René Descartes: Architect of Modern Rationalism

This text delves into the philosophy of René Descartes, a prominent figure born in 1596 in Touraine, France, who passed away in 1650 in Sweden. He is recognized as one of the leading representatives of Modern Philosophy and is widely considered the father of Rationalism. His most important work, Discourse on Method, outlines the necessity for a new philosophical method, fundamentally based on mathematical deduction. Other significant works include Meditations on First Philosophy (often referred to as Metaphysical Meditations), Treatise on the World, Principles of Philosophy, and Rules for the Direction of the Mind. Descartes's thought emerged as a significant outcome of the Humanist and Scientistic movements. He became the chief representative of 17th-century Rationalism, a philosophical movement that championed reason as the primary source of knowledge, aiming to discover truth through rigorous mathematical deduction.

Historical Context: The 17th Century

The 17th century was characterized by several defining features:

• Regal Absolutism: The monarchy gained significant strength across Europe.
• Religious Conflicts in Europe: The devastating Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) raged between Catholics and Protestants, particularly in Germany.
• Triumph of Science: This era witnessed the definitive emergence of modern science. The development of the experimental method and the application of mathematical methods to empirical sciences led to groundbreaking scientific discoveries, largely seen as products of reason. The profound connection between scientific and philosophical thought was often facilitated by mathematics. The 17th-century intellectual landscape placed humanity at the center of inquiry.

Descartes's philosophy was significantly influenced by Greek philosophy, particularly Plato, and by medieval scholastic thought. His ideas proved crucial for subsequent philosophers such as Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Baruch Spinoza, and Nicolas Malebranche, and later resonated with thinkers like José Ortega y Gasset.

Connections Between Descartes and David Hume

Despite their differing approaches, René Descartes and David Hume shared common philosophical concerns:

• Both philosophers grappled with the fundamental problem of human knowledge and the possibility of metaphysics, seeking to restructure the foundations of science.
• Both aimed to understand human cognition.
• The anthropological problem—the study of human nature—occupied a prominent role in their discussions, understood as a key element for understanding knowledge itself.

Key Philosophical Differences: Descartes vs. Hume

• Source of Knowledge: Cartesian Rationalism advocates reason as the primary instrument of knowledge, often rejecting or downplaying sensory experience. Conversely, Humean Empiricism asserts that all knowledge originates from sensory experience.
• Methodology: Cartesian Rationalism primarily employs the deductive method, moving from general principles to specific conclusions. Hume's Empiricism, however, supports the inductive method, deriving general principles from specific observations.
• Innate Ideas: Descartes defends the existence of innate ideas, concepts present in the mind from birth. Hume vehemently rejects the concept of innate ideas.
• Possibility of Metaphysics: For Descartes, scientific knowledge and metaphysics are possible and foundational. Hume, in contrast, argued that metaphysics is largely meaningless, as its claims cannot be verified by experience.

Contemporary Relevance and Reflections

• The problem of human knowledge remains profoundly relevant, enduring through centuries of philosophical inquiry.
• While knowledge can be based on reason or experience, the pursuit of universal and necessary knowledge, especially when grounded solely in experience, presents significant challenges.
• Modern philosophical currents, such as Neo-empiricism and Positivism, have revisited and re-evaluated these fundamental problems of human understanding.
• We contend that scientific knowledge is not merely a collection of facts, but rather a continuous, critical search for secure understanding.