Reference no: EM133301115

Rene Descartes and David Hume

One way to look at Rene Descartes' Meditations 1 is the following: Since it is possible that the world as we know it is a fiction, everything we think we know is only true by probability. The way our world appears to us might actually be that way. Maybe. Or "likely." But we cannot say, for sure, that things are definitely the way they appear to us. And by "things" I mean your job, MJC, your family, your city or town. All of these "things" could be a fiction. These things "might" not be "true". In Meditations 2, he discovers one thing that is 100% true. And this thing, unlike our "world of three dimensions" exists outside of any dimension whatsoever.

One way to read David Hume is that he is accepts Descartes' "skepticism" (in Meditations 1) and then he asks, "if that is true, what else is true?" Hume accepts that anything we can imagine might actually be true. Anything. Hume then focuses on the world as it is mostly likely set up and then he has some rules or methods that we should all follow in order to know what is most likely to be the case. So Hume gives up on 100% knowledge of the world and instead offers us a guideline to know how the world is most "likely" set up.

For your HW I would like you to choose one or more of the following. Just be clear which question you are addressing. Please include the number or numbers of the questions you are answering. Word count is 650 or more for High Pass consideration and 550 for pass. Place the word count on top of your HW

1. What is Descartes' "method" in Meditations 1 that he uses to arrive at his conclusion that there is nothing that is known for certain regarding things in the world of dimensions (1 dimension, 2 dimensions, 3 dimensions). Do you agree with his method and his conclusion from his method?
2. Right now you are reading these words. What is "stuff" tat the "you" or "mind" made of that is reading these words according to Descartes? Where is this "you" or "soul" or "mind" located? In your brain? Where exactly? In the frontal lobe? Be as specific as possible. Do you agree with Descartes answer?
3. What is Hume's argument that we can only have "likely" or "probable" knowledge of this physical world (the world of matters of fact)? That we can never have 100% certain knowledge? Note: this is a different argument to a similar conclusion, compared to Descartes. Do you agree with Hume's reasoning here?
4. What is Hume's "set of rules" for deciding on what is most likely or probably the case? Be specific. Do you agree?
5. Do you believe in miracles? What is David Hume's definition of "miracle"? Do you agree with his definition? According to David Hume, why is belief in miracles unjustified or unsupported by the evidence? What do you think of his argument? Do you agree? Be very specific here (this refers to Section 10 of the Enquiry) btw