메르센과 데카르트에 대한 컬리의 해석은 타당한가

초록

In Descartes against the skeptics Curly makes a very controversial argument about Descartes’ Cogito. His thesis is targeted at the Objections of Mersenne and Responses of Descartes in Meditationes de prima philosophia, but the scope falls on Descartes’ metaphysics as a whole. He makes controversial interpretations of Mersenne’s Objections and harsh criticism of Descartes’ Responses. In this paper I will examine whether his interpretations and criticism are really valid. I think Curly misinterpret Mersenne’s phrase “quod sis”, and also he is wrong in equating his phrase “quod sis res cogitans” with “I think”. And I think Curly’s criticism of Descartes stems from his prejudice of Descartes’ Cogito and from his misreading of Descartes’ phrase “sed tanquam rem per se notam simplici mentis intuitu agnoscit”.

키워드