jso@edison.UUCP (07/22/84)
> I know not what Buddha says, but as for Descartes, cogito ergo sum! > Yes, Descartes believed the real world could be proved to exist, and > his famous propostion is but his first step: he proved he existed. > Please be kinder to Rene next time. He would not rest well if he > thought his method could be generally perceived to state the opposite > of what he meant. > David Rubin > {allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david He *believed* that the real world could be proved to exist, but he certainly didn't prove it logically. It's been a while since I read his "proof", but I seem to remember something like this: He proves he exists, as a thinking entity, because the one thing he can't deny is that he thinks. He also experiences the external world through his senses; this can either be real, he decides, or the action of a "deceiving demon" (maya, illusion). Fine so far. How does he then "prove" that the outside world is real as opposed to some "deception"? Because God is Good. He proves this quite logically, he simply has some very questionable axioms... This is similar to his thoughts on mind-body dualism. He reached the conclusion that the mind (soul?) and body were of separate substances, and therefore could not interact. But of course they did, and faced with a nice, rational conclusion, and "facts" that disagreed with it, he of course retained his conclusion, giving as explanation that the mind and body couldn't interact, except in the pineal gland. [Huh?] Kind of suggests that there's something wrong with mind-body dualism. [Interesting how these netnews discussions cross-fertilize. To net.ai'ers: Note that this says nothing against the existence of the mind, but indicates that maybe there is no real duality, (the universe is one...), or maybe no real body (hmm...)] John Owens ...!{ {duke mcnc}!ncsu!uvacs houxm brl-bmd scgvaxd }!edison!jso