Chapter 3 foreword

① Regarding the two issues of God and the human soul, I have already discussed in the book "On the Correct Ways to Guide Reason and Search for Truth in Science" ②.The book was published in French in 1637.On these two issues, I was just talking about them in passing, without any in-depth discussion, in order to see how everyone judges these two issues, so that I can find a way to use them in the future. method discusses both of these issues.I have always believed that these two issues are very important, and it is best to talk about them a few times; and in explaining these two issues, the way I have adopted is very unconventional, which is quite different from the way people usually use. It will not do any good to raise these two questions in the French book "On Method" that can be understood. I am afraid that ordinary people with little knowledge will think that I allow them to try to go this way.

① There is no "Preface" in the first French edition, but it is included in the Latin edition and the second French edition.This article is translated from the 1865 French edition of Simon. ②Referred to as "Talking Method". In "On Method" I asked anyone who saw anything reproachable in my book to take the trouble to tell me about it; Apart from rebuttals, they did not point out any other important opinions.To these two objections I want to answer here briefly before I explain them more precisely. The first objection is that it does not follow from the fact that the human mind, when it reflects on itself, sees itself and nothing else, that the nature or essence of the human mind is merely thinking. ; for then the word "mere" excludes everything else that can possibly be said to belong to the soul as well.

My reply to this objection is: I did not intend there to be in the order of the actual state of things (for I had not yet spoken of the actual state of things), but only in the order of my train of thought, excluding them. up.I mean: I didn't know at that time that I belonged to my essence, I only knew that I was a thinking thing.But later on I will show how I deduce from the fact that I do not know that anything else belongs to my essence that in fact nothing else belongs to my essence. The second objection is: from the fact that I have a concept of something more perfect than me, it cannot be concluded that this concept is more perfect than me, let alone that the thing represented by this concept exists.

My reply is that the word idea has a different meaning here.Either it is itself an activity of my intellect, in the sense that the idea cannot be said to be more perfect than I; or it may be taken objectively as what this activity represents, which, though it cannot be supposed to exist in my intellect, but by virtue of its very nature it can be more perfect than me.In this book, I will also use more space to explain how I can deduce that this thing really exists just from the fact that I have a concept in my heart that is more perfect than me. In addition to these two rebuttals, I also saw two rather long articles.

However, these two articles are not so much an attack on the reasons I have advanced as an attack on the conclusions I have drawn, because the arguments used in both articles are borrowed from the common arguments of atheists.Since it is impossible for arguments of this kind to make an impression on those who later understand my reasons correctly, and because the judgment of many people is weak and unreasonable, they often prefer to believe preconceived views of things, however they may be. erroneous and contrary to reason, and unwilling to believe the contrary opinion, although this contrary opinion is convincing, true and reliable, and will be understood later, I do not want to discuss these two articles. I am going to make a defense here. I am afraid that I will have to make a defense, so I have to introduce the content of these two articles first.

Now, after fully understanding everyone's opinions, I will resume the discussion about God and the soul of man, and at the same time lay a foundation for the first philosophy.However, I don't want to get any favorable comments from ordinary people, nor do I want many people to read my book.On the contrary, I do not advise anyone to read my books except those who are willing to join me in serious meditation, and who are free from the disturbance of the senses, and completely free from prejudices of all kinds.As for those who take my reasons out of context, without regard to the order and connection of my reasons, and take pleasure in faultfinding (there are many of them), they will get no advantage by reading me, though they may find an opportunity. Some places were criticized, but they couldn't think of any urgent and worthy rebuttals.

Neither do I wish to others that I shall please them at once, nor do I think I am sufficiently gifted to foresee the difficulties which may befall every one, so I shall first set forth my thoughts in the Meditations, How, in this way of thinking, I believed that at last I had come to know the true and manifest truth, in order to try to see if I could convince others of it on the same grounds, and I would later proceed with the refutations which the learned men gave me. reply.I have sent them my Meditations for review before it goes to press.They have made so many and various rebuttals that I dare say it would be difficult for anyone else to come up with a more important rebuttal that has not been covered.

I therefore make a plea to those who wish to read the Meditations, that they take the trouble not to pass judgment until they have seen all those objections and my replies to them.