In the Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes claims that humans are responsible for error based on the interaction between free will and the understanding. Please thoroughly explain Descartes’ position on this interaction.

Using the Nagel essay, how might somebody reject Descartes’ claim that somebody is responsible for error?

 

Descartes’ Position

Descartes claims that humans are responsible for error based on the interaction between free will and the understanding the Meditator then concentrates his attention on the source of his mistakes. They rely on the mind (the ability to know) and the will (the faculty of choice, or freedom of the will). On the other hand, because the intellectual permits us to see concepts rather than judge ideas, it cannot be the source of error. Compared to his knowledge, which he admits is flawed, he perceives his will to be incomparably stronger and purer (Descartes et al.,2014).  The Meditator accepts that God is far more gifted in all of his other cognitive abilities, such as creativity, understanding, and so on. However, in freedom and choice or will, the practitioner discovers his limitlessness, which he most closely resembles her original. God's will may be more assertive by encouraging more strength and knowledge and by embracing everyone. Still, the practitioner chooses to believe that his will is equally powerful as God's in the formal sense. The only ways to express one's will be to proclaim or reject, to struggle or to flee. Insensitivity is not a lack of willpower but rather a lack of understanding about the actual or correct path to take. As a result, God's will be more vital for us in that he has ultimate experience and is always capable of doing what is desirable.

Using the Nagel essay, how might somebody reject Descartes' claim that somebody is responsible for error.

The essay by Nagel could be used to disprove the claim that Descartes is to blame for the error in the first place. The significance of consciousness and the subjective nature of the experience was the focus of Thomas Nagel's essay (Nagel, 1987).  Nagel raises several valid points in his essay what's It Like to Be a Bat? It is more subjective than objective to describe everything we come across in our lives. The essay by Nagel convinced me that each conscious microbe appears to act in its unique way, and I came to this conclusion after reading it. Nagel also discusses Rene Descartes' mind-body problem, which involves the physical body, which is linked to consciousness because it is based on the individual's knowledge and the issue of consciousness itself. Even if we can assume or attempt to understand a position based on our own experiences, as Nagel points out, it is never the same as being the individual or entity going through something for the first time and experiencing it firsthand. To put it another way, Nagel believes that some experiences are entirely beyond the comprehension of human beings.

According to Nagel, awareness is why each of us has different perspectives on how we carry everything. Both consciousness and experience, according to Nagel, could only be seen subjectively based on personal views, understandings, attitudes, emotional responses, and judgment, rather than fact-based, quantifiable, and observable opinions. In other words, he claims that each microbe experiencing consciousness is unique because no organism possesses the same expertise.