Morality Case

1. Descartes believes that he can be certain that the claim "I think therefore I am" is true beyond a reasonable doubt because he is certain of the fact that he is a "thinking thing". Even though he cannot prove his senses to be reliable, he concludes that the act of sensing is enough evidence to say that he exists. He can "doubt, understand, affirm, deny, will, refuse and sense"; these thoughts cannot be taken away from him so there is no doubt that he exists because of this act of thinking.

2. Descartes believes that God must exist because he himself exists. Because he exists in a formal reality and everything thing in a formal reality must have a cause, Descartes decides that God is the cause for his existence. He comes to this conclusion after eliminating himself as the cause for his existence (he is not perfect and the cause for all things would be), his parents (this would create and endless chain) and something less perfect than God (he has an idea of perfection so it must also exist). Although I agree with some of his points, such as there being a cause for all formal realities, I am not sure that I agree that this cause is God or something perfect.

3. Descartes believes that he can be sure that the world around him exists as it appears because he has a natural inclination to do so. He believes that this "strong inclination" was created in him by God, and because God is perfect and not a deceiver, his inclination to believe in the existence of the material things in the world must be true. For Descartes' argument to be true, God's existence and not being a deceiver must also be true.

4. My overall impression of Descartes is good. I like his methods for understanding the world around him however I start to disagree with him when he bases his conclusions off the existence of God. Overall I like his methodical and logical though-process.