Descartes's Demon and the Madness of Don Quixote

Descartes’s Demon and the Madness of Don Quixote Steven Nadler Descartes’s “malicious demon” (genius malignus, le mauvais génie)—the evil deceiver of the Meditations on First Philosophy whose hypothetical existence threatens to undermine radically Descartes’s confidence in his cognitive f aculties—is an artful philosophical and literary device. There is considerable debate over the significance of this powerful and malevolent being within Descartes’s argumentative strategy. Some insist that its role is a substantive one, with Descartes in troducing the deceiver in order to deepen yet further the skeptical doubts of the First Meditation, doubts from which he hopes, by the grace of a benevolent God, eventually to rescue himself. 1 Others claim that its role is merely a rhetorical one, with the demon meant simply to reinforce already philosophically well-established skeptical doubts that, in the face of everyday habit, are difficult to sustain. 2 Either way, there is no underestimating the force of the hypothesis as an epistemological tool for subverting our faith in our reasoning and sensory powers. [End Page 41] It is useful to place the “evil genius” in the context of seventeenth-century intellectual culture 3 not just for our understanding of what may have been the historical origins of this most extreme and “metaphysical” 4 of all skeptical doubts but also for broadening our appreciation of its significance beyond epistemology alone. When we grasp the various practical (moral, legal, and social) problems and the literary and artistic possibilities raised by the demon hypoth esis, we can see why such an improbably hyper-skeptical thesis is nonetheless deserving of general interest. To take just one example, Richard Popkin, in his seminal work on the history of skepticism in early modern thought, describes the knotty problems that are generated in the legal context of a trial when the issue of the demonic is raised (as in the case of someone on trial for witchcraft). 5 In the service of this contextualizing project I compare Descartes’s meditator (with his self-assumed skeptical pose) with a near-contemporary literary character of particular fame and importance. What is especially striking—and instructive—in this comp arison are the parallels and resonances between the kind of general, systematic, philosophically-generated hyperbolic doubt that Descartes introduces by way of his deceptor potentissimus et malignus and the initially more particular (but perhaps eq ually systematic) distrust of the faculties that is suggested by Don Quixote’s own “rationalization” of his illusions. 6 In fact precisely the same philosophical problem is raised both in the first major work of modern philosophy and in the first modern novel: in the face of the possibility of ongoing deception by some powerful and malicious being, how can we possibly trus t our sensory and rational faculties to provide us with true and reliable knowledge? Descartes’s philosophical work can even provide us with a key to understanding part of the nature of Don Quixote’s madness, to systematizing it in its epistemological dim ensions. Reciprocally, it may be that Cervantes’s hero gives us a concrete picture of what it would be like to try to live in the radically deceptive world of the skepticism of the First Meditation. [End Page 42] Did Cervantes’s novel have a direct influence on Descartes’s philosophical reflections? The first part of Don Quixote was published in 1604; the second part, written after several pirated editions of Part I had been circulating for a number of year s, appeared in 1614, the year before Cervantes’s death. The novel was immediately and enormously popular and was quickly translated into a number of other languages. The first French translation of Part I (by César Oudin) was published in 1614. In 1618, François de Rosset translated Part II, and these two translations were published together in one volume in 1639, 1646, and 1665. 7 We can be confident that Descartes knew about Cervantes’s works; and while we cannot say with certainty that he read Don Quixote, given his education, social status, interest in novels of chivalry, and the intellectual circles in which he traveled, it would be surprising if he did not. He

Demon · Epistemology · Faith · Genius · Literature · Metaphysics · Philosophy of science · Rhetorical question · Skepticism · Classical Philosophy and Thought · Historical Philosophy and Science · History of Science and Medicine · Philosophy

• Sleeping with the Enemy

  James S Amelang•American imago•2012

  Incluir item

• The Diabolical Adventures of Don Quixote, or Self-Exorcism and the Rise of the Novel

  Open Access•Hilaire Kallendorf, Hllaire Kallendorf•Renaissance Quarterly•2002

  Incluir item

• The Cartesian evil demon and the impossibility of the monstrous lie

  Open Access•Rodrigo Alfonso González Fernández•Filosofia Unisinos•2021

  Incluir item

• Descartes: Meditations on First Philosophy

  Open Access•René Descartes, Bernard Williams et al.•Descartes : Meditations on First…•1996

  Incluir item

• Demons, Dreamers, and Madmen

  Harry G Frankfurt, Rebecca Goldstein•Demons, Dreamers, and Madmen•2008

  Incluir item

• Essais sur Descartes

  Philip Paul Wiener, Henri Gouhier et al.•The Philosophical Review•1939

  Incluir item

• Cartesian Skepticism from Bare Possibility

  Robert Wachbrit, Robert Edward Wachbrit•Journal of the History of Ideas•1996

  Incluir item