The philosophy of Descartes begins with "Cogito ergo sum" "I think I exist" and completes with mediate or inference knowledge. This special connection that observe through "Cogito ergo sum" and impact on each one of
discussion and issues that Descartes set forth for discussion, is the most important capital for meditators in investigation cartesians philosophy in the past and now. It seems, basically, appraising of this philosophy without considering to above mentioned rules is impossible or at least very difficult.
Bernard williams is one of such scientists that had criticised rule of "Cogito ergo sum" and certainty and imperative retated to it. Study of williams essay, that is written in title "ergo certainty" and you can study it with any interference and possession with regards to criticism of Writer to "ergo", will be very useful in philosophy of Descartes. The writer of essay dominate also analytic
Language, begins in his discussion to this subject that, basically, which kind of apodictics are certainty and imporative. Then refer in detail to this point that dose "Cogito ergo sum" come from this apodictics? In william / s
idea, answer to this question is related to solve other problem, and does "ergo sum" result of deductive that "Cogito" is one its elements or not? It is obvious, if we
believe deduction "ergo sum" even if we believe certainty for it, with certainty "ergo sum" will be different in case of mediate.
Testimony of writer to Descartes phrases is another advantages of this essay, although, in his openion, Descartes had presented in rerference phrases in above definite subject, that it shows complicating of problem.
Williams against the others, declare Descartes pherase a kind of deductive reasoning although it is different from deductive logic and for this reason he analyses it psycologically. Investigation of Descartes reasoning with
mathematical logic is one of characteristks deserve of mentioned essay. The writer devotes considering part of his writing to "ergo" and presents new points in "Cogito" field, that is the best and positive parts of his essay. To put conclusion of this part of discussion together with notice
into nature of "thinking" and relationship with human being is very important that causes accecibility to new rules. At the end of all this analysis, the writer presents that Descartes's method for access "ergo" from "Cogito" only after exact "ergo" nature of "ergo" and everything that actually Descartes has in his mind from "Cogito" is possible. In Writer's idea this reasoning can't be wrong.
)