It is generally assumed that Descartes invokes “objective being in the intellect” in order to explain or describe an idea’s status as being “of something.” I argue that this assumption is mistaken. As emerges in his discussion of “materially false ideas” in the Fourth Replies, Descartes recognizes two senses of ‘idea of’. One, a theoretical sense, is itself introduced in terms of objective being. Hence Descartes can’t be introducing objective being to explain or describe “ofness” understood in this sense. Descartes (...) also appeals to a pretheoretical sense of ‘idea of’. I will argue that the notion of objective being can’t serve to explain or describe this “ofness” either. I conclude by proposing an alternative explanation of the role of objective being, according to which Descartes introduces this notion to explain the mind’s ability to attain clear and distinct ideas. (shrink)

Thomas Reid, twórca szkockiej szkoły zdrowego rozsądku, głosił tezę, że wszystkie wcześniejsze systemy filozoficzne obciążone są tym samym „grzechem pierworodnym” – przyjęciem (w różnych formach) reprezentacjonistycznej teorii spostrzeżenia zmysłowego. Nazywał ją „teorią idei”, której konsekwencją miało być oddzielenie podmiotu i przedmiotu poznania nieusuwalną „zasłoną idei”. Konstruowanie własnej filozofii poprzedził analizą historii tego zagadnienia od starożytności do czasów sobie współczesnych, usiłując wykazać zasadność swego stanowiska. Celem artykułu jest odpowiedź na pytanie o trafność poglądów Reida, wyrażonych w przyjmowanej teorii spostrzeżenia. Chodzi więc (...) przede wszystkim o pogląd charakterystyczny dla tradycji arystotelesowsko-tomistycznej, tradycyjnie interpretowany jako prezentacjonizm, oraz poglądy Kartezjusza dotyczące statusu „idei” w procesie poznawania tzw. świata zewnętrznego. Przeprowadzone analizy wskazują jednocześnie na uproszczenia w Reidowskiej interpretacji poglądów jego poprzedników na naturę spostrzeżenia oraz na cechy krytykowanych teorii, które w pewnym stopniu usprawiedliwiają tę krytykę. ------------------------- Zgłoszono: 28/10/2022. Zrecenzowano: 24/11/2022. Zaakceptowano do publikacji: 16/12/2022. (shrink)

Descartes’s uncompromising rejection of the possibility of animal intelligence was among his most controversial theses. That rejection is based on (1) his commitment to the doctrine of animal automatism and (2) two tests that he takes to be sufficient indicators of thought (the action and language tests). Of these two tests, only the language test is truly definitive, and Descartes is firmly of the view that no animal could demonstrate the capacity to use signs to convey meaning in “all the (...) circumstances of life.” The topic is fascinating for forcing us to ponder what exactly reason is for Descartes and the role it plays in everyday life. This article explores the tensions in Descartes’s arguments produced by an over reliance on the analogy between animals and clocks, including the question of what to make of Descartes’s recognition of the need to posit representational and information-processing subsystems in the brain. (shrink)

This paper aims at reconstructing the ethical issues raised by Spinoza's earlyTreatise on the Emendation of the Intellect. Specifically, I argue that Spinoza takes issue with Descartes’ epistemology in order to support a form of “ethical intellectualism” in which knowledge is envisaged as both necessary and sufficient to reach the supreme good. First, I reconstruct how Descartes exploits the distinction between truth and certainty in hisDiscourse on the Method. On the one hand, this distinction acts as the basis for Descartes’ (...) epistemological rules while, on the other hand, it implies a “morale par provision” in which adequate knowledge is not strictly necessary to practice virtue. Second, I show that Spinoza rejects the distinction between truth and certainty and thus the methodological doubt. This move leads Spinoza to substitute the Cartesian Cogito with the idea of God as the only adequate standard of knowledge, through which the mind can attain the rules to reach the supreme good. Third, I demonstrate that in theShort TreatiseSpinoza develops this view by equating intellect and will and thus maintaining that only adequate knowledge can help to contrast affects. However, I also insist that Spinoza's early epistemology is unable to explain why human beings drop conceive of the idea of God inadequately. Thus, I suggest that in his later writings Spinoza accounts for the insufficiency of adequate knowledge in opposing the power of the imagination and passions by reconnecting the nature of ideas with the mind's conatus. (shrink)

Aspectual shape is widely recognized property of intentionality. This means that subject’s access to reality is necessarily conditioned by applied concepts, perspective, modes of sensation, etc. I argue against representational and indirect-realist account of this phenomenon. My own proposition—presentational and direct realist—is based on the recognition of historical contexts, in which the phenomenon of aspectuality should be reconsidered; on the other hand—it is based on Ludwig Wittgenstein’s conception of aspectual perception. Moreover I apply some results from the area of logicophilosophical (...) investigations called qua theory. (shrink)