2

Everyone knows Descartes old experiment now.

He concludes with absolute certainty that “I am, I exist”. However this could very well be a delusion, since the evil genius could have corrupted the mind to think that, or there a theories creating doubt like “we are all one”.

I feel like a more bulletproof argument is: “something exists”. Any form of skepticism, doubt, delusion, incorrectness or falsity around that statement is itself “something”, and so it literally can’t be denied, since denying is something.

5

1 Answer 1

2

You may well be right. Compare:-

Some critics have complained that, in referring to the “I”, Descartes begs the question by presupposing what he means to establish in the “I exist.” Among the critics, Bertrand Russell objects that “the word ‘I’ is really illegitimate.” Echoing the 18th century thinker, Georg Lichtenberg, Russell writes that Descartes should have, instead, stated “his ultimate premiss in the form ‘there are thoughts’.” Russell adds that “the word ‘I’ is grammatically convenient, but does not describe a datum” (1945, 567). Accordingly, “there is pain” and “I am in pain” have different contents, and Descartes is entitled only to the former." Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy - Descartes' Epistemology especially section 4.1

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .