| Papers [1-16] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "HUME DESCARTES CONCEPT": |
|
|
Hume and Descartes? Concept of Self, 2002.
A comparison of the concept of self as seen by David Hume and Rene Descartes.
4,395 words (approx. 17.6 pages), 16 sources, AU$ 168.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper introduces the notion of 'self' as presented by David Hume (1711-76) and contrasts it with the model by Descartes (1596-1650). In order to understand Humes' theory of self, his theory of knowledge is explored as well. Descartes's view on the duality of mind and body is then examined. The topic of identity is then explored with Hume's and Descartes' views evaluated within this discussion.
From the Paper
"To understand Hume?s conception of self, a little delving into his concept of theory of knowledge will be necessary. Hume concluded from his reasoning that no theory of reality is possible. In ?Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding? he classifies, after Locke, the objects of awareness into ?ideas? and ?impressions.? Ideas are derived from impressions. Impressions are derived form sense perceptions, or from internal consciousness. A word that does not directly stand for an impression has meaning only if it brings before the mind an object that can be gathered from an impression through sense perception or internal consciousness, and thus he dismisses the existence of content beyond the realm of experience.
All objects of awareness are either relations of ideas or matters of fact. Logical relations can be detected between ideas by rationality. Matters of facts cannot be demonstrated, except at the level of mathematics. If a rose is red, it is just a matter of fact; there is no logic within it. It could well have been blue or green. Hume then discusses the following questions regarding causal inference: from what impressions is it derived and what is its nature."
| |
|
On the Nature of the Supreme Deity - Descartes and Hume, 1990.
Review of the arguments of Descartes and Hume for the existence of God. Descartes' argument from definition and Humes' teleological argument (argument from design) are examined.
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 2 sources, AU$ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Rene Descartes, in his work, The Meditations on First Philosophy (1953) ed., and David Hume, in his work, An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1955 ed.), both argue for the existence of a supreme deity. Descartes believes that the deity is a perfect being living in the consciousness of men. Indeed, his God represents the supreme consciousness or all.knowing mind. David Hume sees proof for the existence of God in the perfect and complex order of nature. Thus, the primary difference between the two philosophers concerns where they seek their evidence for the existence of the Deity. Descartes seeks God within man or through internal evidence. Whereas Hume seeks evidence for God's existence through external observations of the world around us. Although to some degree Hume also accepts Descartes' hypothesis that God must exist as long on as man carries awareness of him in his"
| |
|
Hume and the Concept of Utility, 1983.
This paper discusses David Hume's concept of utility, which describes the development of a general concept of justice that is rooted in the relative equity between members of a society.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 1 source, AU$ 69.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The concept of utility, as developed by David Hume in An Enquiry Concerning the Principals of Morals, is about the evolution of a general concept of justice, based on the relative equity that does (or should) exist between members of society. The concept of justice is only one facet that arises out of Hume's idea of utility. In short, what Hume is alluding to, is a kind of societal muscle that comes into use out of need, and becomes strong through use.
Hume starts with a very simple concept, the idea that justice as we have come to recognize it, is not a function of one person ... "
| |
|
Rene Descartes, 2005.
An analysis of the contribution of Rene Descartes's work on the history of philosophy.
3,012 words (approx. 12.0 pages), 10 sources, MLA, AU$ 128.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides an overview of Descartes's life and works. It focuses on an analysis of the "Discourse on Method" and the ?I think, therefore I am? statement.
Outline
Descartes?s Background
Descartes?s Philosophical System
Descartes?s Discourse on Method
Descartes?s Method Regarding Knowledge
Descartes?s Influence on Philosophy
Descartes?s Influence on Enlightenment
Works Consulted
From the Paper
"Rene Descartes is widely recognized as the father of modern philosophy. Also known as Renatus Cartesius (a latinization of his name), Descartes was a 17th century French scientist, mathematician and philosopher. His importance in the history of philosophy is so great because he was among the first to oppose scholastic Aristotleianism, which had influenced European philosophy and culture during a period of almost a thousand years. A French gentleman who signed himself ?Lord of Perron? and who lived twenty years of his life (the most productive ones) in the tolerable and hospitable Dutch republic, Descartes remains a crucial figure in the history of philosophy."
| |
|
Descartes: A Thinking Thing, 2005.
An analysis of Descartes statement that he is a "thinking thing".
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 0 sources, AU$ 77.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how in "Meditation II" Rene Descartes states that he is a "thinking thing" (Descartes 16-18). It analyzes what Descartes meant by this statement and how it has worked into Descartes other meditations on truth, reality and existence.
From the Paper
| |
|
Descartes and 'I', 2007.
An analysis of Rene Descartes' approach to the knowledge of the 'I'.
1,660 words (approx. 6.6 pages), 7 sources, MLA, AU$ 78.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how Descartes' procedure towards the knowledge of the 'I' is extraordinary in that to discover the fundamental principles of philosophy, Descartes skillfully evoked a radical philosophical and scientific method of doubt, classically referred to as hyperbolic doubt. The paper contends that what is radical about Descartes' method of doubt is that it refuses to accept the knowledge and authority of previous philosophers as well as the obviousness of his reasons and senses. For Descartes, anything that could be doubted must be rejected.
From the Paper
"Descartes fantastically opens his Meditations by stating his desire to have only true beliefs. In applying the method of hyperbolic doubt, Descartes is following rules set out by himself into exploration of mathematics and philosophy in Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting the Reason, and Searching for Truth in the Sciences. Descartes started his line of reasoning by doubting everything, so as to assess the world from a fresh perspective, clear of any preconceived notions. Descartes' ultimate aims however are constructive. Unlike common sceptics who doubt purely for the sake of doubting, Descartes aims to reach certainty-to cast aside the "loose earth and sand so as to come upon solid rock" ( Discourse 3, 6:28,29). Descartes' philosophical method was also intended to be a method for science."
| |
|
Rene Descartes, 2004.
An overview of the ideas and theories of the philosopher, Rene Descartes.
1,787 words (approx. 7.1 pages), 10 sources, APA, AU$ 83.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In attempting to connect philosophy and theology, Rene Descartes made certain novel assumptions that, at the outset, would appear to contradict themselves. He believed that only the physical world could be proved according to mathematical evidence, yet, stated that the very existence or presence of an idea of a perfect God in the mind already suggests His reality and existence. The paper discusses Descartes's views that, in the act of perceiving reality, the human soul goes through activities, such as understanding, conceiving, doubting, affirming, denying, willing, refusing, imagining, feeling, and desiring. These activities share the common quality of deliberate thought or perception. The paper explains Descartes's idea that thought, then, is the essential attribute of the soul.
Paper Outline
Introduction
Rationale for the Choice of the Philosophy
Historical Background
Strong Points
Weak Points
Applicability of Descartes?s Philosophy
Summary
Quotes
Bibliography
From the Paper
"It is however, disastrous to accept Descartes? concept of passions as animal spirits circulated by the blood and originating from our pineal gland. If they were inherently physiological, then we need not worry about being responsible for our deliberate acts. There will cease to be any difference between what is right and what is wrong. Civilization will collapse and life itself will vanish from the planet. We should not blame the bleakness or dignity of human existence to the pineal gland."
| |
|
Descartes, 2004.
A brief explanation of Descartes's theory of God's existence.
1,107 words (approx. 4.4 pages), 1 source, MLA, AU$ 56.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents a brief overview of Descartes's theories of how man exists and how man's existence proves God's existence. The writer makes reference to "An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding", by David Hume, in which he seeks to undermine and correct the views that Descartes seems to advance in his proof of God.
From the Paper
"This critique of the basic understanding that most people have of cause and effect is absolutely a terminal blow in relation to Descartes proof of God, because Descartes entire proof rests upon the assumption that there is a direct link between causes and effects. Indeed, he presume the notions that effects precede from causes and that the causes have the exact same amount of reality as the effects. Once Hume has dealt this death-blow to the entire notion of cause and effect the entire rest of Descartes argument falls to pieces, because cause and effect is the very basic principle upon which all of Descartes subsequent proof is predicated."
| |
|
Descartes' Grand Project, 2006.
An evaluation and understanding of Descartes' Grand Project.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 1 source, AU$ 64.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how Descartes' Grand Project was a good idea because identifying and establishing philosophically certain beliefs was necessary in order to provide a solid foundation upon which to base sound philosophical theories. It further explains that Descartes understood that if the foundation was flawed, everything that rested upon it would be flawed, so he formulated his method of doubt in his Meditations on First Philosophy in order to establish a solid foundation he and other philosophers could rely upon. The paper then reports that in considering material provided in Meditations I through IV, it is evident that Descartes' purpose was to systematically question everything he had believed up to that point, logically test its veracity, and subsequently identify unquestionable truths.
| |
|
Pascal, Montaigne and Descartes, 2006.
This paper compares and analyzes the philosophies of Pascal, Montaigne and Descartes.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 2 sources, AU$ 64.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines the philosophy of Pascal, Montaigne and Descartes through a textual analysis. By observing the subjective reasoning that both of these philosophers imply, one can realize why they choose an inner relativity in relation to the truth. Although the truth in philosophy always questions the objectivity of truth in normative "Enlightenment Era" philosophy, Pascal, Montaigne and Descartes agree that the human mind can perceive truth within its own reasoning apparatus. The paper explains that in essence, Montaigne and Descartes agree on the subjective will of the mind that reveals the pattern of truth in human thought.
| |
|
Renee Descartes' Third Meditation Circular, 2006.
Considers whether Renee Descartes' argument in the "Meditations" is actually an argument for the existence of God.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 0 sources, AU$ 64.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines Renee Descartes' "Meditations", and explains that within this writing, he justifies his faith in reason by a circuitous route. The paper explains that Descartes accomplishes this by first raising all of the epistemological doubts of skeptics - and then vindicating his faith in reason by advancing an argument for trusting certain aspects of our rationality. In the process, as far as he is concerned, he manages to: ... "tear down everything and begin anew from the foundations [in order to] ... establish ... firm and lasting knowledge". The paper then goes on to argue that contrary to establishing his faith in reason, to a very large extent, the new foundation that Descartes erects, and pins his firm knowledge on, is his certainty of the existence of God.
| |
|
Mind and Body Belief of Descartes, 2002.
An overview of Descartes' beliefs on the interaction of the mind and body.
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 3 sources, AU$ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper addresses the mind-body problem and Descartes. Descartes claimed that the pineal glad was the interface between the mind and the rest of the brain. Perhaps the most popular view about the relationship between mind and body is the belief that mind and the body are two separate entities.
| |
|
Descartes and The Nature of Existence, 2002.
Discusses Descartes' two meditations on the Certainty of Existence and the presence of God.
1,420 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 2 sources, MLA, AU$ 69.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper shows how Descartes, in two meditations, contemplates the nature of existence and knowledge. It discusses the question that prompted Descartes in pursuing his two meditations "How can we know what is real?" It shows that Descartes' problem lay within connecting the properties created by God, the mental and the physical.
From the Paper
"Descartes examines the nature of existence itself, through analysing the senses, the line between the real and imaginary and the questions basis on which we claim knowledge. In his conclusion of these meditations he only surfaces with one clear statement of which he can be entirely certain of: ?I am, I exist? suggesting that an ability to think, reason, believe and doubt proves that we must exist on some level for this process to occur, even if there is no outside world beyond our own mind."
| |
|
Descartes, 2002.
An explanation of Descartes' proof of God's existence.
975 words (approx. 3.9 pages), 2 sources, MLA, AU$ 50.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A review of Descartes' belief that God does indeed exist. The paper explains that Descartes believes that the idea of God can exist because a real God does exist, and he is the cause of the idea. People believe in a God because God created people to believe such. The paper shows how Descartes used math, as well as general ideas and philosophy to prove the existence of God.
From the Paper
"Ideas can be made up or caused by man except for the idea of God. It is this thought that pushes Descartes to prove his theory on God. According to Lavine, Descartes believed that God is an existent substance possessing all positive qualities in their most eminent degree, that is, in the fullest degree of reality, in their perfect form. And Descartes, God is is infinite perfect being? (104). ?by the word of ?God? I understand a substance I think is finite, independent, supremely intelligent, supremely powerful, and which created both myself and everything else? (Descartes 31). Descartes believes that this idea of God can exist because a real God does exist, and he is the cause of the idea. His argument is that God?s existence is the only thing possible to create the idea."
| |
|
Renee Descartes and the Mind-Body Problem, 2002.
Explores Renee Descartes' views on the relationship between the mind and the body.
750 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 2 sources, APA, AU$ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at Renee Descartes' approach to the question, is mind the same thing as body and if yes, how and if no, why not? It summarizes the arguments Descartes presented in support of his views and offers opposing opinions to each of Descartes' arguments.
From the Paper
"The discussion over the relationship between mind and body that has been intriguing philosophers for a long time is divided into two broad categories: dualism and monism. According to dualism mind and body are two separate substances. There are several types of dualist views including parallelism, epiphenomenalism, occassionalism and interactionism. John Locke and Rene Descartes are among those who laid the foundation of this idea. Whereas Locke and Descartes believed in Dualism, there were other famous philosophers and thinkers who supported monism. Monism refers to the theory that mind and body are inseparable and thus one is influenced by the other."
| |
|
Understanding Descartes?s Dream Argument, 2005.
Examines Descartes's dream theory within the context of the idea that computers might think, dream, and be deceived by dreams.
1,956 words (approx. 7.8 pages), 2 sources, MLA, AU$ 91.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The ?dream argument? may have been a truly-lived expression of doubtfulness during Descartes's era. This paper notes why Descartes and his contemporaries may have been truly puzzled, given the state of scientific understanding at that time. Today, one cannot even get to the point in which proving or refuting Descartes?s dream argument would make any sense. One cannot simply lift the dream argument out of those circumstances and transplant it to our times. The paper shows that what may be appropriate is to look at computer technology today and ask whether computers can think, dream, and be deceived by their dreams.
From the Paper
"One can first begin with the question of whether computers can really play chess. Over thirty years ago it would have been very apparent that chess game software (and the corresponding hardware) had a challenging time competing with someone who was a decent chess player. When the question was asked over thirty years ago, it was possible to answer the question in the negative by way of showing the essential differences between how a human makes a move in chess versus how a computer performs the same operation."
|
|
|
