how does "i think therefore i am" prove that........?

Question

there is a reality independently from yourself?

and how did descartes prove that there was a god or at least some form of it? and was he right?

Answer 1

"I think, therefore I am" does not prove that there is a reality independent from yourself. What it says is that the only reality you can be absolutely sure of is your own.

Answer 2

The "Cogitio ergo sum" is used to prove just that, namely that I exist. As was said in the comment above, you can find this in the Meditations on First Philosophy. Also there is a shorter (and slightly different) version in Discourse on Method. Descartes provides several various arguments that God exists. I will summarize one of them here.

When I reflect on those ideas which I have a priori, i.e. those that are clear and distinct and are not of sensible things or taken in any way from sensation, I find that I have certain cognitions/ideas/concepts ("simple natures," as Descartes calls them in the Rules for the Direction of the Mind) of which I am not the source. For example, I have the concepts of cogitating and doubting. I am aware of these from reflecting on my intellectual processes. However, I also find, while examining these "pure" concepts, notions which I could in no wise have gotten from myself. For example, infinity. I am a finite being. How then could I have gotten the conception of infinity from myself, from reflecting and meditating on my own "pure" intellectual activities? I can not be the source of this, for I have no experience of an infinite being. So this concept could not have come from me. Additionally, I have experiences of the world. I did not produce them. Therefore, there must be some intelligent entity greater than me--not merely greater, but actually infinite, for only an infinite being could give me the concept of infinity--who placed these concepts in my mind. And this is God. And, since God is infinite, he must possess every perfection, including goodness. Therefore, God would not allow the sensory world which I experience to merely be a deception. Since God is good, he cannot be an evil genus who is messing about with me (e.g. if God was an evil genus, then when I think that 2+2=4, it would only be because he makes me think that 2+2=4, and it actually may be that 2+2=5). Then Descartes (in the Discourse) then extrapolates how God would have (probably) created the universe. (According to Descartes, it would have been just like the universe which I sense!). Ergo, if God exists, then the material external world exists. Q.E.D.

This argument presented here must answer the following objection: If I have the concept of finite from myself, and if I have the concept or notion of negation also, then I can just negate the concept of finite and have the concept of infinite (in-finite, not finite). There are other objections to Descartes arguments which you could probably find online.

Descartes' conclusions do not follow from his arguments. However, there is a "reality existing independently from yourself." Descartes problem, as do those of all the moderns after him, especially the empiricists, from holding that the proper objects of knowledge are our ideas and not the thing themselves. In order to evaluate whether or not there is a "reality independent from yourself" you must ask whether it is reasonable to deny that our sensations and experiences do not have any connection to the things which are sensed or experienced.

Husserl, while epistemological reflection, states:

"We are in danger of falling into any one of a number of skepticisms [including solipsism] all of which have, sad to say, one and the same characteristic: absurdity."

I don't agree with Husserl's procedure (using "natural science"--although not exactly in the sense that Husserl means--Aristotle explains how "cognition reaches its object" without reaching any absurdity), nonetheless, Husserl is dead on the money when he states that these skepticisms are absurd.

I hope that helps you get out of your head (if you happen to be trapped in there). ;-)

Answer 3

He didn't prove there is a reality outside the self. He deduced that since HE can think, HE exists, and that his own existence is the only thing about which he can be sure. He also explained the existence of God, and you can find that argument in his Meditations - there is a whole section devoted to the thought.

Answer 4

It doesn't, and wasn't meant to. Descartes wanted to argue that one can't doubt EVERYTHING, that it was self-contradictory to doubt some things, such as personally existing.

Answer 5

hey thats a simple one
Belief creates Behaviour
Behaviour creates environment and
Environment dictates the belief
and we begin again

Answer 6

"there is a reality independently from yourself?" prove it.

Answer 7

I've fallen and can't reach my beer!

Answer 8

This is a typical misquote. It actually is I DRINK therefore I am.