Sentences with phrase «own cogito»

But, even in the fundamental thinkers of high modernity, hints can be found that knowledge requires God: Descartes uses God in the Meditations in order to escape from the interiority where the cogito has stranded him; Kant uses God as a postulate of pure practical reason in order to hold on to the possibility of morality.

Ever heard of the cogito?

Quite the contrary, it is the non-reflective consciousness which renders the reflection possible; there is a pre-reflective cogito which is the condition of the Cartesian cogito.

In the present moment of experience, there is no knowledge of the cogito, because awareness of the cogito is strictly prereflective and nonthetic.

The prereflective cogito (nonthetic self - awareness) is involved as a necessary structure in both consciousness as mere revealing intuition (prereflective positional consciousness of the world) and consciousness as knowledge (reflective positional consciousness of the past self).

My description of the prereflective cogito as the sole form of consciousness in satisfaction is, consequently, at odds with the Sartrean scheme.

Here, cogito and credo are antithetical acts: modern or «objective» knowledge is not religiously neutral, as so many theologians have imagined; rather, it is grounded in a dialectical negation of faith.

On the other hand, we must raise the question: Can we borrow the prereflective cogito without bringing the cogito as such along with it?

«I am lonely because... I am a man of faith for whom to be means to believe, and who substituted «credo» for «cogito» in the time - honored Cartesian maxim.»

Brightman's three stages in Personality and Religion are reminiscent of Descartes» attempt in the Meditations to restore our knowledge of the world on the basis of the cogito, but there the order is self, God, other minds, and finally nature.

Descartes himself acknowledged that his cogito ergo sum is already fundamental in Augustine's philosophy (letter to Colvius, 14 November, 1640), and he believed that his philosophy was the first to demonstrate the philosophical truth of the doctrine of transubstantiation, and could go so far as to claim that scholastic philosophy would have been rejected as clashing with faith if his philosophy had been known first (letter to Mersenne, 31 March, 1641) Indeed, nothing is more revolutionary in modern philosophy than its dissolution of the scholastic distinction between natural theology and revealed theology.

It is the thinking - feeling subject, the cogito, and not just the object, the religious symbol, which must now undergo deeper exploration, in order that it can become open to the reality expressed in symbols.

First, the concept of the cogito as mediated by a universe of signs.

From The Symbolism of Evil8 on I have perceived this constitutional infirmity of Descartes's cogito.

The earlier phenomenology stressed the lived - body (le corps propre) as against the objective body studied in the sciences, and a body - consciousness as opposed to a non-corporeal Cartesian cogito.

We can briefly reconstruct as follows one prominent argument which brings Merleau - Ponty to this new notion of the cogito and which will thus bring us to the question of personal identity.

This has two unfortunate results: it makes the regnant society, or as we would perhaps more loosely say, «the mind,» into an «ego» — in which case the self becomes less a «lived - body» than a Cartesian cogito — and it gives the presiding occasion of the regnant society the impossible, or at least, improbable, job of coordinating all bodily data all the time, pre-reflectively and reflectively, into an organizational unity.

Descartes (1596 - 1650) contributed to mathematics and especially to philosophy — to the latter with his basic questioning and his principle of cogito, ergo sum («I think, therefore I am»).

This power to exist, the «project towards the world that we are» (PP 405), constitutes my most immediate awareness of myself as a «tacit cogito» which is brought to expression and explicit awareness through language.

And this is what Merleau - Ponty expresses in terms of behavioral patterns which form a continuity of past and present in an identical cogito, and pace Professor Weiss, this notion of identity is independent of a commitment to a philosophy of substance.

It is a system of motor powers for exploring and making sense of the world, and as such, the cogito becomes more an «I can» than an «I think.»

The subject - predicate dogma, the scholastic dualism Descartes seemed unable to reject, only obscures some of the truly important aspects of the cogito which inspired Whitehead's ontological principle.

Above all try to forget it, to be an individual man is not to be anything — think, and then thou art the whole of humanity, cogito ergo sum.»

For Whitehead believes that a sensationalist theory is by no means necessary to a system based on the cogito.

Whitehead sees the cogito as the paragon of clear and distinct ideas, involving a fusion if not identity of knower and known.

The people struggle to be subjects of their cultural universe, with their spiritual self, thinking self (cogito), vital self (psyche), feeing self, and perceiving self all forming integral parts of their subjecthood, enabling them to experience and create their own religio - cultural realities.

The cogito ergo sum of the Christian view of repentance is: Since I can repent, I am responsible.

French philosopher René Descartes once said, cogito ergo sum: I think, therefore I am.

:) gfc: ISA VAL FB: cogito ergosum shared: https://www.facebook.com/cogito.ergosum.7161/posts/1705491873008542 mail [email protected] Please contact me via email if I win!

Among Descartes» many contributions (he was a brilliant mathematician and scientist as well), the «cogito» (as philosophers call it) remains his most significant contribution to the history of ideas.

Renee Descartes put «facts» in their place when he said «cogito ergo sum» (usually translated, «I think, therefore I am»).

It is first spoken by René Descartes as «ego cogito, ergo sum» — «I think, therefore I am», but it is a fallacy because he mixed up being with physical processes.

I can start with cogito ergo sum, and get to my position with no assumptions (unless you refer to the Peano Postulates as assumptions, which is barely arguable).