Is there anyone else out there who at one point felt Descartes was right? "I think therefore I am".

Answer 1

Absolutely! Descartes' importance to philosophy can
hardly be over-emphasized. He was the one who placed
philosophy on the path that allowed her to finally break
the chains that kept her a slave to the churches for so
many centuries, and ultimately freed her to develop into
what we now call modern philosophy.
.
Oh sure, he made a few mistakes along the way, but
then all philosophers do. But most of these are fairly
easy to fix:
.
i am, therefore i think :D

Answer 2

Wow, my hallucinations are getting very "real". I thought that another person existed, and asked whether Descartes was right.

Actually, there were some problems with Descartes' solipsistic thought, and Immanuel Kant attempted to refute them in his thesis, "Critique of Pure Reason". Essentially, the matter boils down to the fact that THOUGH everyone experiences the empirical, physical world differently, we nevertheless agree it exists, and that each other exist. The question is perhaps: what does it mean to exist. Such a definition cannot be posited ONlY internally, because it proves nothing to an external party. Take a look at Spinoza's Ethics as well... in the early pages he argues a point similar to Kant's, although much of Spinoza's logic is wandering and based on fallacious assumptions.

And anyway -- if you accept the increasingly convincing argument of Marvin Minsky ("The Mind's I") that the "I" is nothing but the collective agreement of a bunch of "sub"-consciousnesses that are always arguing about who's in charge, it raises questions about the definition of "I", and whether any such entity can persist when both its physical and subconscious components are constantly moving in and out of the picture.

Answer 3

I think you may have misunderstood what the famous slogan means.

It's not a way of saying "Thinking is the best!" or "I am dedicated to the life of thought!" or anything inspirational or expressive like that.

It's a bit of reasoning that Descartes uses (most famously) in the Meditations in order to arrive at some knowledge that is completely certain -- that is, completely safe from doubt. Descartes is reasoning that even wild skeptical scenarios where he is completely deceived must at least include his own existence. In other words, if he's thinking (doubting, wondering, ...) about skepticism, then he must at least exist. So he knows that he himself exists with complete certainty. That, roughly put, is the bit of reasoning captured by the famous slogan.

Answer 4

Yes, until I realized that one doesn't have to 'think' in order to 'be',
Or to put it another way, I dont stop "being" or knowing, full well, that I exist when I stop thinking. Just the opposite; the suspension of thought in meditation actually produces a heightened awareness of 'being'.
This was to be Descartes' ultimate reduction, and the idea was a brilliant approach, but in hind sight it seems that he may have stopped one step short, or it could have been 'I perceive therefore I am'

Answer 5

The better question is there anyone in their right mind who fails to see the truth of this?
Does anyone really go: "I think therefore i DO NOT exist"? Or even:"I think --> but this gives me no information about my existence?" I don't think so.

Answer 6

I always thought he was right until I started to question the concept of I. But that is a whole other bunch of stuff.

Answer 7

Was right? You mean he is no longer right? Or is your grammar and thinking at fault? In that case you should have asked "is right?" You see you confuse his bodily death with the death of his ideas which obviously are not dead.

Ex: Catesian Coordinates & "Cogito ergo sum."

Answer 8

Yes.

Answer 9

It assumes the I. It should start "There is thought".

Answer 10

I always thought that