Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!jade!violet.berkeley.edu!ed298-ak
From: ed298-ak@violet.berkeley.edu.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Descartes argument and assumptions (Re: Deduciblity as knowledge )
Message-ID: <3750@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Thu, 28-May-87 00:04:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: jade.3750
Posted: Thu May 28 00:04:55 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 29-May-87 05:24:04 EDT
References: <6762@mimsy.UUCP> <13261@watmath.UUCP> <3978@sdcc3.ucsd.EDU> <3722@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <728@bsu-cs.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@jade.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: lagache@violet.berkeley.edu (Edouard Lagache)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 15
Keywords: Descartes, Proof theory, Theory of Knowledge
Summary: GIVEN Descartes assumptions his conclusions are correct.


	A number of replies to my posting have suggested that I 
	failed to note that Descartes axioms are at fault.  My point was
	precisely that Descartes conclusions are an artifact of the logic
	he was assuming.  If you truly assume that nothing is certain then
	you clearly have no right to exclude your logical axioms from that
	hypothesis.  I believe that faulting Descartes for this is not
	entirely fair.  Afterall, he invented the search for doubt and
	certainty didn't benefit from all the doubts we have had since
	(including my doubts about this SIG!)

					Edouard Lagache
					School of Education
					U.C. Berkeley
					lagache@violet.berkeley.edu