themselves as “richer, more powerful, freer and happier” than others. It has always been a curiosity that a philosopher whose reputation is so intertwined with the doctrine that we are ultimately mental (as distinct from the physical) so shamelessly flirts with the non-dualism of the Buddhist.
Posts
Timothy Chow on the NF consistency proof and Lean
21 hours ago
14 comments:
Dr. Thompson, I totally agree, even throughout Section 5 of Discourse on Method by Descarte, he gives credit to God, however he seems to draw away from Him at the same time. I also agree with you on the point that you have to have master over your thoughts in order to understand Descartes. In some ways Descartes reminds me of myself, because he just produces statements that are hard to understand at first, however if you read between the lines and not just the words for the word value then you will be able to understand Descartes.
I was talking to my girlfriend's dad today about this and he brought up the French's thinking revolution called deconstructionism. He said that there was a time where many scholars were taking apart a written work and evaluating absolutely every single aspect involved in the development of book in the hunt for hidden truths. Variables such as family life, childhood, religion, the country they lived in, current events and countless other things all made various contributions and had an effect on the author's work. Decartes' work could be a great example of that.
The way that Descartes covers himself and phrases his book seems to hint that he had some hidden messages that could only be seen if evaluated critically and interpreted correctly. Descartes knew that he could quite possibly be persecuted if his noncomformist ideas made their way to the general public. Things like saying he never meant this to be seen by the public and his acceptance of God scream "doubt this and see the reality of this work. I only did this to avoid persecution". Whether or not this is true, I think it is very likely that the reason he accepted God in his work was because of the powerful and hostile church of the time. It's sort of like the movie I Robot with Will Smith. In order to leave a message of truth the lead scientist had to leave a trail of bread crumbs that would uncover the truth, just like Descartes had to leave his trail for his future readers.
I think Decartes is a lost individual he gives credit to God however he stays away from him.
I think Descartess wanted his work hidden from the general public, due to his radical ideas. His radical ideas might get him persecuted. He never really wanted his work published. I think he does not really like God. I think he just put that in his book, due to fear
i believe that descartes does connect god to every opinion he states. according to him, god is the reason for most things. i dont know if he is trying to convince his readers that god does exist or if he just hiding his true opinions behind god. maybe descartes does have fear like chris pointed out. descartes is very confusing at times. its hard to understand his work but if your mind is open to what he is saying then maybe one will have a better understanding. its like andrew said, you have to read between the lines. theres more to it than just god existence.
I think Descartes's constant referrals to God could mean one of two things:
1) He is deeply religious and/or spiritual and genuinely believes all things come from a higher perfect being(God). Said being is what leads our life paths and without it we are lost
2) Descartes was in cohoots with the church over the material published referring God. Maybe he agreed to constantly remind the public that God is our ruler and should be included in all we do. The fact that in the meditations he comes to the conclusion that God is real might have been at the urging of the church which was very powerful at that time. Maybe if he agreed to do all these things that church agreed they would leave him alone. If so, that would make Descartes a coward but if I am wrong than Descarte is rolling in his grave with laughter.
Noemi just stated that Descartes is either really spiritual or religious. I would have to agree with that but not completely. Descartes does put forth his faith in God, but I dont think that he ' deeply' believes that ' all things come from a perfect or higher God'. I feel as though he believe that fate itself is controlled by God, but God does not choose our paths to our final destiny; that it is our own selves who choose what path to follow and our own good sense will lead us.
The part from Descartes about opinion that you quoted seems interesting to me. By saying that he choses the most moderate opinion he makes it seem as if he is taking the easy way out. Instead of choosing an opinion whether it is extreme one way or the other he chooses one that would be easy to talk your way out of or a choice that is easily ignored.
i agree with most of these comment like they say Decartes does believe in god and he is the reason for most of the things. I believe he believes in god but he is afraid of god. He also nows what he believes in certain things , god does not agree with him. Decartes knows that somethings that he says are not that truthful. That is why he gets very confused. Sometimes he gives good opinions that could be true but he has doubts about it also. In conclusion Descartes has fear of god and that is why he draws himself away from god.
Dr. Thompson! I agree that part 3 is a veryyy strange section of Discourse. I am finally coming to understand his reasons for these maxims, or at least what i'm getting out of this is the fact that he creates these 'rules' to live by, to shield himself from the rest of the world's ideas...
I also agree that Descartes offers something to the readers who sense his mystical 'streak' or in the other words, he repeatedly offers his maxims, his desires, his beliefs about both his own personal being and the rest of the world. I admire the fact that Descartes states he would rather "...change my desires than the order of the world..." I have to admit that was probably the only part I completely understood while reading the beginning of his third maxim...
This reminds me of the Discouse part 5. Descartes is very contradicting with the topic of religion. The two points that Noemi made (see above) with the two meanings of God was exactly what I believe. By reading these comments it seems everyone that has commented agrees that he goes back and forth on him loving God, whose the creator, and then he pulls away from God. I would suggest reading one of Kari Pasculli's posts and the comments left there. We all spoke about how Descartes is confused sounding on the topic of God.
I didn't think he was flirting with Buddhism at all. I interpreted it as him simply trying to limit outside interference of which could detract or distract from the search for truth. I thought it was more stoical. Also he concludes that "I think there for I am" so wouldn't it fallow that mastery of thoughts would be of more importance than mastery of shoe making or playing music; and perhaps these physical things involving thought still interact in a certain way.
I also, think it is very confusing. Descartes at times says things that make it seem like he really wants the reader to believe in God with him, yet sometimes he contradicts himself like in part 5 when he says how animals are less intelligent than humans. If God made all living things then why does Descartes say so much how animals are less intelligent and imperfect?
maybe descartes grew up with religion and due to religious education he was taught not to question it. then, he progressed into adulthood with this thinking as well as seeing others being persecuted for challenging the church. and for this, that is why he follows the laws of religion in addition to the laws of the area he is in.
Post a Comment