at we could possibly believe. Perhaps I even doubt that I exist myself. In doing this, I am in the act of doubting. How can I doubt something if I do not exist? Similarly, maybe I am deceived into thinking I do not exist by some other entity. Then I must exist for it is I who is being deceived. This is the basic premise of Descartes' famous "Cogito Ergo Sum" - "I think therefore I am." Here Descartes is not saying anything about what we are here, just that we are. Next, his goal is to find out exactly what he is. Well, Descartes states, if I exist, for how long do I exist? I exist for as long as I think, and if I cease to think, then I shall also cease to exist. Therefore, I am nothing but a thinking thing - that is, a thing that "doubts, understands, affirms, denies, wills, refuses, and that also imagines and senses." Although saying he is all of these things is indeed a bold statement. Descartes feels that in his attempt to prove that he exists he has done all of those things, therefore they must be a part of what he is. Decartes goes on to prove the existence of God. He begins this by stating that nothing can be created from nothing, and that the less perfect can not create something more perfect or better than itself. He explains that he knows he is not perfect because he doubts, and knowing is more perfect than doubting. From that he determines that within him lies this idea of a perfect being, and that he is incapable of coming to such an idea by himself. If there is an idea in our minds that we didn't create, something else created it. He saw nothing in nature that would qualify as superior in the sense that he had stated, so he determined that the only other logical answer was that God placed it in him, therefore, God exists. Berkeley would argue that Descartes is wasting his time by trying to discover what must be absolutely true in the real world. In his Dialogue, Berkeley argues that there is no real world, and that all sensi...
