There are problems with this way of speaking: to decide is to use one's will, but there is something odd about saying that the will decides.
And I can clearly and distinctly understand my body apart from my mind: my body, but not my mind, is essentially an extended non-thinking thing. From here, I will argue that despite the simplicity and use of reasoning in the argument, the weaknesses outweigh the strengths, and ultimately that the argument fails.
Mathematics and geometry provide certainties that pass the test of clarity and distinctness. The argument for dualism First, have a look at the conclusion of this argument.
We can sometimes believe what we want to believe, with sometimes good, sometimes sorry consequences. The will gives its verdict. Continue Reading. He can clearly imagine 'various sizes, shapes, positions and local motions'.
But at least they possess all the properties which I clearly and distinctly understand, that is, all those which, viewed in general terms, are comprised within the subject-matter of pure mathematics But we can be sure that God exists only because we clearly and distinctly perceive this. If you are not sure whether the principle is correct, test it by seeing if you can find a counter-example: you would need to find an A and a B, such that you can clearly and distinctly understand A apart from B, and vice versa, and yet A and B are not metaphysically distinct, cannot exist apart.