按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
Meditations on First Philosophy
by Rene Descartes
1641
Prefatory Note To The Meditations。
The first edition of the Meditations was published in
Latin by Michael Soly of Paris 〃at the Sign of the Phoenix〃 in
1641 cum Privilegio et Approbatione Doctorum。 The Royal
〃privilege〃 was indeed given； but the 〃approbation〃 seems to
have been of a most indefinite kind。 The reason of the book
being published in France and not in Holland； where Descartes
was living in a charming country house at Endegeest near
Leiden； was apparently his fear that the Dutch ministers might
in some way lay hold of it。 His friend； Pere Mersenne； took
charge of its publication in Paris and wrote to him about any
difficulties that occurred in the course of its progress
through the press。 The second edition was however published
at Amsterdam in 1642 by Louis Elzevir； and this edition was
acpanied by the now pleted 〃Objections and Replies。〃2
The edition from which the present translation is made is the
second just mentioned； and is that adopted by MM。 Adam and
Tannery as the more correct； for reasons that they state in
detail in the preface to their edition。 The work was
translated into French by the Duc de Luynes in 1642 and
Descartes considered the translation so excellent that he had
it published some years later。 Clerselier； to plete
matters； had the 〃Objections〃 also published in French with
the 〃Replies；〃 and this； like the other； was subject to
Descartes' revision and correction。 This revision renders the
French edition specially valuable。 Where it seems desirable
an alternative reading from the French is given in square
brackets。
Elizabeth S。 Haldane
TO THE MOST WISE AND ILLUSTRIOUS THE
DEAN AND DOCTORS OF THE SACRED
FACULTY OF THEOLOGY IN PARIS。
The motive which induces me to present to you this
Treatise is so excellent； and； when you bee acquainted with
its design； I am convinced that you will also have so
excellent a motive for taking it under your protection； that I
feel that I cannot do better； in order to render it in some
sort acceptable to you； than in a few words to state what I
have set myself to do。
I have always considered that the two questions
respecting God and the Soul were the chief of those that ought
to be demonstrated by philosophical rather than theological
argument。 For although it is quite enough for us faithful
ones to accept by means of faith the fact that the human soul
does not perish with the body； and that God exists； it
certainly does not seem possible ever to persuade infidels of
any religion； indeed； we may almost say； of any moral virtue；
unless； to begin with； we prove these two facts by means of
the natural reason。 And inasmuch as often in this life
greater rewards are offered for vice than for virtue； few
people would prefer the right to the useful； were they
restrained neither by the fear of God nor the expectation of
another life； and although it is absolutely true that we must
believe that there is a God； because we are so taught in the
Holy Scriptures； and； on the other hand； that we must believe
the Holy Scriptures because they e from God （the reason of
this is； that； faith being a gift of God； He who gives the
grace to cause us to believe other things can likewise give it
to cause us to believe that He exists）； we nevertheless could
not place this argument before infidels； who might accuse us
of reasoning in a circle。 And； in truth； I have noticed that
you； along with all the theologians； did not only affirm that
the existence of God may be proved by the natural reason； but
also that it may be inferred from the Holy Scriptures； that
knowledge about Him is much clearer than that which we have of
many created things； and； as a matter of fact； is so easy to
acquire； that those who have it not are culpable in their
ignorance。 This indeed appears from the Wisdom of Solomon；
chapter xiii。； where it is said 〃Howbeit they are not to be
excused； for if their understanding was so great that they
could discern the world and the creatures； why did they not
rather find out the Lord thereof？〃 and in Romans； chapter i。；
it is said that they are 〃without excuse〃； and again in the
same place； by these words 〃that which may be known of God is
manifest in them；〃 it seems as through we were shown that all
that which can be known of God may be made manifest by means
which are not derived from anywhere but from ourselves； and
from the simple consideration of the nature of our minds。
Hence I thought it not beside my purpose to inquire how this
is so； and how God may be more easily and certainly known than
the things of the world。
And as regards the soul； although many have considered
that it is not easy to know its nature； and some have even
dared to say that human reasons have convinced us that it
would perish with the body； and that faith alone could believe
the contrary； nevertheless； inasmuch as the Lateran Council
held under Leo X （in the eighth session） condemns these
tenets； and as Leo expressly ordains Christian philosophers to
refute their arguments and to employ all their powers in
making known the truth； I have ventured in this treatise to
undertake the same task。
More than that； I am aware that the principal reason
which causes many impious persons not to desire to believe
that there is a God； and that the human soul is distinct from
the body； is that they declare that hitherto no one has been
able to demonstrate these two facts； and although I am not of
their opinion but； on the contrary； hold that the greater part
of the reasons which have been brought forward concerning
these two questions by so many great men are； when they are
rightly understood； equal to so many demonstrations； and that
it is almost impossible to invent new ones； it is yet in my
opinion the case that nothing more useful can be acplished
in philosophy than once for all to seek with care for the best
of these reasons； and to set them forth in so clear and exact
a manner； that it will henceforth be evident to everybody that
they are veritable demonstrations。 And； finally； inasmuch as
it was desired that I should undertake this task by many who
were aware that I had cultivated a certain Method for the
resolution of difficulties of every kind in the Sciences； a
method which it is true is not novel； since there is nothing
more ancient than the truth； but of which they were aware that
I had made use successfully enough in other matters of
difficulty I have thought that it was my duty also to make
trial of it in the present matter。
Now all that I could acplish in the matter is
contained in this Treatise。 Not that I have here drawn
together all the different reasons which might be brought
forward to serve as proofs of this subject： for that never
seemed to be necessary excepting when there was no one single
proof that was certain。 But I have treated the first and
principal ones in such a manner that I can venture to bring
them forward as very evident and very certain demonstrations。
And more than that； I will say that these proofs are such that
I do not think that there is any way open to the human mind by
which it can ever succeed in discovering better。 For the
importance of the subject； and the glory of God to which all
this relates； constrain me to speak here somewhat more freely
of myself than is my habit。 Nevertheless； whatever certainty
and evidence I find in my reasons； I cannot persuade myself
that all the world is capable of understanding them。 Still；
just as in Geometry there are many demonstrations that have
been left to us by Archimedes； by Apollonius； by Pappus； and
others； which are accepted by everyone as perfectly certain
and evident （because they clearly contain nothing which；
considered by itself； is not very easy to understand； and as
all through that which follows has an exact connection with；
and dependence on that which precedes）； nevertheless； because
they are somewhat lengthy； and demand a mind wholly devoted
to their consideration； they are only taken in and understood
by a very limited number of persons。 Similarly； although I
judge that those of which I here make use are equal to； or
even surpass in certainty and evidence； the demonstrations of
Geometry； I yet apprehend that they cannot be adequately
understood by many； both because they are also a little
lengthy and dependent the one on the other； and principally
because they demand a mind wholly free of prejudices； and one
which can be easily detached from the affairs of the senses。
And； truth to say； there are not so many in the world who are
fitted for metaphysical speculations as there are for those of
Geometry。 And more than that； there is still this difference；
that in Geometry； since each one is persuaded that nothing
must be advanced of which there is not a certain
demonstration； those who are not entirely adepts more
frequently err in approving what is false； in order to give
the impression that they un