The Discourse on Method, published in 1637 (4 years before the Meditations on First Philosophy), was meant to be an introduction to three essays: Les Météores, La Dioptrique and La Géométrie. This discourse is mostly an autobiographical work telling the story of Descartes’ path in science, starting with his childhood and the high school he attended, all the way to where he is now in his quest for knowledge. In it, Descartes exposes the method he has used during his life to slowly gain more knowledge. He writes about methodology, a provisional code of morals, metaphysics, science, and the reasons to write and publish his work. It is in this discourse that Descartes has first written “I think, therefore I am”. And it contains the last methodological considerations written by Descartes before his Meditations on First Philosophy.
How did this text come to be?
The discourse was first part of La Dioptrique, which was part of an even greater work, The World. The World was supposed to be Descartes giving a complete account of Descartes’ philosophy, method, metaphysics and science. This discourse shouldn’t have reassembled the final version a lot. It was meant as a test to see whether he was able to convince his readers on metaphysical topics. If he succeeded, he could publish his works on metaphysics, mainly his proof of the existence of God and of the soul.
Descartes worked several years on The World. So why did he not publish it? That is because of the social context. In his book, Descartes proposed a heliocentric vision of the universe. He argued that the earth wasn’t the centre of the universe; rather, it was the sun. This idea was also held by Galileo, who was put to trial for holding this idea, as it did not correspond with the geocentric vision of the church. During his trial, Galileo was convicted of being “vehemently suspect of heresy” and therefore put under house arrest. After the trial of Galileo, Descartes became scared to publish his own book. Descartes even decided that he should burn his book, as publishing it is no longer an option considering the social context. Publishing The World would mean risking his personal life and safety.
However, Descartes did not burn the entirety of his book. Rather, he kept a treatise on light: La Dioptrique. This treatise did not contain anything dangerous. In 1635, Descartes wrote a letter which expressed the intention to add another treatise to La Dioptrique; this new treatise is called Les Météores, which talks about astronomy and meteorology. In this letter Descartes also mentions that he is writing a préface for these two essays; this preface is the Discourse on Method. Later, in 1635, Descartes invented a final part of his work, La Géométrie.
The final title of the preface became: Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting One’s Reason and of Seeking Truth in the Sciences. According to Descartes, everyone has a natural gift to distinguish the true from the false. An example of this can be seen in mathematics; everyone can perfectly distinguish, given enough time, between a calculation that is true and a calculation that is false. There is no one that is unable to distinguish that 2+2=4 is true. The same should go for all other truths, according to Descartes. When we get to more complex truths, however, there are differences of opinion. This is not because our good sense fails us, but because we take into consideration different things, accentuating different personal experiences more or less when considering a problem. For example, the difference of opinion between Galileo and the inquisitors came forth because Galileo took into consideration his experiments and scientific work, while the inquisitors took into consideration the Bible and the writings of Aristotle. Descartes' idea is that people do not conduct their minds properly in order to seek truth. “For it is not enough to have a good mind; the main thing is to apply it well.” While everyone has a natural gift to distinguish the true from the false, not everyone conducts their reason properly. Descartes wants to replace blind trust in the mind with a method that discovers truth by conducting one’s reason from one self-evident truth to the other.
Why did Descartes write the Discourse on Method?
This question is discussed in the sixth and final part of the discourse. According to Descartes, if this method had only served him to get some personal satisfaction by resolving difficulties in speculative science and morals, then he would not have written anything. Concerning moral conduct, according to Descartes, either it should be left to those chosen by God to be rulers and prophets, in which case the blessing of God establishes their authority on the matter and guarantees truth. Alternatively, if this is not the case, then there would be as many moral codes as there are people, in which case Descartes' writing on moral conduct would be worth nothing. Concerning the speculative sciences, Descartes fears that other speculations might please more than those that Descartes proposes.
What changed? Descartes acquired knowledge on physics, which, contrary to the knowledge of morals and speculative science that Descartes has acquired, is indubitably useful and objective. I cannot apply the knowledge of the existence of my soul in everyday life; there simply is no use case for it. If this is the case, then it also does not matter whether someone else believes or does not believe in the existence of their soul because it does not change their lives in the slightest. Physics, on the contrary, is useful in everyday life. None of the technology we have today, which we consider to be essential parts of our everyday lives, could have existed without physics. Think of mobile phones and cars, for example. Furthermore, there is no authority that tries to procure material well-being for humanity other than those who find the truths necessary for doing so. In order to progress the material well-being of people, one has to discover truths and make inventions that allow this progress. In order to give people handy mobile phones, one has to invent the mobile phone. Without the people that make these inventions and discoveries, this progress is not possible. Descartes thus considers that he could not “keep them [his knowledge of physics] hidden away without sinning grievously against the law that obliges us to procure, as much as is in our power, the common good of all men.” The common good that Descartes has in sight here is the material well-being of men.
His discoveries in physics also mean that the development of the universal science to which Descartes has dedicated his life has a sense not only for Descartes but for humanity as a whole. Descartes' problem is that his method for developing his universal science is a slow one that, while assuring with absolute certainty that no mistakes are made, also allows one to only acquire a handful of truths at the time. Descartes foresees two obstacles which might prevent him from accomplishing his universal science: the brevity of life and a lack of experiments (which ranges from simple observation to rigorous scientific experiment). It goes without saying that the development of a universal science also brings with it material conditions. For example, meteorology alone would require Descartes to observe weather conditions across the globe. This simply is not feasible. Writing and publishing his findings will allow other good minds to contribute and advance further Descartes’ universal science. This accomplishes two things. Firstly, as far as experiments and observations go, everyone will now be able to contribute to this universal science with their own experiments. This means that it is no longer up to Descartes alone to do every experiment and observation; it is the task of every scientist to help progress this universal science. This means that Descartes contributes with his Cartesian coordinate system, Copernicus contributes with the discovery of heliocentrism, and Newton contributes with his laws of motion, etc. By writing down and documenting their findings, the next generation will be able to pick up where the last generation left and thus make further progress in this universal science. This way Einstein can build upon the work of Newton, and Hawking can build upon the work of Einstein. This means that the progress of Descartes' universal science is not limited to what one man can find in one lifetime but rather can continually progress by the contribution of everyone.
Descartes’ idea is that, by writing his findings and demonstrating the utility of that which he has found, any good man would feel obliged to help Descartes in the research that is yet to be done. Any good man should, seeing the utility of Descartes' findings and considering the law that obliges us to procure the common good for all men, acknowledge that he too should follow the same path and help Descartes in his research. Seeing, for example, Descartes’ contribution to medicine and its utility might help one come to the conclusion that further progressing medicine is in the best interest of humanity and thus that it is worth dedicating his life to it.
However, there are more reasons for Descartes to write about his findings. Writing also gives the opportunity to re-examine his findings. By writing down his findings, they are eternalised, and Descartes could always come back to them and examine the exact way he has understood something. This is not when relying on memory. After a long time we naturally forget or misremember what we have understood. Re-examining can help us come to new insights or better understand our findings, or it could make us spot a mistake and better examine what we thought to be true. Writing is not a chore which has nothing to do with the progress of Descartes’ universal science; rather, it is part of the process. What especially helps is that by writing, Descartes can spot mistakes, as he has to go over his truths slowly and explain them persuasively for his readers. This is similar to how the Feynman method helps master new learning material.
The main hope of Descartes, however, is that his writings will be useful to future generations and that they will be able to build upon the truths which he has found and follow, if they think it is best to do so, the method that Descartes has laid out. To use Descartes’ principles to further acquire knowledge and truth. However, Descartes is held back by one more thing: controversy. This potential controversy is not an obstacle to writing but to publishing. Descartes wants to dedicate the rest of his life to acquiring knowledge and truth. Responding to objections would take a lot of time, which Descartes cannot spend on acquiring other knowledge. And since Descartes considers that none of these objections will help him advance, as he foresees the type of objections that he will be overwhelmed with (based on religion and other visions of the world), he does not want to publish his works while he is alive. This seems logical. However, Descartes does publish his work! Why?
The first of the Discourse on Method was published anonymously, which saved Descartes the trouble of having to respond to objections. Furthermore, Descartes gives two reasons. Firstly, he does not want to gain a bad reputation, as he had already promised several others of his intention to publish his works. Secondly, he does not want to be accused by another generation of not having done everything he could to acquire more knowledge and truths. This accusation could come from those who judge that Descartes neglected the possibility of any help for his project during his life; therefore, he would not have advanced as far as he potentially could have.
So why did Descartes write the Discourse on Method? To share the utility of the knowledge he has found, to urge others to help him progress in his universal science, to be able to re-examine his findings and to not neglect any possible help that could make him acquire more knowledge or truths. This is why Descartes wrote this discourse, and we should be very grateful to him!
Comments
Post a Comment