Is Descartes' Cogito argument indubitably sound? Descartes tells us, basically:
- I think.
- Therefore, I am.
But I can doubt the proposition expressed by (1). For the proposition expressed by (1) is that Descartes exists, and I can doubt that. Now what I can't doubt is that
I think. So the
Meditations are different from a traditional philosophy book in that they do not give an argument that is supposed to convince the reader. Rather, they give an argument of which a homophone is supposed to convince the reader—the reader is expected to say to herself: "I think. Therefore, I am."
Instead of providing us with an argument against scepticism, Descartes shows us by example how we should argue our way out. In fact, there is no argument that he could give that we could use. Suppose Descartes said:
- You think.
- Therefore, you are.
But I could doubt that the person Descartes refers to with "you" exists. For instance, I could doubt that Descartes meant for me to read his book. Likewise, if the Descartes said "the reader", since I could doubt that I am reading, as I could simply be dreaming that I am reading; besides "the reader" is not of unambiguous reference.
I suppose this is why Descartes called these thoughts meditations.
