Cogito ergo sum

Cogito ergo sum (aka Latin ego cogito, ergo sum, "I think, therefore I am." ) Is the first principle of the philosopher René Descartes, whom he after radical doubts about one's own cognition as not kritisierbares foundation (lat. fundamentum inconcussum, " unshakable foundation " ) in his work Meditations on First Philosophy ( 1641) formulated and methodologically justified: " Since there still is I who doubt, I can at this I, even if it is dreaming or fantasizing himself not doubt more. " from this foundation of Descartes then attempts to build the capacity for knowledge again.

Origin of the formulation

Descartes had most of his works written in Latin, some in French, he wrote, however, so they were accessible to the laity. In one of them, the Discours de la méthode (Part IV), Descartes wrote in 1637:

In 1641 Descartes wrote in his Meditations on First Philosophy about a possible malicious demon could be deceived by the senses and perception: "Well, if he deceives me, so it's no doubt that I am. He deceived me, as much as he can, he will never get finished but that I am nothing so long as I think that I am something. And so I come, after I have now considered all more than enough back and forth, and finally to the conclusion that this sentence: "I am, I exist " (Latin ego sum, ego existo ), so often I express him or grasp in thought, is necessarily true. ".

Later (1644 ) summarizes Descartes his knowledge in the principles of philosophy with the Latin phrase " ego cogito, ergo sum " together. The passage in German translation:

The up to now often-quoted phrase " cogito, ergo sum " comes from a shortening of the Latin " ego cogito, ergo sum " from the Principia Philosophiae. In the Discours de la methode, however, the famous French " Je pense, donc je suis " to find which preceded the aforementioned Latin version and has the same meaning.

Reception

Carnap's linguistic analysis

Rudolf Carnap underwent this statement by Descartes a linguistic analysis, according to which the sentence contains two logical errors:

• The first error in Descartes studies lies in the conclusion of " I am". The verb "to be" is here undoubtedly meant in the sense of existence, as a copula can not be used without a predicate. The " I am" of Descartes has indeed always been understood in this sense. But then violates this sentence against Kant's thesis that existence can be predicated only with respect to a predicate, not in relation to a nominator (subject, proper names); because " His is obviously not a real predicate " ( Critique of Pure Reason, B 626).

• The second error lies in the transition from " I think " to " I exist ". Set of the set "P (a )" ( " the a is the property P to" ) an existence theorem can be derived, it can the existence only in relation to the predicate P, do not testify with respect to the subject a of the premise. From " I am a European " does not follow " I exist ", but " there is a European." From " I think " does not follow " I am," but " there is something Thinking ".

Other approaches to interpretation

According to Jaakko Hintikka the " Cogito ergo sum " is not a logical conclusion, but the prevention of a performative contradiction. That is, if I try to accept my non-existence, I must inevitably recognize my existence. But this view has already been criticized and is problematic.

A formal logical analysis of this dictum of Descartes, as, for example, Rudolf Carnap undertook leads so far astray, as the word existence is "to be" as understood in the sense of relative substance - commercial relationship. Existence is thus " be / is / am / are / etc. " Equated to what has become the norm over the centuries so, and is still used today mainly so. That this, however, in the case of Descartes leads to inconsistencies, shows an example: What is the difference, if someone says " I exist " or he says " I am existent"?

Others

Before Descartes, Augustine already had argued in his City of God (XI, 26) with the immediate givenness of the thinker: " Si enim fallor, sum. Nam qui non est, potest falli nec Utique. Ac per hoc sum, si fallor. Quia ergo sum, si fallor, quomodo eat me fallor, quando me certum est esse, si fallor? " ( " Even if I am mistaken, I am. He who is not, can not deceive. And therefore I am when I'm wrong. 'Cause I am so if I'm wrong, how should I deceive my being, because it's true that I am, even if I'm wrong? ")