PHIL 130 Lecture Notes - Lecture 5: Syllogism
PHIL 130
Lecture 5
Descartes
Aristotle’s doctrine of direct perception vs. Descartes’ doctrine of representative
perception
Meditations 2
oDescares, Discourse on Method -> “Cognito argo sum” (I think, therefore I am)
oMeditations -> (Persuadio, ergo sume” (I am persuaded, therefore I am)
“Sum quiu fullor” -> I am because I am deceived
“fullor, ergo, sum” -> I am deceived, therefore, I am
oHypotheses is that it states the existence of the subject matter. We can treat
them as an axiom because they are indutable. We can treat them as a definition
because they describe the entity in question
Mind
oObjection 1 – How do you bring the “I” in? (Think therefore I am)
Answer: The “I” is there all of the time (this is Descartes searching his
own doubt)
oObjection 2 – Isn’t all of this part of an argument with a major premise not
shown?
Major premise – All that thinks, exists
Minor premise – I think
Conclusion – I exist
Answer: Don’t need a major premise, you start by thinking
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Aristotle"s doctrine of direct perception vs. descartes" doctrine of representative perception. Meditations 2: descares, discourse on method -> cognito argo sum (i think, therefore i am, meditations -> (persuadio, ergo sume (i am persuaded, therefore i am) Sum quiu fullor -> i am because i am deceived. Fullor, ergo, sum -> i am deceived, therefore, i am: hypotheses is that it states the existence of the subject matter. We can treat them as an axiom because they are indutable. We can treat them as a definition because they describe the entity in question. Mind: objection 1 how do you bring the i in? (think therefore i am) Major premise all that thinks, exists. Answer: don"t need a major premise, you start by thinking. Answer: all that is being asserted here is i am thinking. Answer: walking comes later after we learned we have bodies: what he is doing .
