R. Descartes | Provisional Morality | Doubting the Doubt | Cogito

René #descartes , the father of modern #philosophy . In this episode, we explore the profound questions that Descartes posed—questions that continue to shape the way we think about existence, knowledge, and the nature of #doubt
What does it mean to doubt everything?
R. Descartes | Doubting the Doubt | Provisional Morality | Cogito
Support me : MY Cartesian ;-) COGITO Organic Tote Bag :

Listen to More Episodes:
KANT | Free Will in a Determined World | Critique of Pure Reason
Thus Spoke Zarathustra Part 2 | Bestowing virtue | Nietzsche's Woman
Thus Spoke Zarathustra Part 1 | Übermensch | Overman
Michel De Montaigne | Essays | To Philosophize Is to Learn to Die

------------------------------------------------------------------------
How to Support me:
➡️ My ETH crypto wallet wallet : 0x3db70687855fcd93c179d532e9ba59c582ee10bc
➡️ Fuel your philosophical swag with our Vintage Philosophy MERCH!
➡️ Join and be channel member to support my work:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Keys Points:
0:41 Descartes initiated modern philosophy through radical doubt
5:51 Sought absolute truth as foundation for all knowledge
9:41 "Cogito ergo sum" emerged as first indubitable truth
15:13 God as guarantor of knowledge and external reality
19:49 Mind-body dualism: humans as thinking and extended substances
24:40 Provisional morality for practical living amid uncertainty

------------------------------------------------------------------------
➡️ video Description:
Why Descartes?
René Descartes wasn't just another philosopher—he questioned the very foundation of knowledge. In a world ruled by tradition, Descartes dared to doubt everything, even his own existence, leading to his famous conclusion: *Cogito, ergo sum*—"I think, therefore I am."

But why is Descartes still relevant today? His philosophy teaches us to navigate uncertainty with critical thinking and reason, offering tools to make sense of a complex world. This episode explores how Descartes’ ideas continue to shape our understanding and why they matter now more than ever.

Key Words: Descartes french philosopher ,

[mindphilo]

to support me Join and be channel member to support my work:

[TikaClub-so]

getting lost in a forest felt like I was in a real-life Descartes experiment—confusing and disorienting! Every path looked the same, and I couldn’t help but question every choice I made. It’s like living out Cartesian doubt in the wild... The uncertainty and second-guessing were intense, and I seriously felt like I was losing my grip on reality. Anyone else had a similar experience of doubting everything, even your sense of direction?

[majestyj]

I study Philosophy at the University...Amazing

[zhubajie]

Definitely begging the question philosophy

[Kodase-shop]

Okay, but seriously, who would win in a debate: Descartes with his 'I think, therefore I am, ' or Blaise Pascal with his wager on God? 🤔

[Mark.Allen]

I am first. All else is second at best.

[medmed-dbdg]

we doubt every thing not once ;-) thank you for this Cartesian ride

[Zitouzik]

Descartes really had me questioning my own existence... or maybe that was just my coffee running out halfway through the episode

[TikaClub]

As a long-time fan of philosophy, I found this episode on Descartes absolutely fascinating . I appreciate how you connected these concepts to modern life, making them feel so relevant today. Looking forward to more content like this thx

[abdelkarimgotrana]

you make complexes ideas really easy thank you

[SukukNetwork]

Great episode I couldn't help but think about the fascinating contrast between Descartes and Hume on the concept of God. Descartes, with his rationalist approach, argues for the existence of God as a clear and distinct idea that anchors his entire philosophical system. On the other hand, Hume, the skeptic, questions the very basis of such metaphysical claims, emphasizing that our ideas of God stem from human experience and imagination rather than any rational proof. It's intriguing to see how these two philosophical giants approach the same concept from such different angles. Would love to hear more on how their views intersect and diverge, again thank you