Sunday, October 2, 2011

Reflection on Hume versus Descartes

Thinking back on the debate we had on Friday of Hume vs. Descartes, first, I thought that it was a fantastic experience. I unfortunately wasn't there for our first debate of the year on Monday, so I'm glad we had another one this soon. I also felt that every single person really contributed something of importance, and that each group really worked together very well. A few things from the debate were very poignant to me. These would be:
1. The Cogito Proof that Jasmine and Karen presented - This was the argument that Descartes initial assumption, "I think" is, in itself, flawed. This is because Descartes truly does not know whether or not he really exists. Yes, I know, he feels that the fact that he is a rational, thinking substance, is something which can pass his "method of doubt," but in reality, it cannot. Everything is doubtable.
This really leads me to think what the purpose of life is. Because if everything is doubtable, then what is your purpose in life? What is the point if you can never determine what is real, what is completely objective to everything else?
However, as I'm typing this, I came across the thought, is love doubtable? Which I do not know the answer to.....which is disquieting. I feel as if an emotion that strong should pass the "method of doubt" test.
Maybe I'm just a solipsist.

No comments:

Post a Comment