Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Descartes' cogito does not assert that thought exhausts the self, but only that thinking entails existence as a minimal, indubitable fact.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
The cogito's very structure ('I think') presupposes a unified subject, implicitly making thought constitutive of personal identity, not merely evidential.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Descartes treats thinking as the essential attribute of mind (res cogitans), making it the defining feature, not a minimal proof of existence.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If thought doesn't exhaust the self, what non-thinking aspects remain indubitable? Descartes provides no coherent account of this remainder.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Descartes explicitly limits cogito's scope to establishing existence, not defining the complete nature of the self or consciousness.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The phrase 'I think, therefore I am' logically requires only that thinking guarantees some form of existence, not that thought constitutes the entire self.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Descartes later posits extension, emotion, and will as distinct from thought, suggesting he never intended cogito to exhaust the self.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.