Take a photo of a barcode or cover
132 reviews for:
Discourse on the Method and Meditations on First Philosophy
René Descartes, René Descartes
3.44 AVERAGE
132 reviews for:
Discourse on the Method and Meditations on First Philosophy
René Descartes, René Descartes
3.44 AVERAGE
Descartes was a silly little man who wrote sentences that were far too long, though is this due to his character or by the nature of writing in French? Man did have some bangers in this one but the writing was hard to get through.
Okay now I get why people like rationalism, this was a lot of fun. One of the more difficult pieces of philosophy not because of the writing, Descartes is an excellent writer, but just from the sheer volume of ideas Descartes presents. Really fantastic. It is very digestible, none of the ideas are over your head, they just need to be processed and connected.
That being said, it is based on the Axiom of a belief in The LORD, at least being open to the belief in a Perfect Being. I’ve heard many secular people talk about this book being incredibly difficult to read and understand for a reason they would never directly address. They still praise this book and call themselves rationalist** but they usually prefer people like Spinoza and such. I now find this perception hilarious since the root of this confusion is the denial of the fundamental axiom of Descartes reasoning, that God is real and is a Good God. They have to jump through hoops to peal off any understanding in this piece. It’s like reading about rockets and not believing in space.
A really fantastic piece, some of my favorite ideas
The three logical proofs of God
The distinction of the mind and body
Doubt
That being said, it is based on the Axiom of a belief in The LORD, at least being open to the belief in a Perfect Being. I’ve heard many secular people talk about this book being incredibly difficult to read and understand for a reason they would never directly address. They still praise this book and call themselves rationalist** but they usually prefer people like Spinoza and such. I now find this perception hilarious since the root of this confusion is the denial of the fundamental axiom of Descartes reasoning, that God is real and is a Good God. They have to jump through hoops to peal off any understanding in this piece. It’s like reading about rockets and not believing in space.
A really fantastic piece, some of my favorite ideas
The three logical proofs of God
The distinction of the mind and body
Doubt
reflective
slow-paced
challenging
reflective
medium-paced
Descartes is the most fucking pretentious human being to ever live. This text is foundational for modern philosophy and skepticism though
informative
informative
reflective
It is a fault which can been observed in most disputes, that, truth being mid-way between the two opinions that are held, each side departs the further from it the greater
his passion for contradiction.
Back in my salad days I had a friend who taught Medieval Philosophy. We wound up moving the class of such to a pub. This appeared very progressive. He once enlightened us with his proof of the Absence of God. His premise was that God was so vast and so central. God couldn't possibly share any qualities with a pint of Guinness, which was so small, so banal in the grand scheme of things. Yet this pint was here, we could see it, feel it, taste it and even smell it. Thus God couldn't exist.
his passion for contradiction.
Back in my salad days I had a friend who taught Medieval Philosophy. We wound up moving the class of such to a pub. This appeared very progressive. He once enlightened us with his proof of the Absence of God. His premise was that God was so vast and so central. God couldn't possibly share any qualities with a pint of Guinness, which was so small, so banal in the grand scheme of things. Yet this pint was here, we could see it, feel it, taste it and even smell it. Thus God couldn't exist.
reflective
slow-paced
"And that there may be less difficulty in understanding what I am about to say on this subject, I advise those who are not versed in Anatomy, before they commence the perusal of these observations, to take the trouble of getting dissected in their presence the heart of some large animal possessed of lungs"
