Once Rene Descartes
had so famously whittled the sum of all true statements he could make about his world down to "Cogito ergo sum
," (you know.. "I think, therefore I am
") he used this
premise to build his world anew.
Descartes first argues that God exists
because he can conceive of a being more perfect than himself
, and then that what he perceives clearly and distinctly
must be true, as a perfect being
- God - would not deceive him. Unlike the rest of Descartes' very methodical
proposition, this last logical step
leaves much to be desired in terms of intuitive appeal
and evidence provided by Descartes to back it up. It could be said to be one of the greatest flaws
in his most famous work.
If I've confused my philosophers or other facts, please /msg me. Or just use the "new writeup"/downvote cheat code.