The Most Important Sentence in the Western Canon: Descartes Meditations Three and Four

Greetings and welcome everyone. I'm Dr. Chris L. Firestone and this is the Firestone Files. Over the past few months, we've been on quite a journey together, meeting the Fire Stones and celebrating the life of Charlie Kirk. And now, as we enter December, we embark on something new, a special series I'm calling Decart December. All through this month, borrowing any festive detour, we will turn our attention to one of the most significant figures in western thought, Renee Deart. Across five episodes, I'll guide you on an intellectual journey through Renee Deart's famous meditations on first philosophy. These lectures include an introduction, meditations 1 and 2, meditations 3 and 4, meditations 5 and six, and a conclusion.

So, I invite you to grab a notebook and a copy of the meditations if you have one, your favorite mug filled with your favorite drink, and settle in with me through December as we walk with Daycart through doubt, discovery, and deep reflection. This is Decart December. I am Dr. Chris L. Firestone, and this is the Firestone Files. Enjoy.

Hi, I'm Dr. Chris Firestone, professor of philosophy and we are now in lecture three on the philosophy of Renee Deart with particular reference to the meditations on first philosophy. In the previous lectures, two lectures, we first introduced a cart and his uh situation and his philosophical influences and so forth. In the next lecture, we looked at meditations number one and meditation number two.

uh in meditation number one we discovered that uh that's where Decart establishes the method of doubt and in his quest for certainty he assumes as a thought experiment the existence of an evil demon this malignant demon is trying to trick him at every turn and if he can't find some thought or belief that he can be certain of regardless of what what the malignant demon does or does not do, then he will have found that this dog experiment just doesn't work, that there is no true foundations for knowledge at all. But if he could find something that even the evil demon couldn't fool him of, then he would have the proper foundation for knowledge.

It's in meditation number two that we discover the cornerstone for this foundation that Deart was seeking. At the beginning of day two, meditation two, he uh is in search of the Archimedian reference point for knowledge. That point, that immovable point in the universe of knowledge that even the evil demon couldn't fool him of. And he discovered the fact in meditation two that it was thinking itself, that he's a thinking thing that he can't be fooled of. for in order to fool him of this truth, the evil demon would he'd have to be a a thinking thing in order to be fooled into thinking that he's a thinking thing.

There's it's kind of a vicious circle. There's no way to uh um to escape it. If the evil demon wants to play tricks on him, it has to have some him to play tricks on. And we discover and that that that he's a thinking thing that I think, therefore I am. And of that I cannot be fooled. For in order to fool me I'd have to be a thinking thing to be fooled. And there's evening and morning on day two. He has found the Archimedian reference point the cornerstone on which the rest of the foundations for knowledge uh will be built. So we arrive at the morning of day three meditation three. Dear wakes up. He stretches.

He says, "Eureka, um, I have found that, uh, I am a thinking thing and I have ideas and although I can't be sure that those ideas are in fact true beliefs, um, the evil demon could be tricking me of them, he can't be tricking me of the fact that I'm a thinking thing." And this is a huge point of departure. This is this is that uh that stepping stone that we need to to to carry on our philosophical inquiries. But as he's thinking, having that morning cup of coffee, Deart says to himself, "Now time out a second.

I am a thinking thing, who has ideas, and even though I can't know if these ideas are true beliefs or if they're trustworthy in some way, I am having them." And so what that means is that my universe which was just an indivisible dot that is me a mental substance indivisible conscious. I'm interacting with something. Now I can't tell if what I'm interacting is with is precisely what it looks like to me like tables and chairs and trees and so forth. I I can't know if that if that's uh trustworthy. The malignant demon could be fooling me of their very nature. But I am inter interacting with something.

And the very fact that I'm interacting with something, Decart says, means that this something must also be mental because if I'm a mental substance and whatever it is that's interacting with me must also be mental in nature. And so this is kind of the query. It begins to, you know, stir in his his his sugar and his cream. He's thinking, hold on a second. And I've proven the existence of the me and myself as a mental substance. But this mental substance is interacting with something. So I'm not alone. The universe, the foundations of the universe have more than me in them. Because if it was just me, I wouldn't have any ideas at all.

I'd be kind of like a blank slate. And so he wonders whether or not another finite mind could account for this, another mental substance. So here we have mental substance A and we have mental substance B. Maybe that mental substance some other agent is interacting with me giving the me the ideas that I have. Now these ideas are pretty profound. Everywhere I look, I see colors and textures and sights and sounds and whatever this other mental substance is, it's got to be fairly substantial to account for all the quality and quantity of ideas that I have. And he thinks to himself, now time out a second.

It's kind of a reductio at absurdum of some sort when I say that I'm a mental substance and that some other mental substance must account for it. We have two blank minds. We got two mental substances that don't account for the quality and quantity of ideas that I actually have. And so this is a query for Daycart. I can't really presume that um these ideas that I have are accounted for by another mind because it just delays the problem one step further.

So he analyzes the nature of the ideas that he has. Some of them are really clear and distinct like mathematics and immediate sense perception. But there are other ideas I have and one of the ones that it really interests him is infinity. I can imagine things going on forever. I can imagine my mind accumulating knowledge onward onto infinity and so forth. And even though I can't fully comprehend infinity as such, I still have its idea in my mind. And there are certain ideas that I have. this was taught to him by Plato for example that have a quality about them of perfection.

You know he's he's basically uh you know discovers uh analytic geometry and so forth he's perfectly aware that although a perfect triangle may not exist in nature it certainly exists in geometry and these kinds of perfections have to be accounted for. If I have another finite mind who is prone to air and you know open to the uh devices of the evil demon and so forth, I couldn't possibly have these kinds of ideas. No, whatever uh whatever is going to account for uh the fact that I'm not alone, that I have a certain quantity and quality of ideas in my mind, it's going to have to be mental and it'll have to be a cause sufficient to the effect. Now the effect is a manifold of sensation with clear and distinct perceptions of infinity and perfection.

Mathematical truths, ideas in the mind. You know, rationalist philosophers will call this kind of a a source the well of all possible predication. There has to be a source sufficient to the a cause sufficient to the effect of the ideas that I have. And no other finite mind is going to be sufficient to explain the quantity and quality of ideas that I have.

And so here he is in day three saying I find it to be an in uh indisputable inference that there is that I'm not alone that there must be some other mental substance interacting with me because if it wasn't mental it couldn't interact with me and yet it has to have certain qualities about it that are causes sufficient to the effects of the ideas that I have in my mind and chief of those ideas are infinity and perfection. So yeah, I'll give you a quotation that sort of uh teases this out a little bit. It's found in uh midway, if you will, a little bit earlier than midway in meditation number three. But I conceive God as actually infinite so that nothing can be added to his perfection. And in find I readily perceive that the objective being of an idea cannot be produced by a being that is merely potentially existent which properly speaking is nothing but only by a being existing formally or actually.

He's basically making the argument that the quality and quantity of ideas, the infinity and perfection that I have placed in my mind as a mathematician, scientist, as a a person using natural reason has to have a cause sufficient to the effect. I can't simply be making these things up myself. I'm a tablea. I'm a blank slate. I'm interacting with something. Now, interestingly, when he starts to transition in um into into uh meditation 4, he looks at the kinds of ideas he has in even more uh more carefully that some of his ideas are representational. Some of his ideas have to do with the will, some of them have to do with the imagination and so forth.

But there are certain ideas that cannot simply be generated exe by a finite mind. They have to come from an infinite perfect mind. And so in meditation number three, we get the ontological proof of the existence of God. The first proof that we see. Now he's going to expand on this proof in meditation five. But for now, he is fairly satisfied that the only way that he can move forward in his understanding of the world is to recognize that he is a mental substance, a thinking thing, and that he's not alone. And that the only cause sufficient to the effect of the ideas and the quality and quantity of ideas that he has is an infinite perfect thinking thing that stands opposite him. And this is God.

And so he's pretty thoroughly satisfied with his deduction uh in his second movement. So if you want to think of Decart's uh first two steps here in his meditations, one is the establishment of the certainty that I'm a mental substance and the equal certainty that God is an infinite and perfect mental substance for it is the only way I can explain the quantity and quality of ideas that I have. And so that ends if you will meditation number three.

And so if you want to put, you know, sometimes in the classroom when I write up on the uh on on the on the uh marker board, you know, I just put a dot and I said, "So far he's proven that he exists as a mental substance that's represented by this dot." And the white board itself is God, that infinite well of predication, the only possible cause sufficient to the effects of the ideas that he has in his mind. And there's evening and there's morning on the third day. So the Cartisian universe has grown substantially. It's not just him as a dot. It's now a blackboard with him as a dot. There's two entities in the Cartisian universe after meditation three. That is himself as a mental substance and God as an infinite perfect mental substance. Now this will uh lead him in meditation 4 to take a break from his deductions.

Well, a partial break from his deductions. You see, there's one small step for man and one giant leap for mankind. He realizes in meditation 4 that he's gone a long way. That is, he's proven the existence of the soul or the self as a mental substance. And he's proven the existence of God as an infinite perfect mental substance. and he's troubled by whether or not he's moving too quickly. And what he realizes is that the deductions themselves require judgments to be made. Reason has to be employed. And so one of the overarching questions in meditation number four is whether or not reasons trustworthy or reliable.

You see, he's made some very good deductions and in and very uh uh sort of uh life-changing, you know, sort of philosophy uh has revolutionized in meditations 2 and three, but they've done so on the back of judgments being made by reason. And so one of the overarching questions that he's going to have is whether or not I can trust my judgment. So um what about the sensible world? That's that's going to be another question that's percolating here. Judgment and the sensible world. Sensible world seems to be what I inhabit and seems to be obvious, but I have yet to be able to prove that it actually exists.

So, uh, before he can answer that question, he really has to deal with his judgments because he doesn't want to go one step further unless he's sure that he is making sound judgments. Um, is he moving too quickly? Well, Deart seems to say, "No, I'm not moving too quickly." Um, uh, so if you look in early in meditation 4, it's called of truth and air. Um he recognizes that he could be con uh deceived. Um but this power of being deceived cannot be found in God. And so having proven the existence of God, an infinite, perfect and good God, Deart believes the evil demon begins to disappear.

That is the evil demon is in a sense going to have to be vanquished at some point. And the proof of the existence of God means that certain things can be now be assumed about the gifts that God has given us i. e. reason. And so he says, I am conscious that I am possessed uh that I possess a certain faculty of judging or discerning truth from air which I doubtless receive from God along with whatever else is mine. And since it is impossible that he should will to deceive me, it is likewise certain that he has not given me a faculty that will ever lead me into heir provided that I use it rightly. So immediately I I think I mentioned this in the introduction. Decart having proven the existence of God now in a sense vanquishes the malignant demon.

He's going to still have this tinge of critical reasoning, the possibility that he's being fooled throughout the meditations. But having proven the existence of God, he now believes that he has uh uh given credence to the faculty of reason and that if it's employed rightly would not lead him into error. And so in theological terms, there is no knowetic effects of sin. That is if you use reason rightly, it gives us clear light unto the path of truth. And so um he seems to be suggesting in meditation 4 that this uh that this power of reason is really central to uh to u developing his philosophy and fleshing out the foundations of knowledge that are going to be coming in the next meditations.

Now, interestingly, um, you remember back I I told you one of the things we're going to try to do in this in this short set of lectures on Daycard is to give us the ability to retain and to share what we know about Deart's argument. So, so far we have the method of doubt establishing an hourglass shaped argument. The first part of the hourglass at the top is uh the self uh I exist as a mental substance. The next part of the hourglass is God as an infinite perfect mental substance. In the very center of the hourglass is reason and whether or not I can trust my judgment.

And I think it's at the center of the argument for a reason. This is going to inaugurate the age of reason in modern philosophy. And arguably, I would say one of the most important sentences, if not the most important singular sentence in all of Western philosophical tradition, is found in meditation 4, right in the center of his hourglass shaped argument. So, if you look with me, it's a second to last uh paragraph of meditation 4, you find this sentence. He says, and this is uh this is part of a very long sentence, but it's it's the central part.

Although I am conscious of the weakness of not being able to keep my mind continually fixed on the same thought, I can nevertheless by attentive and off repeated meditation impress it so strongly on my memory that I shall never fail to recollect it as often as I require it. And I can acquire in this way the habitude of not airing. And since it is being superior to air that the highest and chief perfection of man consists, I deem that I have not gained little by this day's meditation in having discovered the source of error and falsity. Let me unpack that real briefly. What's Decart saying in this really important sentence? He's saying that God is good and if he's good, he wouldn't give me faculties that would inherently deceive me. So, I know that reason must be trustworthy.

What's going wrong then? Well, what's going wrong is that I maybe I'm lazy. I'm not attentive. Um, I'm prone to the idols of the cave as Francis Bacon would put it and so forth. In the faculty psychology of Decart, you have the intellect which is not fallen, which is reason, which can be used as a light unto the truth. But you also have the will. And the will is weak. It's unfocused and so forth. And so we need to have a disciplined will. We need that's that it really becomes in the in the western tradition, modern period, the very essence of what critical thinking is all about.

It is uh acquiring the habitude of careful analysis of not erring of not allowing the will to lead us to where it wants to go but allow the intellect to shed light on the pathway unto truth. And so um there we have it. We have the age of reason dawning here in meditation 4 right the center of the hourglass shaped argument that Deart wants to make. So as we move forward from here, Deart's going to be satisfied that reason if it's carefully employed if we don't allow our emotions or our will to overshadow it or take it over in some way that it is trustworthy for God wouldn't give us crap.

You know, he would he only gives us stuff that's good. But our essential nature, our ability to will and so forth sometimes gets the better of us. Maybe we're tired, maybe we're lazy, maybe we have ulterior motives and so forth. But the intellect itself if we're careful critical reasoners can get us to the truth. And so we have established by the meditation three and four we have established three things now that I exist as a mental substance. Of this I can't be fooled for even an evil demon would need a mental substance to fool me into thinking that I'm a mental substance. And there's no way out of that.

That God exists and is an infinite and perfect mental substance. For it's the only way, the ends realism ofum, the only way that I could have the well of predication that would be a cause sufficient to the effects that I'm now experiencing. And we also have the dawn of the age of reason where reason is not necessarily fallen per se. Maybe the will is, but not the intellect. and that it can be trustworthy if we can just discipline the will uh uh bridal it as it were so that the light of reason can shine forth and lead us unto the truth. All right.

Well, that's the end of meditations 3 and 4. We turn uh next time into the next lectures where we get back to God, the external world and the mindbody problem. Looking forward to it. Thanks for stopping by to spend some time with me here on the Firestone Files. I hope today's reflections offered you some new insights and perspective on life. If you enjoyed the episode or found it valuable, I'd appreciate it if you'd take a moment to like, subscribe, and share it with someone you care about. I'd also love to hear your thoughts. What resonated with you? What challenged you? Or what would you like to hear more about in future episodes? Drop a comment below or send in your suggestions to the email in the description. Your input helps shape where we go next. This has been Dr. Chris Firestone. Until next time, keep asking the big questions. And remember, the kingdom journey is always best with your friends. Further up and further in. Bye for now.

It turn it around.