How Master Philosopher Rene Descartes Found Enlightenment
Can “cogito ergo sum” be refuted?
Well yes, by Descartes’s interpretation of the language, but the likely actual meaning is so much better. The phrase is amazing.
Contents
The problem is that Descartes, at least initially, does make a definition for “think.” And, we need that definition (of think) to be precise, concrete, and universal. It (still) is not.
I offer one here: https://server.learningframework.com/?p=10659#Reason_-_A_Proper_Process_for_Reason
The upshot of the link and its definition for reason is that absolute truth cannot be claimed. For anything. This is not to say that objective truth can’t be discovered. It can. Only absolute truth is out of reach — for reason that is.
Descartes was almost there: believing ”absolute truth cannot be claimed” – he doubted.
Descartes observed that a thinking person could not trust their senses. Apparently, Descartes’s senses had previously misled him. Thus, he found it necessary to doubt everything he believed he knew. Very good. Eventually, he concluded that it was not possible to prove anything as true but his own existence. An error. As a result, Descartes’ coined his cogito phrase, trusting that, only in thinking can his existence be proven.
The missed turn: doubting is insufficient – the burden of proof analogy
For Descartes, in his doubt, the burden of proof was on his consciousness to prove that some truth held by the SELF was wrong. Until that point, however, the SELF jealously maintained that its belief was true.
However, in reason, the burden of proof (a burden of disproof really) is indirectly on the SELF as the consciousness is required to disprove all competing hypotheses in order to consider any belief potentially held by the SELF as absolutely true. This bar is impossible to reach because of the un-dismissable unknown hypotheses. The net effect is that a reasonable person’s beliefs are inevitably transitioned out of the SELF and permanently maintained within the person’s prefrontal cortex (Prefrontal Contribution to Decision-Making under Free-Choice Conditions) as hypotheses (models).
The interesting result: in doubt, Descartes had developed his SELF-awareness
SELF-Awareness
In another version of Descartes’s declaration, he declared:
… [I feel that] it is necessary to know what doubt is, and what thought is, [what existence is], before we can be fully persuaded of this reasoning — I doubt, therefore I am — or what is the same — I think, therefore I am.
Descartes – La Recherche de la Vérité par La Lumiere Naturale (The Search for Truth by Natural Light)
In short: I doubt, therefore I think, therefore I am.
Because of the new process for reason set forth above, it is not possible to claim that one knows that they exist absolutely. However, this phrase can be recognized to mean that, in fact, Descartes had breached his self-awareness. How magical is that? Descartes realizes that the SELF is different than reasoning and the pursuit of truth.
If he had proceeded a little further and accepted the reason process described above, i.e. no claim to truth, then he could have further resolved that:
- I have self-awareness mastery, therefore I reason
And finally, because reason would have permitted Descartes to take control of his SELF by transitioning truths into the pre-frontal cortex as hypotheses, he might have eventually observed that …
Enlightenment & Nirvana
- I reason, therefore I have found enlightenment (receptiveness to understanding)
As a result, nirvana would have been within Descartes’s grasp. But developing understanding is work. It takes a lifetime of curiosity. There is much of reality to unravel.
Also, if this is more appropriate to you, he would have discovered God’s Grace (a state of openness and subordinate to God’s truths).
