A Quick Look at Descartes and Truth

by Jack

Anyone hear a fan of the philosopher René Descartes? He was widely regarded as the father of modern philosophy and for that alone I like him and think he’s worth reading.

Descartes challenged the traditional thinking of his day, which was not without some risk. After all, the Inquisition was in full swing and science deferred to religious doctrine or (giving a sign of throat slit). That’s somewhat forgivable since it was the 17th century, but when Muslims believe that way in the 21st century…then, not so much. No point to make here, just an observation.

The rational of Descartes’ time was basically that God gave reason to humans, so any truths reached by humans must be reconcilable with Christian doctrine because of it’s inerrancy. If a contradiction occurs then faith takes precedence, because philosophy is the servant of theology. St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) was the Church’s absolute authority on matters of faith and reason. Aquinas believed that all knowledge had been discovered by by past authorities and it was just a matter of definition of what truth is, from a religious perspective of course.  I kid you not, Aquinas actually believed by his age everything was discovered!  

The idea they knew everything that mattered by the 13th century was one truth that did not stand the test of time. lol  It amazes me he could even think that way, there were so many things unknown!  Back then you couldn’t take a step without being in unknown territory. Aquinas might have been a good Saint, but he had a lot to be desired when it came to healthy skepticism and rational thought.

Descartes was desperate for real knowledge and truth, and he ridiculed ancient wise men like Aristotle for his unsatisfactory explanations on things beyond his ability to know, much less comprehend.   For example Aristotle said stones fall to the ground because they have a propensity to do so!   Don’t laugh, because the great minds of his time accepted this.   But, Descartes’ was well aware that his new way of thinking would draw fire from academics and the Catholic Church which had attempted to discredit a number of visionaries like Johannes Kepler (who accurately figured out the elliptical orbits of the planets) Galileo and Francis Bacon who said most of what Aristotle professed was bunk science.

Descartes Essays of 1637 is introduced with this method for sorting out truth:

1. Accept only that which is clear to your mind. (bogus…that totally subjective to one’s mind)
2. Split large problems into smaller ones. (Better, but not always possible)
3. Argue from the simple to complex. (Much better, logical and sustainable)
4. Check everything carefully when you have finished. (That applies to me more than anyone, as I’m often in a rush to publish and this leads to an occasional mistake. That’s bad because 1 aw shi# wipes out 10 atta-boys every time)

If we last another 500 years, I wonder will the truths we think we know today be exposed as silly and preposterous as Aristotle’s stone example?   Which truths do you think will flunk time’s test?