Descartes' Meditations 3

My own edited version of the text of Meditations 3. Intended as an introduction or revision tool and not an exposition. If you have not read the whole meditation for yourself or read a commentary you may even jump to a couple of incorrect conclusions regarding what is being said. As always, however, the hope is this will inspire the watcher to read the text for themselves.

Recommended commentary - Gary Hatfield's 'Meditations' in the well regarded Routledge series.



------------------------

MUSICAL CREDIT:

1. Two Steps from Hell -Protectors of the Earth
2. E.S. Posthumus - Vishnu
3. Eric Ekholm - My Vision

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Descartes
• The Meditations
• God
• Trademark argument
• Plato
• concept
• causation
• metaphysics
• rationalism
• enlightenment
• theism
• doubt
• perfection
• efficient cause
• reality
• Newton's Cradle
• eternal
• existence
• thinking thing

[TheisticThinker]

I'm really thinking that I should read the book.

[TheCartesianTheist]

@TheisticThinker

Definitely!!

[jimsters12345]

@philosophizer149 I think it's the actual thought we had rather than the fact we can think. Descartes suggested that we as humans have an innate idea of God as an infinite being and us being finite beings could not have possibly developed this idea by ourselves. As all objects are the products of something superior, e.g a stone from a boulder. Meaning to have these thoughts of an infinite being, an infinite being must exist to have created them. This infinite being, being God.

[SPR4GOD]

@TheisticThinker It is good. It takes about a day to read as it is not too long.

[babkrani]

@TheCartesianTheist I always loved how Descartes formulated his arguments, but i would really like if you let me know of what you think about the God that Spinoza argued for. I found that it is logically coherent, and since it started from almost unchallengeable axioms i do not see why it is not considered as a strong ontological argument for the existence of God, Spinoza even gone further to explain how God is constantly active within the universe. ( Deductively reasoning ).

Peace.

[philosophizer149]

@LaResistanceChannel If I understood Descartes correctly one of his arguments was that because we are a thinking thing whatever caused us must be a thinking thing as well. Either that means an agent in causal relations must have the same nature as its effect, or that thinking somehow is more perfect or more real than not thinking, and I don't see good support for either option, so I was wondering if someone could clear this up.

[MegaExelo]

i have alot of time this Christmas, so i think i may finally attempt reading the meditation, if i find it in my local library or book store.

Thanks for the video, it was wonderful.

[TheisticThinker]

Wonderful video! 

[aaugoaa]

the problem we have is whether we can have thoughts outside of our own physical capability. such as... can i know something i am not already aware of. without physically hearing it or reading it from another physical source....

i know this is possible but.....

[aaugoaa]

i believe it is a reasonable conclusion if a person could say that they had spiritual experiences where they had thoughts that they knew without doubt that they had never thought before or heard anyone else say (perhaps enlightenment) then they would be justified in believing in an non-physical force outside of themselves that was capable of manipulating them.

of course they would not be able to prove that, but they themselves would know it is possible.