Principles of Philosophy and over 2 million other books are available for Amazon Kindle . Learn more


or
Sign in to turn on 1-Click ordering.
More Buying Choices
Have one to sell? Sell yours here
Sorry, this item is not available in
Image not available for
Colour:
Image not available

 
Start reading Principles of Philosophy on your Kindle in under a minute.

Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.

Principles of Philosophy [Paperback]

Rene Descartes

Price: £4.75 & FREE Delivery in the UK on orders over £10. Details
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
Only 2 left in stock (more on the way).
Dispatched from and sold by Amazon. Gift-wrap available.
Want it tomorrow, 2 Oct.? Choose Express delivery at checkout. Details

Formats

Amazon Price New from Used from
Kindle Edition £0.62  
Hardcover £15.37  
Paperback £4.49  
Paperback, 15 Jun 2009 £4.75  
Unknown Binding --  

Book Description

15 Jun 2009
Principles of Philosophy was written in Latin by René Descartes. Published in 1644, it was intended to replace Aristotle's philosophy and traditional Scholastic Philosophy. This volume contains a letter of the author to the French translator of the Principles of Philosophy serving for a Preface and a letter to the most serene princess, Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Frederick, King of Bohemia, Count Palatine, and Elector of the Sacred Roman Empire. Principes de philosophie, by Claude Picot, under the supervision of Descartes, appeared in 1647 with a letter-preface to Queen Christina of Sweden.


Product details


More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, and more.

Inside This Book (Learn More)
Browse and search another edition of this book.
First Sentence
MADAM,-The greatest advantage I have derived from the writings which I have already published, has arisen from my having, through means of them, become known to your Highness, and thus been privileged to hold occasional converse with one in whom so many rare and estimable qualities are united, as to lead me to believe I should do service to the public by proposing them as an example to posterity. Read the first page
Explore More
Concordance
Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Table of Contents | Excerpt
Search inside this book:

What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?


Customer Reviews

There are no customer reviews yet on Amazon.co.uk.
5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com: 3.7 out of 5 stars  3 reviews
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Incomplete Edition. 11 Mar 2013
By Robert French - Published on Amazon.com
Format:Paperback|Verified Purchase
This edition is extremely incomplete since it leaves out most of what Descartes says on physics in Parts 2-4. For a complete edition I recommend the edition published by Reidel in 1983, translated by Valentine and Reese Miller. Unfortunately it is out of print, but I was able to get a copy with interlibrary loan.
5.0 out of 5 stars Descartes's Euclidean physics 18 Feb 2013
By Viktor Blasjo - Published on Amazon.com
Format:Paperback
The bulk of this book is a compendious catalogue of qualitative explanations of various physical and astronomical phenomena. These things are not Descartes's best work and have proved to be of limited impact and value. More interesting, in my opinion, is Descartes's attempts to build up physics on the basis of his overall philosophy, and his cogito argument in particular. This perspective is really only sustained in parts I and II of the book, so I shall limit my discussion to those parts.

Descartes's philosophical method is modelled on the method of Euclid's Elements, as is clear from Descartes's preface:

"One must begin by searching for ... first causes, that is, for Principles [which] must be so clear and so evident that the human mind cannot doubt of their truth when it attentively considers them ... And then, one must attempt to deduce from these Principles the knowledge of the things which depend upon them, in such a way that there is nothing in the whole sequence of deductions which one makes from them which is not very manifest." (xvii-xviii)

But Descartes is not content with merely adopting the Euclidean method---he also justifies it. He does this by showing that it survives even the most critical examination possible, namely that announced in the first sentence of the text: "whoever is searching for truth must, once in his life, doubt all things" (I.1).

The Euclidean method is the only philosophical method to survive this critical abyss, by the following chain of reasoning.

First we prove our own existence. "We can indeed easily suppose that there is no God, no heaven, no material bodies; and yet even that we ourselves have no hands, or feet, in short, no body; yet we do not on that account suppose that we, who are thinking such things, are nothing: for it is contradictory for us to believe that that which thinks, at the very time when it is thinking, does not exist. And, accordingly, this knowledge, _I think, therefore I am,_ is the first and most certain to be acquired by and present itself to anyone who is philosophizing in correct order." (I.7)

"The knowledge of remaining things depend on a knowledge of God," because the next things the mind feels certain of are basic mathematical facts, but it cannot trust these judgments unless it knows that its creator is not deceitful. Thus "the mind ... discovers [in itself] certain common notions, and forms various proofs from these; and as long as it is concentrating on these proofs it is entirely convinced that they are true. Thus, for example, the mind has in itself the ideas of numbers and figures, and also has among its common notions, _that if equals are added to equals, the results will be equal,_ and other similar ones; from which it is easily proved that the three angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles, etc." But the mind "does not yet know whether it was perhaps created of such a nature that it errs even in those things which appear most evident to it." Therefore "the mind sees that it rightly doubts such things, and cannot have any certain knowledge until it has come to know the author of its origin." (I.13)

The existence of God is established to Descartes's satisfaction by several dubious arguments, most notably the following. "Just as, for example, the mind is entirely convinced that a triangle has three angles which are equal to two right angles, because it perceives that the fact that its three angles equal two right angles is necessarily contained in the idea of a triangle; so, solely because it perceives that necessary and eternal existence is contained in the idea of a supremely perfect being, the mind must clearly conclude that a supremely perfect being exists." (I.14) And all the more since it is "very well know from [our] natural enlightenment" "that that which is more perfect is not produced by an efficient and total cause which is less perfect; and moreover that there cannot be in us the idea or image of anything, of which there does not exist somewhere (either in us or outside us), some Original, which truly contains all its perfections. And because we in no way find in ourselves those supreme perfections of which we have the idea; from that fact alone we rightly conclude that they exist, or certainly once existed, in something different from us; that is, in God." (I.18)

"It follows from this that all the things which we clearly perceive are true, and that the doubts previously listed are removed" (I.30), since "God is not the cause of errors," owing to his perfection, seeing as "the will to deceive certainly never proceeds from anything other than malice, or fear, or weakness; and, consequently, cannot occur in God." (I.29) "Thus, Mathematical truths must no longer be mistrusted by us, since they are most manifest." (I.30)

In the same way we can be sure that material objects exist, since otherwise "it would be impossible to devise any reason for not thinking Him a deceiver" (II.1). But the argument forces upon us the restriction "that the nature of body does not consist in weight, hardness, color, or other similar properties; but in extension alone" (II.4), since a body can easily be conceived to be deprived of its secondary properties (cf. also II.11), but not its extension.

Physics, therefore, must be based on a theory of extended matter and nothing else. Two key characteristics of Cartesian physics follow quite naturally from this starting point, and are indeed introduced almost immediately: relativity of space (II.13-14) and contact mechanics (II.36-52).

The first is a quite unavoidable corollary of Descartes's starting point, since his perspective does not admit the possibility of space as a concept separate from body. Thus he is compelled to argue that "the names 'place' or 'space' do not signify a thing different from the body which is said to be in the place; but only designate its size, shape and situation among other bodies" (II.13). "So when we say that a thing is in a certain place, we understand only that it is in a certain situation in relation to other things" (II.14).

A second rather straightforward consequence of Descartes's starting point is that contact mechanics is the fundamental phenomena in terms of which all other physics must be construed. And indeed Descartes offers a detailed account of contact mechanics almost at once, in II.36-52.
1 of 2 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars "Cogito Ergo Sum" 15 Jan 2009
By Medusa - Published on Amazon.com
Format:Paperback
This book is the synthesis of all Descartes physics and philosophy theories divided into four parts. The first part focuses on philosophy, the second part general science, while the third and forth parts are a collection of Descartes' specific principles of physics he used to develop his theory of the structure of the universe, the solar system, and the origins of the earth.

Descartes' valuable researches in science and physics have long been appreciated and this book is certainly proof of that value. This book is especially significant because it was written after the Church had condemned Galileo and his theories of cosmology and tried to slowdown or halt the progress of science. Descartes presents very strongly his revolutionary scientific conclusions, but my attention had to be focused on Descartes the philosopher not the scientist.
As a scientist, Descartes elucidated basic laws in physics and science, and he brought that logical, straightforward, scientific approach to philosophy and the question of God's existence.

In Descartes earlier work "Meditations on First Philosophy", he called all of our knowledge into doubt as he stated: "If you would be a real seeker after truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt, as far as possible, all things". Similarly, in The first section of "Principles of Philosophy", Descartes restates some of his earlier conclusions, not to argue what we certainly don't know, but rather to try and determine what we know for certain
Descartes' famous declaration "Cogito Ergo Sum" which is translated as "I think, therefore I am.", is the first certain truth that Descartes proclaims in Part I of the Principles. This conclusion, "Cogito Ergo Sum", is for Descartes a truth that cannot be called into doubt: the fact that we exist. Using only this fact, a few principles of logic, and some innate ideas, Descartes believes he can prove the existence of God
Descartes presents two intriguing arguments for God's existence that can by summarized as follows:
1. An ontological argument for God's existence that goes this way: Our idea of God is a perfect being, to exist is definitely more perfect than not to exist, and therefore, God must exist.
2. We are all born with the innate idea of God as an infinite being, so this idea must have infinite objective reality. Knowing that there must be as much reality in a cause as in an effect, then there must be as much formal reality in a cause of an idea as there is objective reality in an idea. Based on this kind of reasoning, we have an idea with infinite objective reality, which is the idea of God, then there must be a being with infinite formal reality that caused this idea. That being is God. .With all due respect to Descartes, I can't help but asking here if Descartes or anyone else can prove that belief in God as an infinite being is innate? It seems to me that it is more a learned idea

To spend time exploring the breadth and depth of Descartes' scientific principles and the unyielding logic and order of his philosophy is so fulfilling and enlightening that until we have taken the journey we are, as thinking, questioning human beings, incomplete
Were these reviews helpful?   Let us know

Customer Discussions

This product's forum
Discussion Replies Latest Post
No discussions yet

Ask questions, Share opinions, Gain insight
Start a new discussion
Topic:
First post:
Prompts for sign-in
 

Search Customer Discussions
Search all Amazon discussions
   


Look for similar items by category


Feedback