With the appearance of René Descartes, the onset of a markedly modern philosophy began, distinguished by a high level of rationalism (Vargas, 2014). This philosophy broke with the paradigm of heliocentric theory in the construction of knowledge and placed a notable emphasis on reason, even above the individual themselves. In short, what matters is not the person, but what is known through reason. René Descartes' proposal, synthesized in the Cartesian method, had repercussions in all areas of knowledge. In correspondence with Vargas (2014), the Cartesian method was characterized by adopting the mathematical model, which, in some way, confirmed what was exposed by Galileo Galilei, in the sense that nature was written in the language of mathematics.
Contextualization
Undoubtedly, modern science considers Aristotelian physics as the farthest reference (Vargas, 2014). In reality, the philosophy of this distinguished Greek thinker has permeated the works of Nicolaus Copernicus, Isaac Newton, Galileo Galilei, René Descartes, and contemporary theorists of positivism and logical empiricism. However, according to Vargas (2014), Plato's hypotheses have influenced the thinking of different philosophers in an antagonistic manner, and it can even be observed that Descartes seems to incorporate some of Plato's theory of ideas.
In this context, the emergence of Cartesian thought was a response to the uncertainty experienced between the 15th and 17th centuries, as the geocentric and theocentric scientific model lost validity, and a new model of the universe was born, as well as a new method of thinking, based on mathematical propositions: the heliocentric theory (Vargas, 2014). According to this theory, what can be measured and quantified becomes relevant and prevails. Additionally, according to Vargas (2014), at that time, there was a division within Catholicism, which aroused "doubt", which in turn questioned the criterion of truth and the structures considered its source: religion and science.
To counteract this blanket of uncertainty and doubt, Descartes attempted to establish a philosophical structure in which there were no errors of any kind (Vargas, 2014). Mathematics helped him achieve this purpose, but he also found in human reason a solid foundation upon which to sow his thought and the new philosophical structure he proposed. Consequently, according to Vargas (2014), he is considered the father of modern philosophy and the pioneer of scientific rationalism, as in his opinion, only reason could differentiate between true and false, while the senses could be deceived.
In this context, his skepticism had no relation to the proposals of the skeptics, who argued that there was no possibility of approaching truth (Vargas, 2014). In contrast, in Descartes' thought, it is possible to access knowledge in two ways: through experience and by deduction. This does not mean that he granted relevance to sensible knowledge, and perhaps for that reason, in the development of his thesis, he replaced experience with intuition, since the latter, along with deduction, are qualities of reason and, in this sense, have the possibility of providing certain knowledge. In fact, this experience can be misleading, as the senses can lead to a mistaken perception and understanding of reality. According to Vargas (2014), hence his attachment to mathematics, a science that starts from a deductive point of view and elaborates knowledge from the mind without obtaining anything from experience.
Methodical Doubt
A crucial part of the Cartesian method is the willingness to question things that are taken for granted (Giles, 2021). However, in Descartes' method, doubt is merely a tool in service of a preeminent objective. The overarching purpose of his philosophy was to find ultimate truth, a certainty upon which he could ground all his thinking. His methodical philosophy was less a method of doubt than a method to avoid error (Giles, 2021). Consequently, in line with Vargas (2014), it is established that the foundation of all knowledge is the individual, as the primary source of knowledge resides in reason.
In Cartesian discourse, doubt is distinguished from skepticism (Vargas, 2014). For this reason, Descartes constructed the so-called "methodical doubt," from which only truth should be acknowledged, namely, knowledge obtained clearly, distinctly, obviously, and precisely. In this case, feasible knowledge must be rejected as it should be considered false. Therefore, methodical doubt constitutes the epistemological aspect of the Cartesian method insofar as it pertains to the question of truth. On the other hand, in accordance with Vargas (2014), the method itself corresponds to the methodological aspect of Cartesian philosophy, that is, the steps to achieve true knowledge.
In this context, doubt combines the characteristics of being universal and methodical (Vargas, 2014). In the former case, it mentions the necessity of questioning almost everything, while in the latter, it seeks to distinguish itself from skepticism. According to Descartes, it is possible to obtain true knowledge, and doubt is merely a mechanism to achieve it. Descartes used part of his "Discourse on the Method" and his first "Meditation on Metaphysics" to propose the need for doubt, pointing out that the senses, although tools for acquiring knowledge, can sometimes be deceived and generate false truths. Hence, according to Vargas (2014), the total relevance he gives to reason as the only probability of constructing true knowledge, because it discovers truth through rational knowledge.
In the process of questioning everything, Descartes found the first elemental truth: the human being is a thinking being (Vargas, 2014). More importantly, people have the possibility to question what is thought, but not thought itself. In this way, he arrived at the first truth: "cogito, ergo sum," which means "I think, therefore I am," a proposition that constitutes the first foundation of all Cartesian philosophy. Therefore, it can be pointed out that this phrase emphasizes the initiative to modify the philosophical framework, moving from the objectivism of the Middle Ages to the subjectivism proposed in the Cartesian method, from which the fundamental aspect is the knowledge of things through human reason. In short, according to Vargas (2014), with methodical doubt, the thinking subject becomes the reason upon which all rational knowledge is built; and with the first truth, the existence of the human being is also found.
The Cartesian Method
Firstly, it is essential to underline that, for Descartes, science and philosophy were closely linked, as evidenced not only in his famous metaphor of the tree but also in his belief that all sciences and disciplines are built upon the knowledge developed by humans and share a common core: the method (Vargas, 2014). This method ensures the correct attainment of truth, providing security in the process of its acquisition and reducing the risk of errors. The realization or construction of science cannot be recognized without a method since it is needed to investigate the truth of things. Therefore, in accordance with Vargas (2014), Descartes taught that the method consists of four certain and easy rules, through which, if followed precisely, one will never take anything false as true, and will not use mental effort unnecessarily, but will gradually increase one's knowledge and arrive at the true understanding of everything that one is capable of doing.
The first rule of the Cartesian method is the rule of evidence, which states that one should not accept as true anything that is not known with certainty, meaning one should avoid rashness and doubt (Molina, 2018). For this reason, the only true thing is what is evident (García, 2021). This exercise is done through intuition; in other words, what is immediately perceived through intuition is evident (García, 2021). Therefore, the idea must be clear and free from doubt. According to García (2021), this eliminates all those derived from deductive processes or that may cause opposition.
The second rule is the rule of analysis (Vargas, 2014). This rule refers to the idea that any idea, no matter how complicated, can be broken down into simpler ideas (García, 2021). Through this process, a complex criterion is broken down into a set of evident ideas. Therefore, according to García (2021), the mind can conceive each of them clearly.
The third rule is the rule of synthesis (Vargas, 2014). Once all the elements of a complex problem have been broken down and understood, all the ideas are constructed in order of complexity (García, 2021). According to García (2021), at this stage and due to this process, new knowledge is generated through deduction.
The last rule is the rule of verifications (Vargas, 2014). In this rule, the entire process is examined to avoid errors in its creation, so that the new knowledge generated is evident and irrefutable (García, 2021). In short, according to Vargas (2014), this last rule would be something similar to making the necessary enumerations and verifications of the examined object to ensure that it is truly true.
The proposal described in the Cartesian method aims, on the one hand, to avoid errors and obtain truths, that is, to differentiate between the true and the false; and on the other hand, to seek new truths from existing and known ones (Vargas, 2014). In this sense, intuition and deduction are understood as human reasoning skills, and thus, they must be allowed to act in accordance with the method to arrive at the truth. Both faculties are present in the steps of the Cartesian method; intuition in the first two and deduction in the last two. According to Vargas (2014), both skills are relevant in Descartes' work, as they are the only way to acquire knowledge and therefore support this method.
Now, to put intuition into action, two conditions are necessary (Vargas, 2014). The first refers to the fact that what is intuited must be understood clearly and distinctly, and the second is that what is intuited should be done simultaneously, not one after the other. On the contrary, deduction is done in a movement of the mind from which one thing can be inferred from another; therefore, it is not simultaneous but gradual. However, according to Vargas (2014), in the application of this method, there comes a point where the subject, after approaching the truth, manages to combine deductive ability with inductive ability, so that the steps of the method are quickly completed, distinguishing the true from the false and giving the impression that the latter is only done from an inductivist point of view.
References
García, A. M. (2021). Método cartesiano. Economipedia. Recuperado 27 de noviembre de 2021, de https://economipedia.com/definiciones/metodo-cartesiano.html
Giles, D., PhD. (2021). What Was Descartes’ Method? - Inserting Philosophy. Medium. Recuperado 29 de noviembre de 2021, de https://medium.com/inserting-philosophy/what-was-descartes-method-8ef2f9457201
Molina, V. H. (2018). El método cartesiano y su relación con las normas internacionales de información financiera. Universidad de los Andes. Recuperado 27 de noviembre de 2021, de https://www.redalyc.org/journal/4655/465554397012/html/
Vargas, C. M. (2014). Una aproximación al método cartesiano. Su relación con la contabilidad. Scielo. Recuperado 27 de noviembre de 2021, de http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0123-14722014000200009
