Clarification On Descartes Statement

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Hello,

Can someone explain the following statement to me? “My thought imposes no necessity on things and, since I can think of a horse with wings even though no horse has wings, perhaps I could likewise attribute existence to God even though no God exists.” I understand this statement however, what does he mean when he writes, “There is a logical mistake concealed here. From the fact that I cannot think of a mountain without a valley it does not follow that a mountain and valley exist somewhere, but only that mountain and valley, whether they exist or not can be separated from one another. Likewise, from the fact that I can think of God only as existing, it follows that existence is inseparable from God and therefore that he really does exist”

Again, I understand what Descartes says when he discusses the conception of a horse with wings even if no such horse exists, and how the same could be attributed to God, but I do not quite grasp his second statement regarding the mountain and valley.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks,
smti

2

he is trying to make you think that valleys and mountains can exist together or apart and because of that, his god (which definitionally must exist to him) cannot not exist.

-Imp

3

Tortoise,

Hah. I completely agree, in fact I thought of the same exact idea, that is, the conception of a dragon. I also came to the same conclusion as well. I thought maybe that I was interpreting Descartes’ statement incorrectly, so i wanted to make sure.

Thanks for the clarification. If anyone else has anything thoughts on the issue, feel free to chime in!