If there are no self-evident first principles, as a…
““If there are no self-evident first principles, as a foundation for reasoning to conclusions that are not immediately apparent, how can you construct any kind of a philosophy? If you have to prove even the basic axioms of your metaphysics, you will never have a metaphysics, because you will never have any strict proof of anything, for your first proof will involve you in an infinite regress, proving that you are proving what you are proving and so on, into the exterior darkness where there is wailing and gnashing of teeth. If Descartes thought it was necessary to prove his own existence by the fact that he was thinking, and that his though therefore existed in some subject, how did he prove that he was thinking in the first place? But as to the second step, that God must exist because Descartes had a clear idea of him – that never convinced me, then or at any other time, or now either. There are much better proofs for the existence of God than that one.””
About This Quote
This interpretation was drafted with AI assistance. It is one reading of the quote, not the author's own explanation.
Without self‑evident first principles, philosophical foundations become an endless regress, making certainty impossible.
In simple terms: No basic truths lead to endless questioning.
Key Takeaway
Accept uncertainty and seek pragmatic guidance.
Themes
philosophy
epistemology
skepticism
Mood
thoughtful
analytical
Type
philosophical
skeptical
When to use this quote
- academic debate
- personal belief formation
- ethical decision making
Key Concepts
metaphysics
logic
infinite regress
Questions to Reflect On
- Can you live with unresolved questions?
- What practical steps guide you without absolute proof?
A Different Perspective
Overemphasis on certainty can stall action.