Q: Why does Descartes say that doubting one’s thoughts necessitates the existence of an evil, deceiving being?
A: He doesn’t - it’s just a further point to consider
The “evident truth” of the validity of mathematical expressions seems so obvious, that the only case where it might not be so, is if some great being was attempting to deceive this person.
Clear and distinct means “evident, without any doubt, to the mind”
Q: It seems that Descartes, ultimately, even while “radically doubting everything”, still believes that the mind (1) was created, (2) has inherent properties - to be deceived or to think clearly. Thus, even while “radically doubting everything”, he still has to suppose that something created the mind, as opposed to us being something like a Boltzmann brain.
Three kinds of ideas - ones that appear external, ones that are innate.
The ideas of perfection and infinity are innate - and since ideas are effects, and effects cannot be larger than causes - there must exist a larger infinity/perfection that caused that thought in our mind.
How would Descartes respond to the idea of a Domino effect, for instance? Where a small domino falling can topple larger ones in succession? Or the butterfly effect, where even incredibly minor changes cause much more significant effects?
The idea of deception being inherently imperfect must be taken for granted.
Does Descartes argue for this [the idea of deception being inherently imperfect] any further, or does he simply state that this must be taken for granted, as without this premise there is no argument that can be made at all?