Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Philosophy 105 (7):333 - 345 (2008)
|Abstract||Descartes’s proof of the existence of God in the third ’Meditation’ can be interpreted as a version of the argument from design. He cannot point to the marvels of nature, since all he has after the second ’Meditation’ is his ideas, but his idea of God serves as the brilliantly designed entity that he claims he cannot have authored on his own. Several passages in his replies to commentators support this interpretation, and when one considers what Descartes believed he had deduced from this idea, it is understandable that he could consider it a wonderful idea|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
R. J. Butler (1972). Cartesian Studies. Oxford,B. Blackwell.
Leon Pompa (1984). The Incoherence of the Cartesian Cogito. Inquiry 27 (1-4):3 – 21.
Tom Vinci (2011). Argument and Persuasion in Descartes' Meditations. Journal of the History of Philosophy 49 (4):497-498.
Xiaoqiang Han (2009). Interpreting the Butterfly Dream. Asian Philosophy 19 (1):1 – 9.
Peter Slezak (2010). Doubts About Indubitability. Philosophical Forum 41 (4):389-412.
Gonzalo Rodriguez-Pereyra (2008). Descartes's Substance Dualism and His Independence Conception of Substance. Journal of the History of Philosophy 46 (1):69-89.
Douglas C. Long (1969). Descartes' Argument for Mind-Body Dualism. Philosophical Forum 1:259-273.
Peter Slezak (2010). Doubts About Descartes' Indubitability: The Cogito as Intuition and Inference. Philosophical Forum 41 (4):389-412.
Dale Jacquette (1996). Descartes' Lumen Naturale and the Cartesian Circle. Philosophy and Theology 9 (3-4):273-320.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads83 ( #11,245 of 739,344 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,538 of 739,344 )
How can I increase my downloads?