Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

The Cartesian Circle

bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

-----------------------------------------

ARGUMENT

Descartes' argument is circular and contradictory. Descartes is basically saying that (a) we know that what we C/D perceive is true because God exists, and (b) we know God exists because we C/D perceive Him. This is obviously circular, and if we buy (b), then we must believe that C/D perception is prior to God, which contradicts (a).

REPLY

Descartes responds by saying that God's guarantee of C/D perception only applies to arguments being recalled, not in the case of understanding the clarity and distinctness of an argument(s) that is immediately in the awareness. Therefore, if the arguments being used to prove God are being currently attended, they can be C/D perceived, thereby proving God, and subsequently allowing all C/D ideas (currently attended and recollected) to be safely considered C/D. Therefore, there is no circularity or contradiction.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 4:05:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Bump
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 5:06:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

-----------------------------------------

ARGUMENT

Descartes' argument is circular and contradictory. Descartes is basically saying that (a) we know that what we C/D perceive is true because God exists, and (b) we know God exists because we C/D perceive Him. This is obviously circular, and if we buy (b), then we must believe that C/D perception is prior to God, which contradicts (a).

REPLY

Descartes responds by saying that God's guarantee of C/D perception only applies to arguments being recalled, not in the case of understanding the clarity and distinctness of an argument(s) that is immediately in the awareness. Therefore, if the arguments being used to prove God are being currently attended, they can be C/D perceived, thereby proving God, and subsequently allowing all C/D ideas (currently attended and recollected) to be safely considered C/D. Therefore, there is no circularity or contradiction.

It sounds fishy to me. Although I haven't read much Descartes.
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 5:08:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 5:06:55 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

It sounds fishy to me. Although I haven't read much Descartes.

Yeah, it sounds fishy to me too.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 5:09:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 5:08:12 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 3/5/2015 5:06:55 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

It sounds fishy to me. Although I haven't read much Descartes.

Yeah, it sounds fishy to me too.

Sometimes these sort of arguments are the type where we know something is bs about it, but can't quite put your finger on it. At least that's how I personally feel.

On a side note, Prof Feser just did a post on Descartes' indivisibility argument. http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com...
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 5:11:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 5:08:12 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 3/5/2015 5:06:55 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

It sounds fishy to me. Although I haven't read much Descartes.

Yeah, it sounds fishy to me too.

Btw, I see you now identify as agnostic. Just curious.. could you explain this recent change?
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 6:01:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 5:11:08 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/5/2015 5:08:12 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 3/5/2015 5:06:55 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

It sounds fishy to me. Although I haven't read much Descartes.

Yeah, it sounds fishy to me too.

Btw, I see you now identify as agnostic. Just curious.. could you explain this recent change?

It's not really a new change...it's been that way for a few months. It just reflects my general lack of surety as far as that is concerned.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 8:58:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

-----------------------------------------

ARGUMENT

Descartes' argument is circular and contradictory. Descartes is basically saying that (a) we know that what we C/D perceive is true because God exists, and (b) we know God exists because we C/D perceive Him. This is obviously circular, and if we buy (b), then we must believe that C/D perception is prior to God, which contradicts (a).

REPLY

Descartes responds by saying that God's guarantee of C/D perception only applies to arguments being recalled, not in the case of understanding the clarity and distinctness of an argument(s) that is immediately in the awareness. Therefore, if the arguments being used to prove God are being currently attended, they can be C/D perceived, thereby proving God, and subsequently allowing all C/D ideas (currently attended and recollected) to be safely considered C/D. Therefore, there is no circularity or contradiction.

God cannot be 'clear and distinct' because, in being absolute, there is no not-God to distinguish God from. He is thus, completely indistinct and indistinguishable.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 8:59:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 8:58:47 PM, sdavio wrote:
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

-----------------------------------------

ARGUMENT

Descartes' argument is circular and contradictory. Descartes is basically saying that (a) we know that what we C/D perceive is true because God exists, and (b) we know God exists because we C/D perceive Him. This is obviously circular, and if we buy (b), then we must believe that C/D perception is prior to God, which contradicts (a).

REPLY

Descartes responds by saying that God's guarantee of C/D perception only applies to arguments being recalled, not in the case of understanding the clarity and distinctness of an argument(s) that is immediately in the awareness. Therefore, if the arguments being used to prove God are being currently attended, they can be C/D perceived, thereby proving God, and subsequently allowing all C/D ideas (currently attended and recollected) to be safely considered C/D. Therefore, there is no circularity or contradiction.

God cannot be 'clear and distinct' because, in being absolute, there is no not-God to distinguish God from. He is thus, completely indistinct and indistinguishable.

That's not the question I am asking though.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2015 9:23:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 8:59:43 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 3/5/2015 8:58:47 PM, sdavio wrote:
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

-----------------------------------------

ARGUMENT

Descartes' argument is circular and contradictory. Descartes is basically saying that (a) we know that what we C/D perceive is true because God exists, and (b) we know God exists because we C/D perceive Him. This is obviously circular, and if we buy (b), then we must believe that C/D perception is prior to God, which contradicts (a).

REPLY

Descartes responds by saying that God's guarantee of C/D perception only applies to arguments being recalled, not in the case of understanding the clarity and distinctness of an argument(s) that is immediately in the awareness. Therefore, if the arguments being used to prove God are being currently attended, they can be C/D perceived, thereby proving God, and subsequently allowing all C/D ideas (currently attended and recollected) to be safely considered C/D. Therefore, there is no circularity or contradiction.

God cannot be 'clear and distinct' because, in being absolute, there is no not-God to distinguish God from. He is thus, completely indistinct and indistinguishable.

That's not the question I am asking though.

Well, I don't think there's any circularity in the argument. It basically seems like saying that we can discover things about how humans think by studying the brain. That could seem 'circular' but it's not circular in the fallacious sense. We can understand how God makes knowledge possible, and have knowledge about that, and that is not a circle.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
tabularasa
Posts: 200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2015 3:33:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

-----------------------------------------

ARGUMENT

Descartes' argument is circular and contradictory. Descartes is basically saying that (a) we know that what we C/D perceive is true because God exists, and (b) we know God exists because we C/D perceive Him. This is obviously circular, and if we buy (b), then we must believe that C/D perception is prior to God, which contradicts (a).

REPLY

Descartes responds by saying that God's guarantee of C/D perception only applies to arguments being recalled, not in the case of understanding the clarity and distinctness of an argument(s) that is immediately in the awareness. Therefore, if the arguments being used to prove God are being currently attended, they can be C/D perceived, thereby proving God, and subsequently allowing all C/D ideas (currently attended and recollected) to be safely considered C/D. Therefore, there is no circularity or contradiction.

I have been saying for years that this argument is nonsense.
1. I already googled it.

2. Give me an argument. Spell it out. "You're wrong," is not an argument.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2015 4:22:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/6/2015 3:33:04 PM, tabularasa wrote:
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

-----------------------------------------

ARGUMENT

Descartes' argument is circular and contradictory. Descartes is basically saying that (a) we know that what we C/D perceive is true because God exists, and (b) we know God exists because we C/D perceive Him. This is obviously circular, and if we buy (b), then we must believe that C/D perception is prior to God, which contradicts (a).

REPLY

Descartes responds by saying that God's guarantee of C/D perception only applies to arguments being recalled, not in the case of understanding the clarity and distinctness of an argument(s) that is immediately in the awareness. Therefore, if the arguments being used to prove God are being currently attended, they can be C/D perceived, thereby proving God, and subsequently allowing all C/D ideas (currently attended and recollected) to be safely considered C/D. Therefore, there is no circularity or contradiction.

I have been saying for years that this argument is nonsense.

Why?
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2015 1:16:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:


Descartes' argument is circular and contradictory. Descartes is basically saying that (a) we know that what we C/D perceive is true because God exists, and (b) we know God exists because we C/D perceive Him. This is obviously circular, and if we buy (b), then we must believe that C/D perception is prior to God, which contradicts (a).


The argument is obviously circular. In order to justify the premise that C/D perception is true, he turns to the existence of God, which he justifies by appealing to the premise that C/D perception is true. It's effectively saying that C/D perception is true because C/D perception is true. But does this prevent it from establishing truth? Hardly. If the truth of X does, in fact, follow from X, then it is a justified argument. Without circular reasoning all arguments would ultimately rely on assumptions. And if that were the case, then would could not justify anything, including any argument to that effect.

Secondly, the idea that C/D perception comes "first" is absurd. We can just as easily formulate the argument as "We know God exists because we can C/D perceive him, and we know that what we C/D perceive is true because God exist." That's what circularity is all about; it doesn't matter which premise you start with. Neither is logically secondary.
NoMagic
Posts: 507
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2015 5:17:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 9:23:47 PM, sdavio wrote:
At 3/5/2015 8:59:43 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 3/5/2015 8:58:47 PM, sdavio wrote:
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

-----------------------------------------

ARGUMENT

Descartes' argument is circular and contradictory. Descartes is basically saying that (a) we know that what we C/D perceive is true because God exists, and (b) we know God exists because we C/D perceive Him. This is obviously circular, and if we buy (b), then we must believe that C/D perception is prior to God, which contradicts (a).

REPLY

Descartes responds by saying that God's guarantee of C/D perception only applies to arguments being recalled, not in the case of understanding the clarity and distinctness of an argument(s) that is immediately in the awareness. Therefore, if the arguments being used to prove God are being currently attended, they can be C/D perceived, thereby proving God, and subsequently allowing all C/D ideas (currently attended and recollected) to be safely considered C/D. Therefore, there is no circularity or contradiction.

God cannot be 'clear and distinct' because, in being absolute, there is no not-God to distinguish God from. He is thus, completely indistinct and indistinguishable.

That's not the question I am asking though.

Well, I don't think there's any circularity in the argument. It basically seems like saying that we can discover things about how humans think by studying the brain. That could seem 'circular' but it's not circular in the fallacious sense. We can understand how God makes knowledge possible, and have knowledge about that, and that is not a circle.

Pardon me if I jump in, but I don't think your analogy holds up. We can study the brain which provides evidence that it thinks. Or we can study thought and derive it is produced by a living brain. You claim knowledge is ultimately sourced to god. But, unlike the brain analogy, we cannot study knowledge and source that knowledge to god. Or we cannot study god, and derive god is the source of knowledge. My question, how have you source knowledge to god?
Raisor
Posts: 4,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2015 6:24:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/5/2015 1:04:59 AM, bsh1 wrote:
INTRO

The Cartesian Circle is an argument against Descartes' view about "clear and distinct" (C/D) perception. I will review the (simplified) argument and Descartes' rebuttal to it below. Do you think Descartes' rebuttal succeeds? If so, why not?

-----------------------------------------

ARGUMENT

Descartes' argument is circular and contradictory. Descartes is basically saying that (a) we know that what we C/D perceive is true because God exists, and (b) we know God exists because we C/D perceive Him. This is obviously circular, and if we buy (b), then we must believe that C/D perception is prior to God, which contradicts (a).

REPLY

Descartes responds by saying that God's guarantee of C/D perception only applies to arguments being recalled, not in the case of understanding the clarity and distinctness of an argument(s) that is immediately in the awareness. Therefore, if the arguments being used to prove God are being currently attended, they can be C/D perceived, thereby proving God, and subsequently allowing all C/D ideas (currently attended and recollected) to be safely considered C/D. Therefore, there is no circularity or contradiction.

I wrote a paper on this once upon a time. An excerpt with relevant stuff emphasized:

"A major criticism of Descartes" argument for the certainty of clear and distinct ideas is that the conclusion that a non-deceiving God exists, the conclusion that guarantees the certainty of clear and distinct ideas, is founded on arguments depending on the truth of clear and distinct ideas. If this criticism is correct, Descartes" argument is circular and he has not proven the certainty of God or clear and distinct ideas.
The question of circularity arises mostly due to Descartes" lack of clarity on exactly how doubt relates to clear and distinct ideas. At times (prior to proving God"s existence) Descartes seems to treat clear and distinct ideas as totally suspect to doubt while at other times accepting certain ideas as true because they have been revealed by "natural light" or because they are clear and distinct. Still more confusing is the manner in which Descartes defends his argument from the charge of circularity in the Fifth Meditation and in his Replies.

Descartes" own response to the charge of circularity suggests that he believes all clear and distinct ideas to be certain while these ideas are being perceived. In his Second Replies, Descartes says "there are other matters which are perceived very clearly by our intellect so long as we attend to the arguments on which our knowledge of them depends; and we are therefore incapable of doubting them during this time" (AT VII 146). Descartes expressly says that clear and distinct ideas cannot be doubted while the mind is contemplating them. Similarly, Descartes says in the Fifth Meditation: "my nature is such that so long as I perceive something very clearly and distinctly I cannot but believe it to be true" (AT VII 69). Certainty in clear and distinct ideas is thus located temporally at the moment of perception.

Doubt creeps in when Descartes realizes "I cannot fix my mental vision continually on the same thing so as to keep perceiving it clearly" (AT VII 69). The memory of a clear and distinct idea is not enough to guarantee certainty of the idea. Any conclusion derived from a clear and distinct idea is uncertain once it is no longer being perceived, as the firm conviction of the truth will be undermined by the mind"s doubt. The certainty is derived directly from the act of perception, when the mind is no longer engaged in that act the certainty is lost.

Descartes emphasizes that the certainty derived from God"s existence is only certainty of "knowledge of those conclusions which can be recalled when we are no longer attending to the arguments by means of which we deduced them" (At VII 140). Certainty of a non-deceptive God is not the cause for the certainty of clear and distinct ideas, but rather removes the mind"s doubt about whether or not such ideas that had seemed certain while being perceived were actually in error. When Descartes speaks of the certainty of clear and distinct ideas, he often describes the certainty he feels while perceiving the ideas. For instance, in the third meditation: "when I turn to the things themselves . . . I am so convinced by them"" (AT VII 36). However, the doubt he applies to clear and distinct ideas is retroactive. In the original statement of the metaphysical doubt Descartes wonders how he can be certain that "God has not brought it about that I too go wrong every time I add two and three or count the sides of a square, or in some even simpler matter"?" (AT VII 21). This question is whether or not Descartes has gone wrong in the past while perceiving clear and distinct ideas. Indeed, the way that the cogito is able to overcome the metaphysical doubt is through the act of experiencing it, as Descartes says in Second Replies (AT VII 140-41). The certainty of a non-deceiving God removes this sort of retroactive doubt.
Descartes believes that this position make him safe from charges of circularity. Descartes says in Fourth Replies (AT VII 246) that we are sure of God"s existence at the time we prove it, because at that moment we perceive the clear and distinct ideas necessary to arrive at the conclusion that a non-deceiving God exists. Once one has arrived at this conclusion and realizes that a non-deceiving God removes the retroactive doubt that puts clear and distinct ideas in question, one can be sure of conclusions derived from clear and distinct ideas even when not currently perceiving them.

When the objection is raised that an atheist can have clear and distinct perceptions, Descartes responds with a distinction between "knowledge" and "awareness of first principles." True knowledge involves the ability to recall conclusions without going through the process of re-creating the arguments that led to those conclusions. An atheist can never have this certain knowledge, because he has no way of overcoming the metaphysical doubt.

An atheist is able to have certainty about clear and distinct ideas, but only at the time he perceives those ideas. The atheist is unable to have true knowledge, only momentary certainty. In the Second Replies Descartes acknowledges that an atheist may have clear and distinct ideas, but says that these perceptions do not constitute a body of knowledge.

Descartes" response to the charge of circularity is an effective defense. Since certainty of clear and distinct ideas is not dependent on the existence of a non-deceiving God at the moment of perception, it is legitimate to use these ideas in a proof of God. At the same time, God is still critical in Descartes" quest for certainty. God is necessary to achieve certainty of the senses and more importantly, to enable knowledge of ideas. Without God the human mind would be limited to certainty of only that which it directly perceives. While we may have certainty of the geometrical proof we are currently conducting without God, we need God to have certainty of all the proofs we did yesterday and the day before that...."

_____

In my view the criticism of circularity is incorrect.

It might be another question whether or not direct contemplation of CD ideas actually yields certainty.