Descartes proves the existence of Self and God

Descartes proves the existence of Self and God

In his works The Meditations on First Philosophy and the Principles of Philosophy, Descartes is trying to prove the existence of three kinds of substance, specifically God, the mind or self, and bodies. Descartes presents the real distinction proof in the sixth meditation of Meditations on First Philosophy and again, as a condensed version, in article 60 of his later work The Principles of Philosophy. Descartes uses this proof to argue that the mind and body are entirely separate or distinct substances and that they can exist without one another.

In his dedicatory letter in the Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes tells that the primary purpose in his work is to prove that God and the soul exist

thoughtfully so that their existence is irrefutably evident. Before trying to argue the existence of bodies, he wants to demonstrate that bodies are entirely separate substances from minds and God, so that he may prove that bodies exist as distinct substances. Descartes needs to conclude that bodies exist as different substances, so that he may set up an argument for the immortality of the soul. Descartes real distinction proof as presented in the Principals of Philosophy goes as follows:

1. A real distinction occurs between two or more substances.
2. A real distinction is perceived when one substance is clearly and distinctly understood without any other content.
3. God can create anything that is clearly and distinctly understood in the way that it is understood.
4. I understand that it is my body’s nature to be an extended, corporeal substance.
5. Therefore I can be confident that my body can exist. (From 3 &4)
6. I understand that it is my mind’s nature to be a thinking substance.
7. Therefore I can be certain that my mind can exist. (From 3 & 6)
8. I can clearly and distinctly understand my body apart from my mind.

   Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page

   GET CUSTOM PAPER
9. Therefore, I can be certain that the body and mind can exist as distinct, separate substances. (From 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8)
10. God can conjoin two distinct substances to make a single something.
11. God can also separate that thing back to its distinct substances.
12. Therefore,
    1. Any substances that God has conjoined to make a single something remain distinct substances. (From 10 & 11)
    2. Anything that God can separate is made of distinct substances. (From 10 & 11)
13. God can conjoin the distinct substances of mind and body. (From 10)
14. God can separate the mind and body. (From 11)
15. Therefore, my mind and body are separate substances. (From 12b)
16. Thus, the mind can exist without the body. (From 9, 15)

Before Descartes can begin his argument, he must first define what a real distinction is. He declares that a real distinction is between two or more substances and that a substance can only be perceived as distinct when it can be understood without any other substance. He then goes on to say that if we clearly and distinctly understand something, then God can make it in the way that we understand it. He can assert this because since these ideas are clearly and distinctly understood, the mind cannot help but believe them to be true; so they must be true because if they were not then God would be deceiving the mind, which he cannot do, after all, God is a perfect being. Descartes also believes that God’s power can extend at least as far as our conception, so if Descartes can understand something, then it follows that God can create it, as long as it is a clear and distinct thing or idea.

Descartes presents the idea of an extended, corporeal substance, meant to represent the body. He goes on the say that if we can distinctly understand the body alone to be an extended, physical substance, then we can be confident that it can exist that way because since it is distinctly understood, God can make it that way. He goes on to say the same thing about the mind; that if we can plainly understand the mind to be a thinking thing independent from the body, then we can be positive that it can exist as such and because it is also distinctly understood, God can create it that way. When these two ideas are considered together, and it shows that if you can distinctly perceive the mind and body to be separate, independent, distinct substances, then God can create them (because they are distinctly understood independently) as such. This is the beginning of Descartes’s argument that if mind and body are separate substances than the mind can exist without the body. This opens up the idea that the soul is not only a substance distinct from the body, but that it also could be proven to be immortal.

Descartes then proceeds to say that God has the power to conjoin distinct substances to create a single something and that he also can separate the thing he made back to the different original substances. This shows that if God were to combine two distinct substances, they are still really distinct because God can separate them. This brings the idea that anything that God can break into parts is made up of different substances because a distinct substance has no parts and therefore, cannot be torn apart. Descartes discusses this idea to show that God could combine the mind and body to form one thing, but they would remain distinct substances. This point is crucial because it shows that even if the mind and body were conjoined, God can separate them, and the mind or soul can go on and exist without the body. This further reinforces Descartes’ idea that if the mind and body are separate, then the mind can be immortal. This idea that substances can be conjoined and later separated is also essential because it serves as an explanation as to how and why the mind and bodywork together, for the body, cannot think and the mind cannot be extendable, but they are somehow able to work together. While this explanation is quite weak in the fact that there is no real proof, it serves as a possibility to be considered.

While examining Descartes’s two presentations of the Real Distinction argument, there are some differences in the ways that he defends his ideas. The version of the argument in the sixth meditation of Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes elaborates a bit on the nature of substances and the limitation that substances may only have one true nature. This means that if something is said to have two natures, it is not just one substance, it is two since every substance may only have one nature. Descartes uses this idea in the Meditations to show that because the nature of the body is to be extended and the nature of the mind is to be a thinking thing, they must be separate, distinct substances since one substance can’t have multiple natures. In the Principles of Philosophy version of the argument, Descartes mentions in passing that the idea of body is to be extended and that the mind is a thinking thing. Still, he does not elaborate that a substance can have only one nature. He instead uses it as a way to show how to separate the mind and body; that the parts of us that are distinctly body are the parts that can be extended and that the parts of us that distinctly mind are those that are thinking. In both presentations of the proof, Descartes arrives at the same conclusion, that minds and souls are distinct substances that do not rely on one another to exist, but the way that he arrives at that conclusion differs a little.

One thing in Descartes’s argument that sticks out as questionable is that Descartes seems to make the jump from “it can exist” to “it does exist.” Specifically, he says that because he can understand the mind separate from the body, God can create it that way, and so it shall exist that way. Still, even if it were true that the mind and body could exist separately because God can make them as such, it does not at all prove that they are separate. Descartes has only been able to establish that it could be that they are different and to conclude that they are separate from this possibility puts a large hole in the credibility of his proof because there is no real evidence to support what he is trying to assert.

If Descartes were asked to respond to this objection, he would more than likely answer that God is not a deceiver. If the mind and soul did not exist as they are clearly and distinctly understood (as separate substances that is), then God would be a deceiver because the mind would have been misleading to believe that the mind and body exist this way, when they do not. So, the only possible way to preserve the idea of God being perfect and non-deceiving is to conclude that minds and bodies do exist as distinct substances; that way, the mind is not being deceived. Descartes might also discuss the idea of different substances, only containing one nature or essence. Descartes would conclude that because the nature of the mind is to be a thinking thing, it must be its substance and that because the nature of the body is to be extended, it must also be its substance. So the only explanation for how we exist is that the mind and body must be two substances.

In my opinion, Descartes has not been able to fully prove that the mind and body are distinct substances that can exist without one another. He has presented many ideas that show the possibility of mind and body being distinct. However, he has done only that. His proof lacks real evidence that shows how the options turn into actualities, which stunts the ability of the evidence to prove anything with certainty.