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
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
What can I say - it's Descartes.
I do feel I gained a more thorough understanding from reading the whole book than what I had gleaned in my college philosophy course, where we only read the third and fourth meditations. It's amazing to think of the concepts his mind built four hundred years ago. (ish) I mean... there's a part where he talks about machines made to look and sound like men, but how we would be able to tell they weren't men. (Rather a primitive concept of the Turing test!) And yet he's also held captive by the limitations of a hierarchical, necessarily rational world-view.
That and he keeps banging on about god. Three different 'proofs' of the existence of a deity, and not one of them rings convincing. I wouldn't mind if he just accepted that he was talking about a necessary first principal to cap his hierarchy, but yeah, no, he leaves both natural philosophy and theology quite cross with him at the end.
I do feel I gained a more thorough understanding from reading the whole book than what I had gleaned in my college philosophy course, where we only read the third and fourth meditations. It's amazing to think of the concepts his mind built four hundred years ago. (ish) I mean... there's a part where he talks about machines made to look and sound like men, but how we would be able to tell they weren't men. (Rather a primitive concept of the Turing test!) And yet he's also held captive by the limitations of a hierarchical, necessarily rational world-view.
That and he keeps banging on about god. Three different 'proofs' of the existence of a deity, and not one of them rings convincing. I wouldn't mind if he just accepted that he was talking about a necessary first principal to cap his hierarchy, but yeah, no, he leaves both natural philosophy and theology quite cross with him at the end.
I am reviewing this book after a reread, and my impression of this work hasn't changed much since the first go-round. This is a book that can never be dismissed as antiquated because we will never stop asking the questions it draws from us. How do we know what we know (or say we know)? If we approach this question with honesty and openness, we must confess that much of what we claim to know has been printed in a book by someone we have never met, or spoken to us by a person standing in front of a lecture hall, or even told to us casually by a friend. The foundation for our knowledge and its certainty can suddenly appear very airy. Descartes writes of his personal experiences of pursuing learning of many different types and his abrupt realization that his quest for truth possibly lacked a true ground upon which to stand. He resolves to strip away all that is not "clear and distinct" to find his way to the basis of all certainty. All of this leads to his unveiling of his famous cogito ergo sum.
Book IV is where the grand expression is presented and discussed. Readers might see the parts that follow as time poorly spent. Book V treats of topics of anatomy, and the material needless to say is outdated. Book VI is primarily Descartes' recollection of his inner struggles during the time he was mulling over whether or not to publish his work. This is material more suited to a preface or introduction, but treatises in those times were written in a more personal manner. If one is only after the cogito then it may be advisable to shelf this one after book IV (as much as it pains me to suggest leaving a book unfinished).
Book IV is where the grand expression is presented and discussed. Readers might see the parts that follow as time poorly spent. Book V treats of topics of anatomy, and the material needless to say is outdated. Book VI is primarily Descartes' recollection of his inner struggles during the time he was mulling over whether or not to publish his work. This is material more suited to a preface or introduction, but treatises in those times were written in a more personal manner. If one is only after the cogito then it may be advisable to shelf this one after book IV (as much as it pains me to suggest leaving a book unfinished).
I read this book over a decade ago for my "Search for Meaning" class in college. I was enamored then, by Descartes and his philosophical renderings of what is, and what is not. Swooned, some may say, by the first dip of my toes into philosophy. And while I still love philosophy to this day, I am not nearly as captivated by Descartes as I once was. Growth, perhaps? Change in ideologies? Only time, and pondering will tell.
But because the need to get things done does not always permit us the leisure for such a careful inquiry, we must confess that the life of man is apt to commit errors regarding particular things, and we must acknowledge the infirmity of our nature - Rene Descartes
But because the need to get things done does not always permit us the leisure for such a careful inquiry, we must confess that the life of man is apt to commit errors regarding particular things, and we must acknowledge the infirmity of our nature - Rene Descartes
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
Descartes is a really interesting character. Discourse has me very inspired to travel places, and the Meditations leaves me in severe doubt of all realities, divine and corporeal. Gripping philosophy and super approachable for the most part.
challenging
inspiring
reflective
informative
reflective
fast-paced
Very interesting so see someone's thought process written in the first person. Alike almost all philosophies, Descartes doesn't miss out on some quite obvious contradictions that jeopardize the discourse. Also, the use of God as the basis of the theory, and the agument he uses to try and prove it's existence are demonstrations of the weakness of the method. Regardless, a very enlighting and reflective read for those who enjoy philosophy.
Descartes can suck Locke's philosophical dick.
