Please read the two images inserted below and answer the following question below
Did anything strike you in particular? Why?
Try to connect something from the images below with your own experiences.
Thank you
Transcribed Image Text: MEDITATION II
OF THE NATURE OF THE HUMAN MIND; AND THAT IT IS MORE EASILY
KNOWN THAN THE BODY
1. The Meditation of yesterday has filled my mind with so many doubts, that it is no longer in
my power to forget them. Nor do I see, meanwhile, any principle on which they can be
resolved; and, just as if I had fallen all of a sudden into very deep water, I am so greatly
disconcerted as to be unable either to plant my feet firmly on the bottom or sustain myself by
swimming on the surface. I will, nevertheless, make an effort, and try anew the same path on
which I had entered yesterday, that is, proceed by casting aside all that admits of the slightest
doubt, not less than if I had discovered it to be absolutely false; and I will continue always in
this track until I shall find something that is certain, or at least, if I can do nothing more, until I
shall know with certainty that there is nothing certain. Archimedes, that he might transport the
entire globe from the place it occupied to another, demanded only a point that was firm and
immovable; so, also, I shall be entitled to entertain the highest expectations, if I am fortunate
enough to discover only one thing that is certain and indubitable.
2. I suppose, accordingly, that all the things which I see are false (fictitious); I believe that
none of those objects which my fallacious memory represents ever existed; I suppose that I
possess no senses; I believe that body, figure, extension, motion, and place are merely fictions
of my mind. What is there, then, that can be esteemed true? Perhaps this only, that there is
absolutely nothing certain.
3. But how do I know that there is not something different altogether from the objects I have
now enumerated, of which it is impossible to entertain the slightest doubt? Is there not a God,
or some being, by whatever name I may designate him, who causes these thoughts to arise in
my mind? But why suppose such a being, for it may be I myself am capable of producing
them? Am I, then, at least not something? But I before denied that I possessed senses or a
body; I hesitate, however, for what follows from that? Am I so dependent on the body and the
senses that without these I cannot exist? But I had the persuasion that there was absolutely
nothing in the world, that there was no sky and no earth, neither minds nor bodies; was I not,
therefore, at the same time, persuaded that I did not exist? Far from it; I assuredly existed.
since I was persuaded. But there is I know not what being, who is possessed at once of the
highest power and the deepest cunning, who is constantly employing all his ingenuity in
deceiving me. Doubtless, then, I exist, since I am deceived; and, let him deceive me as he may.
he can never bring it about that I am nothing, so long as I shall be conscious that I am
something. So that it must, in fine, be maintained, all things being maturely and carefully
considered, that this proposition (pronunciatum) I am, I exist, is necessarily true each time it is
expressed by me, or conceived in my mind.
Descartes now feels that all his
beliefs are ungrounded, but he
decides to proceed and see
whether, once set aside all
doubtful beliefs, something
remains that he can consider
certain.
Even if the external world and his
own body do not exist, Descartes
realizes that there IS something
certain. In fact, if he was
persuaded of anything (including
that nothing existed), this means
that he exists. If he is deceived, he
exists. He is aware of this.
If I think, if I am aware of
something, then I exist: this is
Descartes' famous "Cogito ergo
sum", I think therefore I am.
Transcribed Image Text: 4. But I do not yet know with sufficient clearness what I am, though assured that I am; and
hence, in the next place, I must take care, lest perchance I inconsiderately substitute some
other object in room of what is properly myself, and thus wander from truth, even in that
knowledge (cognition) which I hold to be of all others the most certain and evident. For this
reason, I will now consider anew what I formerly believed myself to be, before I entered on
the present train of thought; and of my previous opinion I will retrench all that can in the least
be invalidated by the grounds of doubt I have adduced, in order that there may at length
remain nothing but what is certain and indubitable.
5. What then did I formerly think I was? Undoubtedly I judged that I was a man. But what is a
man? Shall I say a rational animal? Assuredly not; for it would be necessary forthwith to
inquire into what is meant by animal, and what by rational, and thus, from a single question, I
should insensibly glide into others, and these more difficult than the first; nor do I now possess
enough of leisure to warrant me in wasting my time amid subtleties of this sort. I prefer here to
attend to the thoughts that sprung up of themselves in my mind, and were inspired by my own
nature alone, when I applied myself to the consideration of what I was. In the first place, then,
I thought that I possessed a countenance, hands, arms, and all the fabric of members that
appears in a corpse, and which I called by the name of body. It further occurred to me that I
was nourished, that I walked, perceived, and thought, and all those actions I referred to the
soul; but what the soul itself was I either did not stay to consider, or, if I did, I imagined that it
was something extremely rare and subtile, like wind, or flame, or ether, spread through my
grosser parts. As regarded the body, I did not even doubt of its nature, but thought I distinctly
knew it, and if I had wished to describe it according to the notions I then entertained, I should
have explained myself in this manner: By body I understand all that can be terminated by a
certain figure; that can be comprised in a certain place, and so fill a certain space as therefrom
to exclude every other body; that can be perceived either by touch, sight, hearing, taste, or
smell; that can be moved in different ways, not indeed of itself, but by something foreign to it
by which it is touched and from which it receives the impression]; for the power of self-
motion, as likewise that of perceiving and thinking, I held as by no means pertaining to the
nature of body; on the contrary, I was somewhat astonished to find such faculties existing in
some bodies.
6. But as to myself, what can I now say that I am], since I suppose there exists an extremely
powerful, and, if I may so speak, malignant being, whose whole endeavors are directed toward
deceiving me ? Can I affirm that I possess any one of all those attributes of which I have lately
spoken as belonging to the nature of body? After attentively considering them in my own
mind, I find none of them that can properly be said to belong to myself. To recount them were
idle and tedious. Let us pass, then, to the attributes of the soul. The first mentioned were the
But... what am I?
Descartes wants to examine his
former beliefs about his own
nature, and see whether they are
dubitable or not.
First of all, Descartes says, I
thought I was a body: and then I
thought that I had a soul, that is: I
eat, walk, perceive, and think.
What do I mean by "body"?
In the hypothesis that an evil
demon is deceiving me, I cannot
be sure to possess the attributes I
formerly thought belonged to
bodies.