Essay --

Rachel ReedPHIL 389Saint-Croix10 February 2014Question 7 Descartes FoundationalismIn this piece of music I will describe the foundationalist structure of Descartes arguments in his work Meditations on First Philosophy. Foundationalism is the view that there are virtually beliefs are epistemologically fundamental and can be known without knowing anything else is lawful (Loeb, Lecture 1-14). For example, philosophers such as Descartes would ac association that geometric truths, such as 2 + 2 = 4, are so fundamental that they dont need to be proven through argumentation. Thus, these truths can provide the basic foundation for further arguments. In my paper, I will show that both foundational claims of Descartes are first, the existence of the mind, and second, the existence of idol. From these claims Descartes derives many others, including the argument for material objects and souls. As I lay out Descartes case, I will examine the philosophical soundness and validity of his found ationalist account, as well as its merits and potential weaknesses. In the end, I will conclude that Descartes foundationalism, while alluring in its simplicity, does non survive deeper investigation.Descartes first foundational argument asserts that one can have knowledge of ones own existence. The claim is essential to many arguments that ensue because it survives his Deceiver Hypothesis. This hypothesis states that there may be a correctly deceiver of supreme power who is deliberately and constantly deceiving me (Med III, p. 17). This demonstrates that we cannot know, or be sure of, anything based on sensory dumbfound alone. However, Descartes supports the idea that about things can be known entirely outside of sensory experience through the use of logic and re... ...undational premises, such as the existence of God and the mind, do not provide indisputable groundwork for Descartes argument. First begging the question to prove the existence of the mind via dualism, and the n conflating logic with pagan and personal ideals, these two tenets cannot stand on their own. In the case of Descartes Meditations on First Philosophy, foundationalism does not endure close scrutiny.Grade B-General comments Your paper doesnt really goal the prompt. It does not discuss arguments that might be offered in favor of Foundationalism or discuss how effective such arguments might be, nor does it address the question of what arguments Descartes does offer. Theres also little in the way of focused password of what you take to be the problem with the position. It seems like you started on a contrary prompt and switched part-way through.