While Rene Descartes' method of finding truth was innovative and scientific, his proofs for the existence of God were ultimately very weak. In the Discourse on Method, Descartes outlines his scientific method at length. He succeeds in his desire to find true and innate ideas. However, the arguments posited for the existence of God by Descartes in the Meditations are not entirely convincing. It seems strange that if the ideas on which he makes his conclusions were correct, that the actual conclusions would be faulty. It was fallacy in his logic, not his method. In this paper, I plan to demonstrate that some of the logic used by Descartes was flawed; namely, he makes hasty assumptions from his facts and does not always follow his own rules.
Descartes intended to reach new and unknown truths with his method. Syllogistic logic, in his opinion, only demonstrated that which we already know. Descartes wanted to start a new method from scratch, one that questioned everything he knew......
Join Now or Login to view the rest of this paper.
Approximate Word Count: 2631
Approximate Pages: 11 (260 words per double-spaced page) |