1 |
 |
Since "Discourse on Method", have there been any critiques or arguments against the premise "I think, therefore I am"? Who made them? Posted by unwritten on Jul 28, 2008. |
Discourse on Method Group
2 |
 |
There have been many discounters of Rene Descartes philosophical idea, but none quite so well published as Friedrich Nietzsche. He broke down his argument against the Cogito into a series of assumptions that would have to be made before one could accept the statement ("I think, therefore I am") as true. Here are the basics: (1) that it is I who thinks;
(2) that there must necessarily be something that thinks;
(3) that thinking is an activity and operation on the part of a being that it assumed to be a cause;
(4) that there is an "ego" (meaning that there is such a thing as an "I")
(5) that it is already determined what is to be designated by thinking--that I know what thinking is. There argument is this: for a statement to be true, it must be free of assumptions. This one is full of assumptions, and therefore can not eliminate doubt.Bernard Williams, a 20th century British philosopher, also argued against the Cogito. He suggested that no third person entity would be able to prove that "I think". Because the thinking is personal, it can not be verified. Therefore, the statement "I think" is still based on individual perception and lacks substantiation.Posted by sullymonster on Jul 28, 2008. |
3 |
 |
Fascinating! I will have to look this up and bring this into my discussions in drama about why characters on stage must speak aloud their "thoughts" or have a voice-over to relay those thoughts to the audience. This philosophy is something I have never truly jumped into, but I may need to wade in and try it out. Thanks, Sullymonster! Posted by amy-lepore on Jul 30, 2008. |
