3 ms·
That's interesting! My understanding of Descartes comes from the book Descartes' Bones, which frustrated me in some ways but made an argument about Descartes th
by unalone 14y ago
That's interesting! My understanding of Descartes comes from the book Descartes' Bones, which frustrated me in some ways but made an argument about Descartes that I found very interesting: when Descartes wrote his Discourse on Method, he was a Christian who felt his works very strongly connected with the existing works of the Church. He was not an advocate of discarding all non-mechanistic discovery so much as he advocated reexamining what we already knew. It was philosophers who came after him who began to argue that perhaps the mechanistic model could function in its own right, without connection to any other existing school of knowledge.
I haven't read Discourse myself yet, unfortunately: it's in a long queue of works which is currently taken up by Alexander's The Nature of Order, a wonderful but long read. I was led to believe that Descartes argued his new method should be added to existing ones rather than replace them entirely – am I wrong in thinking this way?
- msutherl 14y agoWhy can't I find a company to work for with people like you guys?
- unalone 14y agoI'm actually unemployed and looking for work right now. If you find a company that wants guys like me working for them, let me know! ;-)
- davesims 14y ago"I was led to believe that Descartes argued his new method should be added to existing ones rather than replace them entirely – am I wrong in thinking this way?" Actually I think you are, but it is of course complicated. My read of the Discourse (certainly not original with me!) traces a sequence of subtle but nevertheless explicit rejections of each category of Descartes' own education: mathematics, physics, metaphysics, aesthetics, etc. Descartes flatters his masters on the one hand while on the other "provisionally" rejecting every single one of them, never to return. This is the birth of modernism. The rejection of the past, the 'blank slate' of a hypothetical 'view from nowhere' acutely expressed in Descartes' notion of Radical Doubt (in the Meditations on First Philosophy). Descartes argues that, like a city built by multiple architects over many centuries, contemporary knowledge in the 17th Century was brilliant and confused all at once, at odds with itself and incapable of 'clear and distinct' ideas. Therefore he proposes that he himself embark on a provisional quest for certain knowledge, not because of his own genius, but because it is possible that a single philosopher with clarity of purpose can achieve what centuries of confused development cannot. It is an intoxicating proposition, and we moderns have yet to let go of its promise.
- unalone 14y agoThat's quite an interesting read. Now I want to read Discourse and see if that's how I see Descartes' arguments myself. Bleh... so damn much to read.
- davesims 14y agoAwesome. With your interests and obvious clarity of expression, I'd suggest you pop the Discourse near the top of the queue! What's needful at this point in history, imo, is as many inquisitive, acute minds as possible re-engaging these debates in their original subtlety.