"I think, therefore I am" redirects here. For the R. Dean Taylor album, seeI Think, Therefore I Am. For the Billie Eilish song referencing Descartes's principle, seeTherefore I Am (song).
The Latincogito, ergo sum, usually translated into English as "I think, therefore I am",[a] is the "first principle" ofRené Descartes' philosophy. He originally published it in French asje pense,donc je suis in his 1637Discourse on the Method, so as to reach a wider audience than Latin would have allowed.[1] It later appeared in Latin in hisPrinciples of Philosophy, and a similar phrase (Ego sum, ego existo, 'I am, I exist') also featured prominently in hisMeditations on First Philosophy. Thedictum is also sometimes referred to asthe cogito.[2] As Descartes explained in amargin note, "we cannotdoubt of ourexistence while we doubt." In the posthumously publishedThe Search for Truth by Natural Light, he expressed this insight asdubito, ergo sum, vel, quod idem est, cogito, ergo sum ("I doubt, therefore I am—or what is the same—I think, therefore I am.").[3][4]Antoine Léonard Thomas, in a 1765 essay in honor of Descartes, presented it asdubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum ("I doubt, therefore I think, therefore I am.").[b]
Descartes's statement became a fundamental element ofWestern philosophy, as it purported to provide acertainfoundation for knowledge in the face ofradical doubt. While other knowledge could be a figment of imagination, deception, or mistake, Descartes asserted that the very act of doubting one's own existence served—at minimum—as proof of the reality of one's own mind; there must be athinking entity—in this case theself—for there to be a thought.
One critique of the dictum, first suggested byPierre Gassendi, is that it presupposes that there is an "I" which must be doing the thinking. According to this line of criticism, the most that Descartes was entitled to say was that "thinking is occurring", not that "I am thinking".[5]
Descartes first wrote the phrase in French in his 1637Discourse on the Method. He referred to it in Latin without explicitly stating the familiar form of the phrase in his 1641Meditations on First Philosophy. The earliest written record of the phrase in Latin is in his 1644Principles of Philosophy, where, in a margin note (see below), he provides a clear explanation of his intent: "[W]e cannot doubt of our existence while we doubt". Fuller forms of the phrase are attributable to other authors.
The phrase first appeared (in French) in Descartes's 1637Discourse on the Method in the first paragraph of its fourth part:
Ainsi, à cause que nos sens nous trompent quelquefois, je voulus supposer qu'il n'y avait aucune chose qui fût telle qu'ils nous la font imaginer; Et parce qu'il y a des hommes qui se méprennent en raisonnant, même touchant les plus simples matières de Géométrie, et y font des Paralogismes, jugeant que j'étais sujet à faillir autant qu'aucun autre, je rejetai comme fausses toutes les raisons que j'avais prises auparavant pour Démonstrations; Et enfin, considérant que toutes les mêmes pensées que nous avons étant éveillés nous peuvent aussi venir quand nous dormons, sans qu'il y en ait aucune raison pour lors qui soit vraie, je me résolus de feindre que toutes les choses qui m'étaient jamais entrées en l'esprit n'étaient non plus vraies que les illusions de mes songes. Mais aussitôt après je pris garde que, pendant que je voulais ainsi penser que tout était faux, il fallait nécessairement que moi qui le pensais fusse quelque chose; Et remarquant que cette vérité,je pense,donc je suis,[c] était si ferme et si assurée, que toutes les plus extravagantes suppositions des Sceptiques n'étaient pas capables de l'ébranler, je jugeai que je pouvais la recevoir sans scrupule pour le premier principe de la Philosophie que je cherchais.[d][e]
Translation:
Accordingly, seeing that our senses sometimes deceive us, I was willing to suppose that there existed nothing really such as they presented to us; And because some men err in reasoning, and fall intoParalogisms, even on the simplest matters of Geometry, I, convinced that I was as open to error as any other, rejected as false all the reasonings I had hitherto taken for Demonstrations; And finally, when I considered that the very same thoughts (presentations) which we experience when awake may also be experienced when we are asleep, while there is at that time not one of them true, I supposed that all the objects (presentations) that had ever entered into my mind when awake, had in them no more truth than the illusions of my dreams. But immediately upon this I observed that, whilst I thus wished to think that all was false, it was absolutely necessary that I, who thus thought, should be something; And as I observed that this truth,I think,therefore I am,[c] was so certain and of such evidence that no ground of doubt, however extravagant, could be alleged by the Sceptics capable of shaking it, I concluded that I might, without scruple, accept it as thefirst principle of the philosophy of which I was in search.[f][g]
In 1641, Descartes published (in Latin)Meditations on first philosophy in which he referred to the proposition, though not explicitly as "cogito, ergo sum" in Meditation II:
hoc pronuntiatum:Ego sum, Ego existo,[h] quoties a me profertur, vel mente concipitur, necessario esse verum.[12]
Translation:
this proposition:I am, I exist,[h] whenever it is uttered by me, or conceived by the mind, necessarily is true.[i][j]
In Response to an Objection fromMarin Mersenne, he wrote "cogito, ergo sum” in an extended form and, again, prefaced with ‘ego’:
Cum advertimus nos esse res cogitantes, prima quædam notio est quæ ex nullo syllogismo concluditur; neque etiam cum quis dicit ‘ego cogito, ergo sum, sive existo,’[h] existentiam ex cogitatione per syllogismum deducit, sed tanquam rem per se notam simplici mentis intuitu agnoscit.[13]
Translation:
And when we become aware that we are thinking things, this is a primary notion which is not derived by means of any syllogism. When someone says 'I am thinking, therefore I am, or I exist’[h] he does not deduce existence from thought by means of a syllogism, but recognizes it as something self-evident by a simple intuition of the mind.[14]
In 1644, Descartes published (in Latin) hisPrinciples of Philosophy which beginsVeritatem inquirenti semel in vita da omnibus, quantum fieri potest, esse dubitandum. (That in order to seek truth, it is necessary once in the course of our life, to doubt, as far as possible, of all things.[k]) The phrase "ego cogito, ergo sum" appears in Part 1, article 7:
"ego cogito, ergo sum" with margin note in original (1644) Principia Philosophae
Sic autem rejicientes illa omnia, de quibus aliquo modo possumus dubitare, ac etiam, falsa esse fingentes, facilè quidem, supponimus nullum esse Deum, nullum coelum, nulla corpora; nosque etiam ipsos, non habere manus, nec pedes, nec denique ullum corpus, non autem ideò nos qui talia cogitamus nihil esse: repugnat enim ut putemus id quod cogitat eo ipso tempore quo cogitat non existere. Ac proinde haec cognitio,ego cogito, ergo sum,[c] est omnium prima & certissima, quae cuilibet ordine philosophanti occurrat.[l]
Translation:
While we thus reject all of which we can entertain the smallest doubt, and even imagine that it is false, we easily indeed suppose that there is neither God, nor sky, nor bodies, and that we ourselves even have neither hands nor feet, nor, finally, a body; but we cannot in the same way suppose that we are not while we doubt of the truth of these things; for there is a repugnance in conceiving that what thinks does not exist at the very time when it thinks. Accordingly, the knowledge,[m]I think, therefore I am,[c] is the first and most certain that occurs to one who philosophizes orderly.[k]
Descartes'smargin note for the above paragraph is:
Non posse à nobis dubitari, quin existamus dum dubitamus; atque hoc esse primum, quod ordine philosophando cognoscimus.
Translation:
That we cannot doubt of our existence while we doubt, and that this is the first knowledge we acquire when we philosophize in order.[k]
Descartes, in a lesser-known posthumously published work written ca. 1647,[17] originally in French with the titleLa Recherche de la Vérité par La Lumiere Naturale (The Search for Truth by Natural Light)[3] and later in Latin with the titleInquisitio Veritatis per Lumen Naturale,[18] provides his only known phrasing ofthe cogito ascogito, ergo sum and admits that his insight is also expressible asdubito, ergo sum:[4]
"dubito, ergo sum, vel, quod idem est, cogito, ergo sum" inInquisitio Veritatis per Lumen Naturale
... [S]entio, oportere, ut quid dubitatio, quid cogitatio, quid exsistentia sit antè sciamus, quàm de veritate hujus ratiocinii:dubito, ergo sum, vel, quod idem est,cogito, ergo sum[c] : plane simus persuasi.
Translation:
… [I feel that] it is necessary to know what doubt is, and what thought is, [what existence is], before we can be fully persuaded of this reasoning —I doubt, therefore I am — or what is the same —I think, therefore I am.[n]
Peter J. Markie notes: "Descartes stresses the first person in his premise twice in the Principles and once in his Reply to Mersenne.ego cogito, ergo sum . . . . (AT VIII, 7; AT VIII, 8; AT VII, 140)" and adds "It is unlikely that Descartes would stress the first person in his premise, if he wanted us to read the premise as 'Thought is taking place' rather than 'I think.'"[20] Gary Hatfield writes: "[I]n Latin the first-person voice need not be expressed through a separate pronoun, but may be included in the verb form; nonetheless, Descartes used the Latin first-person pronounego more than thirty times in the six Meditations."[21]
The proposition is sometimes given asdubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum. This form was penned by the French literary critic,Antoine Léonard Thomas,[o] in an award-winning 1765 essay in praise of Descartes, where it appeared as "Puisque je doute, je pense; puisque je pense, j'existe" ('Since I doubt, I think; since I think, I exist'). With rearrangement and compaction, the passage translates to "I doubt, therefore I think, therefore I am," or in Latin, "dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum."[p] This aptly captures Descartes's intent as expressed in his posthumously publishedLa Recherche de la Vérité par La Lumiere Naturale as noted above:I doubt, therefore I am – or what is the same –I think, therefore I am.
A further expansion,dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum—res cogitans ("…—a thinking thing") extends thecogito with Descartes's statement in the subsequentMeditation,"Ego sum res cogitans, id est dubitans, affirmans, negans, pauca intelligens, multa ignorans, volens, nolens, imaginans etiam et sentiens…" ("I am a thinking [conscious] thing, that is, a being who doubts, affirms, denies, knows a few objects, and is ignorant of many, [who loves, hates,][q] wills, refuses, who imagines likewise, and perceives").[r] This has been referred to as "the expandedcogito."[28][s]
While the Latincōgitō may be translated rather easily as "I think/ponder/visualize",je pense does not indicate whether the verb form corresponds to the Englishpresent simple ("think") orprogressive aspect ("is thinking").[31] FollowingJohn Lyons (1982),[32] Vladimir Žegarac notes, "The temptation to use the present simple is said to arise from the lack of progressive forms in Latin and French, and from a misinterpretation of the meaning ofcogito as habitual or generic" (cf.gnomic aspect).[33] Also following Lyons,Ann Banfield writes, "In order for the statement on which Descartes's argument depends to represent certain knowledge,… its tense must be a true present—in English, a progressive,… not as 'I think' but as 'I am thinking, in conformity with the general translation of the Latin or French present tense in such nongeneric, nonstative contexts."[34] Or in the words ofSimon Blackburn, "Descartes's premise is not 'I think' in the sense of 'I ski', which can be true even if you are not at the moment skiing. It is supposed to be parallel to 'I am skiing'."[35]
The similar translation "I am thinking, therefore I exist" of Descartes's correspondence in French ("je pense,donc je suis") appears inThe Philosophical Writings of Descartes by Cottingham et al. (1988).[36]: 247
Fumitaka Suzuki writes "Taking consideration of Cartesian theory of continuous creation, which theory was developed especially in the Meditations and in the Principles, we would assure that 'I am thinking, therefore I am/exist' is the most appropriate English translation of 'ego cogito, ergo sum'."[39]
Alexis Deodato S. Itao notes thatcogito, ergo sum is "literally 'I think, therefore I am'."[40] Others differ: 1) "[A] precise English translation will read as 'I am thinking, therefore I exist';[41] and 2) "[S]ince Descartes ... emphasized that existence is such an important 'notion,' a better translation is 'I am thinking, therefore I exist.'"[42]
Descartes wrote this phrase as such only once, in the posthumously published lesser-known work noted above,The Search for Truth by Natural Light.[3] It appeared there mid-sentence, uncapitalized, and with a comma. (Commas were not used inClassical Latin[u] but were a regular feature of scholastic Latin,[44] the Latin Descartes "had learned in a Jesuit college at La Flèche.")[45] Most modern reference works show it with a comma, but it is often presented without a comma in academic work and in popular usage. In Descartes'sPrincipia Philosophiae, the proposition appears asego cogito, ergo sum.[46]
As put succinctly byKrauth (1872), "That cannot doubt which does not think, and that cannot think which does not exist. I doubt, I think, I exist."[37]
The phrasecogito, ergo sum is not used in Descartes'sMeditations on First Philosophy, but the term "thecogito" is used to refer to an argument from it. In theMeditations, Descartes phrases the conclusion of the argument as "that the proposition,I am, I exist, isnecessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind" (Meditation II).George Henry Lewes says Descartes "has told us that [his objective] was to find a starting point from which to reason—to find an irreversible certainty. And where did he find this? In his own consciousness. Doubt as I may, I cannot doubt of my own existence, because my very doubts reveal to me a something which doubts. You may call this an assumption, if you will; I point out the fact as one above and beyond all logic; which logic can neither prove nor disprove; but which must always remain an irreversible certainty, and as such a fitting basis of philosophy."[47]
At the beginning of the second meditation, having reached what he considers to be the ultimate level of doubt—his argument from the existence of a deceiving god—Descartes examines his beliefs to see if any have survived the doubt. In his belief in his own existence, he finds that it is impossible to doubt that he exists. Even if there were a deceiving god (or anevil demon), one's belief in their own existence would be secure, for there is no way one could be deceived unless one existed in order to be deceived.
But I have convinced myself that there is absolutely nothing in the world, no sky, no earth, no minds, no bodies. Does it now follow that I, too, do not exist? No. If I convinced myself of something [or thought anything at all], then I certainly existed. But there is a deceiver of supreme power and cunning who deliberately and constantly deceives me. In that case, I, too, undoubtedly exist, if he deceives me; and let him deceive me as much as he can, he will never bring it about that I am nothing, so long as I think that I am something. So, after considering everything very thoroughly, I must finally conclude that the proposition,I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind. (AT VII 25; CSM II 16–17)[v]
There are three important notes to keep in mind here. First, he claims only the certainty ofhis own existence from the first-person point of view — he has not proved the existence of other minds at this point. This is something that has to be thought through by each of us for ourselves, as we follow the course of the meditations. Second, he does not say that his existence is necessary; he says thatif he thinks, then necessarily he exists (see theinstantiation principle). Third, this proposition "I am, I exist" is held true not based on a deduction (as mentioned above) or on empirical induction but on the clarity and self-evidence of the proposition. Descartes does not use this first certainty, thecogito, as a foundation upon which to build further knowledge; rather, it is the firm ground upon which he can stand as he works to discover further truths.[49] As he puts it:
Archimedes used to demand just one firm and immovable point in order to shift the entire earth; so I too can hope for great things if I manage to find just one thing, however slight, that is certain and unshakable. (AT VII 24; CSM II 16)[v]
According to many Descartes specialists, includingÉtienne Gilson, the goal of Descartes in establishing this first truth is to demonstrate the capacity of his criterion — the immediate clarity and distinctiveness of self-evident propositions — to establish true and justified propositions despite having adopted a method of generalized doubt. As a consequence of this demonstration, Descartes considers science and mathematics to be justified to the extent that their proposals are established on a similarly immediate clarity, distinctiveness, and self-evidence that presents itself to the mind. The originality of Descartes's thinking, therefore, is not so much in expressing thecogito—a feat accomplished by other predecessors, as we shall see—but on using thecogito as demonstrating the most fundamental epistemological principle, that science and mathematics are justified by relying on clarity, distinctiveness, and self-evidence.Baruch Spinoza in "Principia philosophiae cartesianae" at itsProlegomenon identified "cogito ergo sum" the "ego sum cogitans" (I am a thinking being) as the thinkingsubstance with hisontological interpretation.
Although the idea expressed incogito, ergo sum is widely attributed to Descartes, he was not the first to mention it. In the late sixth or early fifth century BC,Parmenides is quoted as saying "For to be aware and to be are the same". (Fragment B3)Plato spoke about the "knowledge of knowledge" (Greek: νόησις νοήσεως,nóesis noéseos) andAristotle explains the idea in full length:
But if life itself is good and pleasant…and if one who sees is conscious that he sees, one who hears that he hears, one who walks that he walks and similarly for all the other human activities there is a faculty that is conscious of their exercise, so that whenever we perceive, we are conscious that we perceive, and whenever we think, we are conscious that we think, and to be conscious that we are perceiving or thinking is to be conscious that we exist... (Nicomachean Ethics, 1170a 25 ff.)
The Cartesian statement was interpreted to be an Aristoteliansyllogism where the premise that all thinkers are alsobeings is not made explicit.[50]
In the early fifth century AD,Augustine of Hippo inDe Civitate Dei (book XI, 26) affirmed his certain knowledge of his own existence, and added: "So far as these truths are concerned, I do not at all fear the arguments of the Academics when they say, What if you are mistaken? For if I am mistaken, I exist."[51][w] This formulation (si fallor, sum) is sometimes called the Augustiniancogito.[52] In 1640, Descartes wrote to thank Andreas Colvius (a friend of Descartes's mentor,Isaac Beeckman) for drawing his attention to Augustine:
I am obliged to you for drawing my attention to the passage of St Augustine relevant to myI am thinking, therefore I exist. I went today to the library of this town to read it, and I do indeed find that he does use it to prove the certainty of our existence. He goes on to show that there is a certain likeness of the Trinity in us, in that we exist, we know that we exist, and we love the existence and the knowledge we have. I, on the other hand, use the argument to show that thisI which is thinking is an immaterial substance with no bodily element. These are two very different things. In itself it is such a simple and natural thing to infer that one exists from the fact that one is doubting that it could have occurred to any writer. But I am very glad to find myself in agreement with St Augustine, if only to hush the little minds who have tried to find fault with the principle.[36]: 159
The 8th century Hindu philosopherAdi Shankara wrote, in a similar fashion, that no one thinks 'I am not', arguing that one's existence cannot be doubted, as there must be someone there to doubt.[54]
Spanish philosopherGómez Pereira in his 1554 workAntoniana Margarita, wrote "nosco me aliquid noscere, & quidquid noscit, est, ergo ego sum" ('I know that I know something, anyone who knows is, therefore I am').[55][56]
InDescartes, The Project of Pure Enquiry, English philosopherBernard Williams provides a history and full evaluation of this issue.[57] The first to raise the "I" problem wasPierre Gassendi, who in hisDisquisitio Metaphysica,[58] as noted by Saul Fisher, "points out that recognition that one has a set of thoughts does not imply that one is a particular thinker or another. …[T]he only claim that is indubitable here is the agent-independent claim that there is cognitive activity present."[59]
The objection, as presented byGeorg Lichtenberg, is that rather than supposing an entity that is thinking, Descartes should have said: "thinking is occurring." That is, whatever the force of thecogito, Descartes draws too much from it; the existence of a thinking thing, the reference of the "I," is more than thecogito can justify.Friedrich Nietzsche criticized the phrase in that it presupposes that there is an "I", that there is such an activity as "thinking", and that "I" know what "thinking" is. He suggested a more appropriate phrase would be "it thinks" wherein the "it" could be animpersonal subject as in the sentence "It is raining."[60]
The Danish philosopherSøren Kierkegaard called the phrase atautology in hisConcluding Unscientific Postscript.[61]: 38–42 He argues that thecogito already presupposes the existence of "I", and therefore concluding with existence is logically trivial. Kierkegaard's argument can be made clearer if one extracts the premise "I think" into the premises "'x' thinks" and "I am that 'x'", where "x" is used as a placeholder in order to disambiguate the "I" from the thinking thing.[62]
Here, thecogito has already assumed the "I"'s existence as that which thinks. For Kierkegaard, Descartes is merely "developing the content of a concept", namely that the "I", which already exists, thinks.[61]: 40 As Kierkegaard argues, the proper logical flow of argument is that existence is already assumed or presupposed in order for thinking to occur, not that existence is concluded from that thinking.[63]
Williams himself claimed that what we are dealing with when we talk of thought, or when we say "I am thinking," is something conceivable from athird-person perspective—namely objective "thought-events" in the former case, and anobjective thinker in the latter. He argues, first, that it is impossible to make sense of "there is thinking" without relativizing it tosomething. However, this something cannot be Cartesian egos, because it is impossible to differentiate objectively between things just on the basis of the pure content of consciousness. The obvious problem is that, throughintrospection, or our experience ofconsciousness, we have no way of moving to conclude the existence of any third-personal fact, to conceive of which would require something above and beyond just the purely subjective contents of the mind.[57]
As a critic ofCartesian subjectivity, German philosopherMartin Heidegger sought to ground human subjectivity in death as that certainty which individualizes and authenticates our Being (Dasein). As he wrote in 1925 inHistory of the Concept of Time:[64]
This certainty, that "I myselfam, in that I will die," is the basic certainty ofDasein itself. It is a genuine statement of Dasein, whilecogito sum is only the semblance of such a statement. If such pointed formulations mean anything at all, then the appropriate statement pertaining to Dasein in its being would have to besum moribundus [I am in dying],moribundus not as someone gravely ill or wounded, but insofar as I am, I ammoribundus. TheMORIBUNDUS first gives theSUM its sense.
The Scottish philosopherJohn Macmurray rejected thecogito outright in order to place action at the center of a philosophical system he entitled the Form of the Personal. "We must reject this, both as standpoint and as method. If this be philosophy, then philosophy is a bubble floating in an atmosphere of unreality."[65] The reliance on thought creates an irreconcilable dualism between thought and action in which theunity of experience is lost, thus dissolving the integrity of our selves and destroying any connection with reality. In order to formulate a more adequatecogito, Macmurray proposes the substitution of "I do" for "I think," ultimately leading to a belief in God as an agent to whom all persons stand in relation.
InProcess and Reality, Whitehead wrote "Descartes in his own philosophy conceives the thinker as creating the occasional thought. The philosophy of organism inverts the order, and conceives the thought as a constituent operation in the creation of the occasional thinker. The thinker is the final end whereby there is the thought. In this inversion we have the final contrast between a philosophy of substance and a philosophy of organism."[66]
In theshort story,I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream, byHarlan Ellison, Gorrister, when asked what 'AM' means, says "At first it meant Allied Mastercomputer, and then it meant Adaptive Manipulator, and later on it developedsentience and linked itself up and they called it an Aggressive Menace, but by then it was too late, and finally calleditself AM, emerging intelligence, and what it meant was I am ...cogito ergo sum ... I think, therefore I am."[67]
In theJapanese animated television series,Ergo Proxy, acomputer virus that affects the autoreivs, the series' version ofrobots, known as the Cogito virus begins infecting the autoreivs, which is named such due to the fact that it makes the infectedconscious, and experienceemotions as a human would.
In the video gameHonkai: Star Rail, Dr. Ratio (real name Veritas Ratio), a playable character and, according to in-game lore, aphilosopher,[70] has a skill, named "Cogito, Ergo Sum".
^This translation, by Veitch in 1850,[6] is modified here as follows: Veitch's "I think, hence I am" is changed to the form by which it is currently best known in English, "I think, therefore I am", which appeared in the Haldane and Ross 1911 translation,[7]: 100 and as an isolated attributed phrase previously, e.g., in Sullivan (1794);[8] in the preceding line, Veitch's "I, who thus thought, should be somewhat" is given here as "… should be something" for clarity (in accord with other translations, e.g., that of Cress[9]); and capitalization was reverted to conform to Descartes's original in French.
^The 1637Discours was translated to Latin in the 1644Specimina Philosophiae[10] but this is not referenced here because of issues raised regarding translation quality.[11]
^abcdCogito variant highlighted to facilitate comparison; capitalization as in original.
^This combines, for clarity and to retain phrase ordering, the Cress[9] and Haldane[7]: 150 translations.
^Jaako Hintikka comments thatego sum, ego existo is the simplest example of an "existentially self-verifying" sentence, i.e., one whose negation verifies itself "when … expressly uttered or otherwise professed"; and thatego sum is an alternative tocogito, ergo sum to express "the existential inconsistency of the sentence 'I don't exist' and the existential self-verifiability of 'I exist'".[4]
^A 1647 French translation,[15] published with Descartes's enthusiastic approval, substituted 'conclusion' for 'knowledge'.[16]
^Translation by Hallam,[19] with additions for completeness.
^Thomas was known in his time for his great eloquence especially for éloges in praise of past luminaries.[22]
^The 1765 work,Éloge de René Descartes,[23] by Antoine Léonard Thomas, was awarded the 1765 Le Prix De L'académie Française and republished in the 1826 compilation of Descartes's work,Oeuvres de Descartes[24] byVictor Cousin. The French text is available inmore accessible format at Project Gutenberg. The compilation by Cousin is credited with a revival of interest in Descartes.[25][26]
^the French adds "loves, hates"; hence Veitch's inclusion despite its absence from the Latin here. see Cottingham, J. (ed), 1986, "Meditations on First Philosophy, with selections from Objections and Replies", p.24fn1.
^ This translation byVeitch[27] is the first English translation from Descartes as "I am a thinking thing".
^Martin Schoock, in the 1642–43 controversy between Descartes andGisbertus Voetius, fiercely attacked Descartes and his philosophy in an essay.[29]He wrotecogito, ergo sum, res cogitans andcogito, inquiro, dubito ergo sum as well ascogito, ergo sum (multiple times) in his 1652De Scepticismo.[30]
^Krauth is not explicitly acknowledged as author of this article, but is so identified the following year by Garretson.[38]
^Miller, Valentine Roger; Miller, Reese P. (1983).Descartes, René. Principles of Philosophy. Translated, with explanatory notes. Springer. pp. xi, 5.ISBN978-90-277-1754-2.
^Kline, George L. (1967). "Randall's Interpretation of the Philosophies of Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz". In John Peter Anton (ed.).Naturalism and Historical Understanding. SUNY Press. p. 85.
^Lyons, J. (1982). "Deixis and subjectivity: Loquor, ergo sum?". In Jarvella, Rovert J.; Klein, Wolfgang (eds.).Speech, place, and action: Studies in deixis and related topics. pp. 101–224.
^Žegarac, Vladimir (1991).Tense, aspect and relevance(PDF) (PhD thesis). University of London. pp. 84, 85.Archived(PDF) from the original on 2015-10-18.
^Banfield, A. (1998). "The Name of the Subject: The "il"?".Yale French Studies (93):133–174.doi:10.2307/3040735.JSTOR3040735.
^del Pozo Baños, Marcos (2015).My Mind, My Self, My Identity: A Task-Independent Neural Signature for Biometric Identification (PhD). Universidad De Las Palmas De Gran Canaria.
^Carpenter, John Michael (2012).Remedying Some Defects in the History of Analyticity (PhD). Florida State University.
^Pereira, Gómez. [1554] 1749.Antoniana Margarita: "De Immortalitate Animae". p. 277.
^López, Modesto Santos. 1986. "Gómez Pereira, médico y filósofo medinense." InHistoria de Medina del Campo y su Tierra, volumen I: Nacimiento y expansión, edited by E. L. Sanz.
Boufoy-Bastick, Z. 2005. "Introducing 'Applicable Knowledge' as a Challenge to the Attainment of Absolute Knowledge."Sophia Journal of Philosophy 8:39–52.
Christofidou, A. 2013.Self, Reason, and Freedom: A New Light on Descartes' Metaphysics. Routledge.
Hatfield, G. 2003.Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Descartes and the Meditations. Routledge.ISBN0-415-11192-7.
.png)
