summer-Phil-20B-16

summer-Phil-20B-16 - Reading etc Until Monday Meditation...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Reading etc Until Monday: Meditation Four: pages 324-329 Meditation Two: pages 311-315 (Meditation Six: pages 332-341)
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Objections to the cogito (1) Unnecessary Propagation of certainties: T1: I am thinking that Hesperus is Phosphorus. T2: It is impossible that (I am thinking that H is P) and that (Hesperus is not Phosphorus). T3: Hesperus is Phosphorus. (2) The inference is not a good one OR the ‘I’ in premise C1 is question-begging => Lichtenberg (0) The ambulo (3) Descartes cannot use an inference for the cogito since he is not certain yet that inferences work well.
Background image of page 2
( Meditation Two ) “When we observe that we are thinking beings, this is a sort of primary notion, which is not the conclusion of any syllogism ; [. .] when somebody says; I am thinking, therefore I am or exist, he is not using a syllogism to deduce his existence from his thought, but recognising this as something self-evident, in a simple mental intuition.” It is not an inference but an intuition . What makes the claim true is that it is thought.
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 08/06/2008 for the course PHIL 20B taught by Professor Tsompanidis during the Summer '08 term at UCSB.

Page1 / 8

summer-Phil-20B-16 - Reading etc Until Monday Meditation...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online