WHAT TO READ
What to read | What to think about | What to write
WHAT TO READ
Meditations on First Philosophy, by Rene Descartes.
Any edition will do, but the standard Oxford text is to be found in The Philosophical Works of Descartes, vol II. ed Cottingham, J., Stoothoff, R. and Murdoch, D. (Cambridge UP, 1984)
If you are a lazy internet squirrel, you will find it on Past Masters. But don't go to the Oeuvres Complètes, unless your French is very good. Instead click on the Continental Rationalists, and proceed from there.
Read: The Preface to the reader; The Synopsis; Meditation I, Meditation II (as far as cogito); Meditation VI
First time through, aim to get a sense of the whole project of the Meditations, and how it is structured by the Method of Doubt. Then, on a second reading, close-focus on Meditation I to grasp the various stages of the doubt, and how they fit together. And then third time round, apply the closest scrutiny that you can to the section containing the Dream Argument itself, and try to work out how, in detail, the argument is meant to operate. Then, finally, check out Meditation VI to discover Descartes' considered criterion for wakefulness.
You may at this point wish some help from secondary sources. I name four, in ascending order of accessibility, and descending order of accuracy. Which means that the Cottingham is at once the most accessible and the least accurate work.
The Cottingham book should not be confused with a collection of articles he has edited, also called Descartes (OUP, 1998). Nor should it be confused with a third book of his, also called Descartes, (Phoenix, 1997).
Whether or not you select the Williams as your favoured secondary source, read his Appendix on the Dream Argument. Wilson is rather good as well. Oh, and by the way, students who repeat Cottingham's views in their essays can expect a hard time defending them in tutorials.
IMPORTANT: NEVER EVER read a secondary source before you read the primary text. If you do, you doom yourself to forever seeing the text through someone else's spectacles. You must find out what YOUR response is the first time round.
This is an excellent little book. Read all you like, but you probably will only have time for his chapter on the Dream Argument. If so, save the rest for later.
This is Wells' last ever short story. And it is a gem. Its plot will force you to think very hard about Descartes' criterion for wakefulness. What would Descartes say about this possibility? You can read it online here. Or here, with pictures.
This article has been described as 'The philosophical equivalent of The Charge of the Light Brigade'. Only read it if you have time (unlikely, but possible). It would be a good exercise of your understanding to be able to work out your own response to Malcolm.
How is The Dream Argument located textually? How is it located intellectually? What does Descartes think that dreams are like for the purposes of his argument? Are your/our dreams actually like that? Does it matter whether they are or not? What is the difference between the dream hypothesis and the demon hypothesis? What does the Dream Argument show, if anything? What criterion does Descartes (later) offer as a way of distinguishing waking from dreaming experiences? Does it work?
Are your dreams like this?.......................................................................................................................................Or like this?
You can click on the right-hand image to see another version of 'A Dream of Armageddon'.
A short piece, please. Let's say, 1,000 words or less. Explain the Dream Argument to someone who is intelligent, but utterly ignorant of philosophy. Choose your own title. Concentrate on accuracy and brevity of expression.
