1 Comparing And Evaluating René Descartes's Meditations on First Philosophy and Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics In evaluating philosophers' arguments, it is critical that we first comprehend their reasoning on its terms before critiquing its validity. Through studying Descartes's Meditations on First Philosophy and Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, I have chosen to focus on Descartes's theory of methodological doubt and philosophy of mind against Aristotle's ethics of virtue and happiness. Descartes ultimately constructs more rigorous arguments by establishing systematic doubt and the self as a primally thinking substance, contrasting Aristotle's reliance on undemonstrated premises about ethical absolutes providing human fulfillment. Using the TV show Lost as an accessible example revealing issues in interpreting truth and the mind's essence, I will show that Descartes's provocative questioning better engages substantive existential questions about knowledge and being. Descartes’s Theory of Doubt and the Self In Meditation One, Descartes constructs his theory of universal doubt by resolving to doubt all senses and preconceptions systematically and receiving beliefs that are not absolutely certain to build new knowledge on rational foundations. He states, "So today, I have set all my worries aside and arranged for myself a clear stretch of free time. I am here quite alone, and at last I will devote myself, sincerely and without holding back, to demolishing my opinions" (Descartes 1). Descartes seeks some fact resistant to doubt to serve as the bedrock of certainty. Descartes first observes that sensory perception is dubious, as when a tower appears round from afar but squares up close. Next, even basic mathematics can be doubted, as an "evil genius" could deceive us about everything. However, Descartes argues that the very fact that he doubts, thinking, and perceiving proves he must necessarily exist in some form: "I shall
2 stubbornly persist in this train of thought; and even if I cannot learn any truth, I shall at least do what I can do, which is to be on my guard against accepting any falsehoods so that the deceiver however powerful and cunning he may be - will be unable to affect me in the slightest" (Descartes 96). Descartes concludes that even if there is an omnipotent evil genius deceiving him about all his beliefs and perceptions, the fact he thinks entails that he necessarily exists. Descartes seeks irrefutable knowledge resistant to doubt. Even if his senses and ideas are entirely deceived, the mind perceiving and doubting must exist for deception to occur. This seminal insight is the cornerstone of Descartes's entire system, grounding the possibility for further knowledge and demonstration through the self-evident realization that the mind undeniably exists as a thinking thing. Douting confirms that essence, making the statement's truth self-verifying and resistant to skepticism. This essential truth subtends all other sensory beliefs that can be doubted as secondary and contingent. Through this series of negations, Descartes strips away assumptions and external inputs to establish the self-reflecting mind as an intrinsically existing substance upon which he rebuilds the world. Aristotle’s Theory of Virtue Ethics and Eudaimonia Contrastingly, in Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle constructs an ethical framework where the highest human good is "eudaimonia,” or fulfillment achieved by cultivating virtues and reason over a lifetime to actualize intrinsic human capacities. As Aristotle argues, “Now we have said that the good man is at the same time pleasant and useful; but such a man does not become the friend of one who surpasses him in the station unless he is also surpassed in virtue; if this is not so, he does not establish equality by being proportionally exceeded in both respects. However, people surpassing him in both respects are not easy to find" (Aristotle 8). Aristotle puts forth his conception of eudaimonia, or the highest human good and fulfillment, in this passage.
3 He argues that realizing the good of man requires actively exercising the faculties of the soul in accordance with virtue or excellence. According to Aristotle, the human soul has innate capacities that must be actualized over time through intentional effort and reason to achieve excellence. This cultivation of virtue and reason to guide action is an ongoing process over a complete lifetime. The example of one swallow not making a spring illustrates that a fleeting period of happiness or a single good deed alone does not constitute supreme human fulfillment. True eudaimonia consists of a lifetime of consciously applying practical reason in choosing activities that fully develop intrinsic human capacities for virtue. Unlike a brief span of luck or pleasure, which quickly passes, dedicating oneself to virtuous thoughts and actions as guided by practical wisdom leads to genuine, lasting contentment and the highest good of fulfillment, according to Aristotle. The sustained, routine application of reason towards moral self-realization comprises the good life. Aristotle asserts that since “The virtue and the function of each of these are different, and so are the reasons for which they love; the love and the friendship are therefore different also” (Aristotle 7). The highest human good is achieving excellence in applying reason over a lifetime to choose virtuous habits and actions comprising an ethical, fulfilled existence. This conception of fulfillment and virtue forms the foundation of Aristotle’s ethical claims. He further argues that as all actions aim at perceived goods, moral education requires proper habits and wisdom to choose actual over apparent goods, discerning absolute, universal ethical standards that apply unconditionally. Evaluation Using Lost Both Descartes and Aristotle put forth strong yet fundamentally differing theories of knowledge and the human mind’s purpose. For Descartes, indubitable truth means absolute or
4 complete certainty of existence achieved by doubting all perceptions and everything beyond the thinking self or ego in order to demonstrate the existence of the individual thinking self in its own consciousness. For Aristotle, human good is an objective universal virtue chosen by reason over a lifetime as a final goal that brings about happiness, not simply pleasure. The Lost TV series, originating in the early 2000s, visually demonstrates several important issues that help to assess these philosophical claims. The show is the story of the crash landing of an airborne, following which it strands its survivors on a mysterious island where extraordinary events beyond ordinary reasoning occur. The novel is infused with the island's mysteries—the rock, the forest, and its natives. These enigmas make characters and readers question reality and knowledge in Descartes' terms: nothing is certain, and what defines the self? Many writhes in perpetual skepticism concerning the nature and purpose of the island— skepticism like Descartes's universal doubt. On the other hand, people such as John Locke argue that virtuous and logical paths are to be taken, and this is done by harnessing Aristotelian principles aimed at a misguided cause. By watching the show, it is revealed that the inherent deficiency of human knowledge and vision Investigative zeal does not entirely remove the mystique from the unknown. However, confined to reading the deepest truths of the island, questions such as finding one's personal meaning and ethical relationships become unavoidable. In this regard, Descartes' systematic skepticism provides critical information by pointing out the inherent uncertainty and the assumption-based nature of all human knowledge. The bracketing of received ideas by his ruthless doubt leads to rediscovering self-evident first truths upon which to reconstruct a more reliable understanding (The Lost, 2004). This questioning of apparent realities is essential to Lost, which shows this continual openness to not knowing. Besides, Descartes even more convincingly shows that the mind's ability to reason is the
5 undisputed foundation of existence and even subsequent knowing. This truth, internally selfvalidating, serves as the foundation that grounds Descartes's innovative and generative theories of mind and knowledge. On the contrary, in Lost, characters pursuing Aristotle’s objective virtues, which are rationally chosen for completion, usually end up tragically. Notwithstanding ingenuity, even Locke’s virtuous reasoning turns into self-justifying violence and fanaticism from misperceiving what constitutes the ethical good (The Lost, 2004). Such attempts to define moral truth always lead to dogmatism and denial when unexpected situations arise on the island of unpredictability. Lost, however, recommends applying external standards of universal right or wrong to guide action only when the context is stripped of nuance. It is especially questionable in strange environments that go against the order expectation, assuming available immutable virtues. Therefore, the dilemmas of Lost imply that Cartesianism supports a less convincing argument on the denials of claims about the external truth and gains from self-reflecting reflection. Unlike Aristotle, who enumerates particular and universally satisfying virtues, Descartes opts for self-critique as the subjective path leading to new knowledge and understanding. Descartes' monad is free from static absolutes, as Lost shows hypocrisy and chaos when practiced dogmatically. Perhaps it is only from such an autonomous perspective of his framework that it might be possible to chart the ephemeral nature. Hence, the motifs of Lost substantiate that Descartes' mastermind skepticism serves as valuable philosophical ground for studying thought critically by demolishing premises to be ready for a new confrontation with reality without twisting the truth. His assertion that selfreflexive subjectivity is the source of opposing radical skepticism at a level where Aristotle's premises about virtue and reason as the perfect form of human self-fulfillment are not. As the
6 mysteries of the Lost Island constantly overpower ordinary understanding, Descartes presents crucial strategies for making sense even with such situations or natures that outrun human minds when he points out that the power to pose questions alone attains being and truth in the waves. In conclusion, Lost displays some critical points of knowledge and identity that are important in evaluating an argument concerning reality and the nature of the mind. Despite its intrinsic fuzziness, Descartes constructs a system that is more solidly based on the self-asfoundation that arises through the process of doubt, from which subsequent inquiry starts in a state of uncertainty. Aristotle describes a much less persuasive argument in ethics founded on premises regarding general virtues that secure humans' utilitarian status without proof. Immersed in mysteries that do not self-explicate through reason as Lost does, Descartes's methodological skepticism results in creative, immanent approaches revealing the elements of truth and meaning hidden from the outside scale. With doubt, Descartes establishes the definite substance of the thinking self, and this is where his creativity lies, establishing a strong foundation for pursuing further metaphysical inquiries and visualizing odd realities.
Works Cited Aristotle, T., and M. Ostwald. Nicomachean ethics, book VIII. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill Co, 1962. Descartes, René. Meditations on first philosophy. Newcomb Livraria Press, 1951. LOST Full Series Recap | Season 1-6 Ending Explained. https://youtu.be/ONIdaQ4Hcxs? si=MnlN-TARt7GF_yO4
7