Descartes’ First Meditation aims to highlight the unreliability of our perceptions and sensations. The main goal is to instill doubt in our senses. Descartes supports this idea with three main arguments: the dream argument, the deceiving God argument, and the evil demon “or evil genius” argument. According to Descartes’ dream argument, it is difficult to distinguish between dreams and reality because dreams closely resemble real experiences.
To strengthen his argument, Descartes presents the deceiving God argument. He suggests that God, being all powerful, has the ability to deceive us regarding our perceptions of reality or our dreams. However, Descartes finds this argument incomplete, leading him to introduce the evil genius argument. The evil genius argument aims to consolidate and reinforce all these arguments, thus enhancing Descartes’ overall argument.
According to the evil genius argument, God, being omnipotent and supremely good, cannot be the one who deceives humans. Instead, a separate entity known as the “evil genius” is responsible for deceiving humans. This evil genius is described as supremely powerful and clever, and his sole purpose is to deceive individuals, including the author (Descartes). Deception in this context refers to tricking humans into believing that their sensations and perceptions are real, when in fact they are not. To counteract the influence of this evil genius, Descartes suggests that he will treat all external things as illusions or tricks used by the evil genius to exploit his trust (Descartes).
The analysis will elaborate on Descartes’ arguments in the First Meditation, including the purpose of the evil genius argument, Descartes’ efforts to overcome this influential deceiver, and the reason behind his unsuccessful attempt. Within Descartes’ First Meditation, three key arguments are presented. The first argument concerns dreams, suggesting the potential occurrence of dreaming at any given moment and the consequent falsehood of our perceptions and sensations.
Descartes introduces the concept by saying “On many occasions, my sleep has convinced me of such ordinary things: that I am present there, wearing my robe, sitting next to the fireplace — even though I am actually lying naked in bed!” (Descartes 490). Through personal experience, Descartes illustrates how dreams can closely resemble reality. He suggests that because he frequently sits by the fireplace in his dressing gown, it is plausible for him to believe his dream in which he does the same.
To sum up, distinguishing between a dream and reality is impossible because they are separated by an extremely small gradient. Descartes’ first argument explores the theory of a deceiving God, proposing that our deceptions stem from a supremely powerful deity. As imperfect beings, we can be deceived unlike God who is flawless. If we accept the idea of God as an omnipotent being who created us, it logically follows that he could deceive even our most reliable senses.
In his statement, Descartes expresses doubts about the existence of various things such as the earth, heavens, extended things, shape, size, and place. He questions how he can be certain that these things truly exist or if they are merely illusions created to deceive him. This aligns with Descartes’ main theme in the First Meditation where he encourages doubt and skepticism towards almost everything. However, in the subsequent meditation, Descartes comes to the conclusion that the only certainty lies in the act of thinking itself while everything else remains uncertain.
Descartes identifies a flaw in the argument regarding the deceiving God. The argument suggests that if God is perfect, humans would never be deceived. However, Descartes rejects this notion as untrue. He asserts that a perfect God would not deceive people, as deception is considered bad. To address this concern, Descartes introduces the evil genius argument. According to this argument, it is not God who deceives us, but rather a separate entity known as the evil genius. This entity aims to distort our perceptions and senses. By introducing this new party, Descartes ensures the consistency of his argument.
Descartes argues that the prior arguments he presents are not enough to address the problem, which is that while God does not intend to deceive people, an equally powerful deceiver does. Therefore, Descartes develops a method to overcome this deceptive being. At the end of the First Meditation, Descartes realizes that he needs to start from scratch and rebuild everything in order to establish solid and reliable knowledge in the sciences. This technique allows him to approach things with an unbiased mind.
In order to comprehend Descartes’ message, one must eliminate complex concepts developed from previous ideas and instead begin with fundamental and inherent concepts such as colors, shapes, mathematics, and quantities. He acknowledges that certain aspects of the world are unquestionable and unchanging, regardless of whether one is dreaming or awake. Descartes phrases it as follows: “Even when I am asleep, two plus three always equals five, and a square never possesses more than four sides. It seems implausible that such evident truths could be doubted.”
If he begins with definite ideas, then it is impossible for this deceiver to deceive him with false perceptions. To possess a mind without bias and deception is to wholeheartedly and openly engage in the “general examination of your beliefs” (Descartes 490). Descartes also reveals important information about discovering the truth. He acknowledges that “it is not within my power to know anything that is true, (but) it is certainly within my power to be extremely careful in not assenting to what is false, so that this deceiver, however powerful and clever he may be, cannot have any influence over me” (Descartes 492). This summarizes Descartes’ strategy to remain steadfast against deception. Was he successful in overcoming this evil genius? According to Descartes, immediately after outlining his method for defeating the evil genius, he admits his failure. In his attempt to conquer the evil genius, his own laziness gets the better of him! Can we hold Descartes accountable for “voluntarily slipping back into our old beliefs” (Descartes 492)? From my perspective, it is understandable because starting from scratch is a difficult endeavor.
No one can ignore the knowledge and beliefs they have acquired throughout their life. Certain ideas become deeply ingrained in us from an early age, making it incredibly difficult to release them. It is impractical to anticipate someone swiftly altering their longstanding perspectives. Take, for instance, being taught as a child that drinking water and eating fruits promotes good health. Is it realistic to expect someone to discard that belief? No, it would be exceedingly arduous.
In my view, drawing from both personal experiences and Descartes’ writings, the attempt to overcome the evil genius has proven unsuccessful. Moreover, individuals generally have a preference for living in illusions, whether these illusions exist in reality or within their dreams. The presence of the evil genius becomes even more challenging to ignore because people do not necessarily have a desire for truth. Descartes draws a comparison by likening himself to a prisoner who finds enjoyment in an imaginary sense of freedom during sleep but dreads being awakened when realizing it was all just a dream. This analogy sheds light on why some individuals choose not to confront their misconceptions as they find comfort in remaining ignorant. In conclusion, Descartes effectively exposes the unreliability of our senses through his First Meditation and raises doubts about numerous senses that are typically taken for granted.
The dream argument, the deceiving God argument, and the evil genius argument contribute to his overall skepticism regarding human senses. The evil genius argument assumes the greatest significance as it serves as a unifying force for these arguments. The notion of a distinct and influential entity apart from God is vital for the validity of these arguments. He endeavors to overcome this malevolent genius; however, due to the multitude of sensations and opinions ingrained within us, it proves futile to overcome this pervasive deceit.
