‘I think, therefore I am’ is (kind of) Wrong

In the first and second meditations of Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes embarks on the task of accurately identifying the aspects of life that are certainly true (for something to be certainly true, it must be true in all cases).

Descartes’ journey starts with the idea that as he aged, many truths of childhood turned out to be falsehoods. For example, a young child that is born into an isolated tribe of dark skin complexion may be astonished to find fair-skinned individuals.

Descartes says,

“Reason now leads me to think that I should hold back my assent from opinions which are not completely certain and indubitable just as carefully as I do from those which are patently false,”

and then follows his first statement by saying,

“So, for the purpose of rejecting all my opinions it will be enough if I find in each of them at least one reason to doubt.”

In other words, if Descartes finds any reason to doubt something, whether or not there is a small or large probability concerning its existence, he will doubt it exists. In fact, Descartes is quickly creating his methodological skepticism in which he will continue to use throughout the rest of the Meditations.

As Descartes begins brainstorming the validity of various things’ existence, he comes up with the evil demon argument. Specifically, Descartes says that there is a chance, even if it is the slightest, that there is an evil demon that is presenting him with an illusion of the world. For example, one may think they are looking at a sheet of paper or feeling the bark of a tree but in actuality, the demon is simply augmenting the individual’s perception. Descartes goes as far as saying that even when one is computing the answer to 2 + 3, Descartes says that the evil demon may be tricking the individual into thinking it is equal to 5.

With the evil demon argument, Descartes quickly unravels his entire life to be a falsehood: one can not prove their hands exist; one can not prove their husband or wife exists; and one can not prove that the river flowing outside their house exists.

But just when Descartes seemingly proves the nonexistence of everything, he reaches a stark realization: one can not doubt they exist because they would be doubting that their doubt exists which implies that doubt exists; cogito ergo sum; I think, therefore I am.

On the surface, cogito ergo sum seems to be irrefutable; however, even this is slightly refutable. The commonly used phrase “I think, therefore I am” holds two distinct issues: the existence of the self and the existence of logic — both contended issues.

When one says “I think, therefore I am,” they are assuming the existence of themself (note the “I”) and they are assuming the existence of logical truth (note the “therefore”). With this in mind, cogito ergo sum might be better translated to “a thinking thing thinks, a thinking thing exists.”

The new translation removes the presumed self, as well as confirms the existence of a thinking thing without using a syllogism.

Thank you for taking the time to read this article! I hope you found it informative and engaging.

If you enjoyed this piece, be sure to explore more content on my profile. Your feedback and comments are always welcome and appreciated.

Stay curious!