Does that mean that a cat only exists in our brains (4 us)?
2007-03-11 09:58:12 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Ok Ok!!! If cats think, then change the subject what Do u think uhm ? A FLI EXISTS?
2007-03-11 10:04:41 · update #1
a STONE? The rain? They dont think uh? They dont exist?
2007-03-11 10:06:11 · update #2
Even if we assume that a cat does not think, what Descartes meant was that if you think, then you exist. He did not mean to say that if you do not think, then you do not exist. Your question is an example of a logical fallacy know as denying the antecedent.
Of course, Descartes was only referring to himself. His radical skepticism, which formed the foundation of modern philosophy, did not allow him the luxury of knowing whether other people either thought or existed, not to mention cats.
2007-03-11 10:30:45 · answer #1 · answered by marc 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You say that a cat doesn't think... that is untrue. Although they may not use the same processes that we as humans do, they do think. Have you ever watched one hunt a bird or a mouse? Or have you watched as they change a behavior after being squirted with water a few times? It takes a level of thought to realize that they have to sneak up on thier prey, or they won't catch it; and that the water bottle will squirt them if they continue to get on the counter. So in essence a cat does think, just like every other animal, so yes it does exist.
2007-03-11 17:25:46 · answer #2 · answered by J.T. 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, everything in the universe exists whether it thinks or not. A fly must think because it could not survive if it didn't. It has to get food and meet survival needs. The same goes for cats. All of the other things, rocks, trees, stars, planets, whatever, were created to meet the needs of things that do think. They process the result of living things to think, as a matter of fact. Everything that we can look upon, or think about does exist or could possibly exist.
2007-03-11 17:55:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Descartes, able to think, was also able to doubt, and his formulation was a means of resolving his doubt. It wasn't a means to somehow guarantee his existence, as if nothing that doesn't think could exist.
From looking at the other answers, I'm a bit appalled at how many people think that animal behavior entails thinking. Turn it around, and consider a narrower conception of thinking as the tip of the iceberg of human neurological behavior. Most of our human neurological behavior is unconscious, like that of animals, but we have another element, the capacity to choose relatively freely from among our thoughts, feelings, and memories, over and above the attention-changes that happen to us via unconscious associations. We can direct not only our attention, but also the selection-criteria of our attention. We can reflect on our own internal experiences (thoughts, etc.) as if they were external objects, and we can conceive of ourselves as "selves". Cats don't behave in any manner that gives any evidence of anything like this.
2007-03-11 21:22:42 · answer #4 · answered by G-zilla 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No.
"I think, I am " is the foundation for Descartes' proof of the external world. He argues that we have clear and distinct ideas, which are the apriori essence of objects. He also gives a proof for God, who guarantees the reality of what we see, because it's against God's nature to be a deceiver.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descartes#Philosophical_work
The cat is like any other object. It doesn't need to think to exist.
Besides, your argument is fallacious. You denied the antecendent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denying_the_antecedent
2007-03-11 17:14:06 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
According to Descarts, thinking is proof of existance. However, it is not a requirement.
A finger print might prove that A killed B. However, the lack of a finger print does not prove that A didn't kill B.
2007-03-11 17:07:33 · answer #6 · answered by cato___ 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Mr. Descartes did not want to repeat himself, but the truth of the matter is: Cogito, ergo cogito sum: I think, therefore I think I am. I apologize for the master!
Now you can sleep in peace!0!
2007-03-11 18:51:33 · answer #7 · answered by Alex 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. How do you know a cat doesn't think?
2. Moving buses probably don't think. Step in front of one.
Could Descartes have been saying "I think, therefore I am a reasoning being"?
2007-03-11 17:01:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Cats think. Cat's learn.
2007-03-11 17:03:57 · answer #9 · answered by apple juice 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Haven't you learned yet that Descarte was full of sh!t? The only purpose his philosophy served was to alienate human beings from themselves and each other, and probably the world.
Damn, I can't stand Descartes!
2007-03-11 18:35:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋