Talk:笛卡尔
维基百科，自由的百科全书
Cogito ergo sum到底是否一個“公式”、論證其實仍有爭議。這句拉丁文的意思只是“我思、我在”而不是“我思所以我在”，到底笛卡兒是否要以我思論證我在，不同的人有不同的說法，而他們也各自在笛卡兒的文本（《方法論》和對反駁《沉思錄》的人的回應？）中找到支持自己的理據。--Ivy ST 17:42 2004年11月25日 (UTC)
[编辑] 笛卡兒, 笛卡尔
笛卡尔和笛卡兒分別是那裹的譯名? 條目裹兩個譯名也有，有點混亂。 --Johna 16:44 2005年6月22日 (UTC)
[编辑] 名
這個“勒奈”是哪裡公認的啊？姓有固定的，名可說不準。René應該是勒內更貼近一些。而且我在google的搜索結果也是勒內比勒奈多。--wooddoo 虢國夫人遊春圖 20:39 2005年9月6日 (UTC)
[编辑] Is self-awareness necessary for "我思故我在" ?
我思故我在(Cogito ergo sum)
This is the most genuine and irrefutable truth claimed by Descartes. As mentioned by him, a man can doubt every thing in this world, e.g. existence of water, sky, body, land, light etc. Yet, when he doubts, he is thinking, and when he is thinking it is irrefutable that he exists. I have read an online article commenting that Descartes’ idea is based on the concept of self awareness. In this gentleman’s idea, if a person does not have awareness of self, he does not exist in the eyes of Descartes’, e.g. a person with intellectual disability. However, in my opinion, this comment’s ‘person’ seems to be hardly exists in the real world. Even for the people with intellectual disability, they are rarely lack of self concept.
On the other hand, though Descartes had mentioned that when a person thinks / voices out ‘I exist’ then he exists, this does not represent the whole meaning of Descartes. This is not actually a process that people must do in order to be exist, but Descartes was pinpointing on thinking. Even though there is a person who does not have self-concept and never know what is ‘I’, yet when he thinks he exists.
Thinking in psychological realm is defined very broadly, it is not necessarily logical calculating and philosophical thinking as most of us think thinking is, but also cognitive perception, learning, decoding and encoding messages in contact with the person etc. Thus the more noticeable problem that appears in Descartes’ discussion should his definition of thinking. Nature of thinking and functions produced by thinking are different according to Descartes which is not aligning with the psychology field nowadays (which should be integrated and treated as one whole). I think that in looking into Descartes’ idea nowadays we should take the definition from psychology realm about thinking.
