Spinoza Vs Descartes Essay
The True Essence of Substance
Esha Jain
Descartes and Spinoza are both regarded as rationalists, and for good reason. There is quite a bit of similarity in the methodology used by both modern philosophers as they try to make sense of the world and establish what is true. Both philosophers have implemented an orderly way to construct their arguments as a way to seek the perfect, whole truth. One essential truth that both Descartes and Spinoza strive to understand is on the matter of substance. Descartes implores the possibility of material things in Meditation Five and comes to the conclusion that there must be some sort of physical substance in the world, while Spinoza also acknowledges the existence of substance very early on in his arguments …show more content…
By the end of Meditation Two, Descartes has rationalized that he knows he can think so he must be a thinking thing. His famous phrase, “cogito sum,” summarized Mediation Two and was the foundation of his quest to discover the purpose of his existence. Descartes understands that he is the author of his own thoughts and he has awareness of his ideas. To him, the very fact that he is thinking means that he is existing. Descartes stated that he cannot doubt that he can think and that his thoughts. In Meditation Five, Descartes solidifies the notion that it is clear and distinct that the body must be true as well. Descartes writes, “I have a distinct idea of body, insofar as this is simply an extended, non-thinking thing,” and he even goes a step further to remove any doubt existing in ideas that are clear and distinct by describing how he cannot be mistaken about objects since upon inspection of the object, it seems as if he is recalling something he previously knew. Descartes understands that these ideas cannot be nothing and thus must have their own “immutable nature” that would be present regardless of his existence or the existence of an object corresponding to
Esha Jain
Descartes and Spinoza are both regarded as rationalists, and for good reason. There is quite a bit of similarity in the methodology used by both modern philosophers as they try to make sense of the world and establish what is true. Both philosophers have implemented an orderly way to construct their arguments as a way to seek the perfect, whole truth. One essential truth that both Descartes and Spinoza strive to understand is on the matter of substance. Descartes implores the possibility of material things in Meditation Five and comes to the conclusion that there must be some sort of physical substance in the world, while Spinoza also acknowledges the existence of substance very early on in his arguments …show more content…
By the end of Meditation Two, Descartes has rationalized that he knows he can think so he must be a thinking thing. His famous phrase, “cogito sum,” summarized Mediation Two and was the foundation of his quest to discover the purpose of his existence. Descartes understands that he is the author of his own thoughts and he has awareness of his ideas. To him, the very fact that he is thinking means that he is existing. Descartes stated that he cannot doubt that he can think and that his thoughts. In Meditation Five, Descartes solidifies the notion that it is clear and distinct that the body must be true as well. Descartes writes, “I have a distinct idea of body, insofar as this is simply an extended, non-thinking thing,” and he even goes a step further to remove any doubt existing in ideas that are clear and distinct by describing how he cannot be mistaken about objects since upon inspection of the object, it seems as if he is recalling something he previously knew. Descartes understands that these ideas cannot be nothing and thus must have their own “immutable nature” that would be present regardless of his existence or the existence of an object corresponding to