René Descartes - Meditation #2 - I think, therefore, I am

I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.

This is a lecture video from Introduction to Philosophy. The lecture is about the second of Rene Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy, originally published in Latin in 1641. In this medition Descartes finds the first thing that he thinks he can know for certain: that he exists. The famous phrase "Cogito Ergo Sum" or "I think, therefore, I am" does not actually appear in the meditations. But this is the meditation where Descartes makes that point. After demonstrating his own existence, Descartes claims that the kind of thing that he is is a thinking thing. He then discusses the nature of thought, and how his view of the human mind differs from Aristotle's conception.

[alicejones]

You are insanely articulate and intelligent. One of the best YouTube channels on philosophy out there!

[samipersun]

Thanks a lot for all your work! It is really helpful and extremely interesting!
This will be my go-to recommendation if anyone wants to know more about the subjects discussed.

[MrZenGuitarist]

Oh, how I wish I had a teacher in philosophy like you! Your enthusiasm is contagious, and your ability to break it all down in a rather simple/easily understandable level. (By for ex. still presenting the many different and often rather daunting 'concepts'(latin phrases) in a an easily understandable every-day language!).
I'm a computer-programmer - but is rather much more interested in philosophy, religion, history and to a certain extent scholasticism these days....Your videos are simply great!
Kudos and thanks!

[odenwalt]

Descartes is the father of "a brain in a vat". Proof of Descartes genus is when an amputee feels pain in the limb that was amputated. Although the pain is subjective to an observer, it is objective to the one experiencing the phantom limb syndrome.

[ShamasGamas]

A teacher who knows his subject well can clearly explain it and you certainly can explain this material very well indeed.

[MariahBunni]

Great video Jeffrey. I’m a university student majoring in English and lately I’ve been thinking of getting into philosophy ever since I took a theory course and learned some of the basics (Kant, Hegel, Foucault, Butler etc). Philosophy seems very daunting but also interesting. Anyways, thanks for the video! Subscribed!

[aryabhardwaj]

Looking forward to the Advance level course, if I may say so. Thank you!
Also, please make a video on Leibniz MOnadology. Thank you!

[ΠετροςΤασοπουλος-ωβ]

Blind people can't see in there sleep descarte wrong

[brokenrecord]

😬 Kinda worried about Meditations 3 - As I remember from the introduction, proving god was his goal.
I wonder if Descartes is the all powerful, evil entity tricking me into thinking things that aren't true.

[darkthrongrising]

Thank you for your work Prof. This is some of the best stuff Ive seen, I just started studying Nietzsche and some of your videos made it easier to digest although I still struggle at times. This series on Descartes is just what I needed to get some of the fundmentals down. I am a self teacher(so to speak), your vids have thrown many doors open in my mind, I share and recommend you to everyone, youre awesome, again, thank you.

[dirtynoahsquickreviews]

You said there will be questions on the exam. You do these videos for your class?

[LearnThaiRapidMethod]

Ok, the order of the meditations seems to about face somewhat. As I mentioned in Meditations 1, mathematical (/logical) principles need to be established first… to distinguish between, say, “I think therefore I am” and “I am therefore I think”. The certainty of “therefore” needs to be established in this instance.

Secondly, just because he thinks doesn’t necessarily mean that he exists. It does, but that’s not the point. He can only be certain of his existence if he is AWARE of his thoughts. Otherwise “I think” could be equivalent to “it’s raining”. The rain certainly exists, but it doesn’t KNOW that it exists. Only a being capable of being aware of its thoughts can know that it exists. Otherwise, yes, a god or demon could be setting the thinking in motion (as in a computer program) and then how “real” (or “certain”) is a computer program? I think that’s where it starts to become messy. Does a song exist? Yes, but what makes it exist for sure? The singer? The tape or disc or file that the song is recorded on? The mind of the songwriter? All of these are true, but perhaps not so clearcut.

Yes, we live in a Cartesian world; but methinks Aristotle was also right (says little ol’ me). It seems to me that neurologists anyway know that there is no soul. They have an explanation for Descartes’ imagination and it’s basically a function of the material (brain) and of form (the neural networks) and sensations are derived from physical signals from nerves or chemical receptors (triggered by hormones and blood sugar/salt levels and the diffusion or exchange of chemicals and chemical charges across cell membranes). Sensations need not be real of course, but they are caused by physical triggers, whether from sensors in the body or from activity within the brain itself. In fact, ALL sensations are brain functions: a signal travels to the brain via a nerve or chemical messenger and then the brain starts a chain of “thought” that is identical whether triggered from outside the brain or inside the brain.

(I mean “thoughts” in the sense of brain activity, most thoughts are subconscious and we may not be aware of them. In fact we’re not aware of most of what goes on in our bodies or brains. I think Descartes meant “conscious thought” when he wrote about “thinking”.)

[rebeccacason]

The most important part of this lecture is that pineapple belongs on pizza

[CogitoErgoSum]

Thank u so much for this, it's funny I how I hated his classes when I was in school but now in my 30s I find it fascinating

[havesomedecorem]

I have an asynchronous class at my University and Ill gladly use your videos as my professor this semester. Thank you so much!!!

[hugoseriese]

I'm enjoying these lectures tremendously, thanks so much!

[calorion]

What the holy Hell? How could I have a degree in Philosophy—with courses in both Ancient and Modern Philosophy—and never have heard this distinction between Aristotle's and Descartes' conception of mind, and that Descartes creates the conception of mind we still have??

(Nevermind that I think Aristotle's, as you describe it, is more accurate—that's a whole 'nother story.)

[martinbennett]

Descartes did not write "cogito ergo sum", he wrote "je pense donc je suis". This appears in his work: Discours de la Méthode (Discours de la méthode pour bien conduire sa raison et chercher la vérité dans les sciences) which was first published anonymously (in French) in 1637. It was later translated and published into Latin in 1644.

Les Méditations was written in Latin and then later translated into French. In both cases the translations were not by Descartes but were carried out under the guidance of Descartes. The Latin for his conclusion that he necessarily exists each time that he conceives or expresses anything is "Ego sum, ego existo, quoties a me profertur, vel mente concipitur, necessario esse verum". As professor Kaplan intimates, Descartes must have had strong reasons for avoiding the more catchy "cogito ergo sum".

[hammer]

cannot believe he forgot what pepperoni is

[BelegaerTheGreat]

Ah, but Descartes unknowingly presupposes the existence and validity of logic.