When the definiendum of extension covertly invokes motion, the ontological priority of extension over motion becomes circular rather than foundational, as Garber argues in 'Descartes' Metaphysical Physics'.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Circular reasoning(the trap that occurs when trying to define counterfactuals): A logical mistake where you use the very thing you're trying to prove as part of your argument, like saying 'I'm trustworthy because I said I am'—this goes in circles and doesn't actually explain anything.
Daniel Garber(as a philosophical researcher): A modern philosophy scholar who specializes in studying René Descartes' ideas and writings.
Descartes: # Descartes René Descartes was a French philosopher and mathematician from the 1600s who fundamentally changed how people think about knowledge and the mind. He's famous for the idea "I think, therefore I am" (cogito ergo sum), which means that the very fact that you can think proves you exist—a foundation for modern philosophy. He also invented the coordinate system used in mathematics (the x and y axes on a graph), which connects geometry and algebra in practical ways we still use today.
Foundational(as the opposite of what cross-individual coordination is claimed to be)

Based on where you are in your exploration