but it cannot be that I judge this； and that my mind which judges this does not exist。” （10） That is
to say； everything which is for me I may assert to be non…existent； but when I assert myself to be
non…existent； I myself assert； or it is my judgment。 For I cannot set aside the fact that I judge；
even if I can abstract from that respecting which I judge。 In this Philosophy has regained its own
ground that thought starts from thought as what is certain in itself； and not from something external；
not from something given； not from an authority； but directly from the freedom that is contained in
the ‘I think。’ Of all else I may doubt； of the existence of bodily things； of my body itself； or this
certainty does not possess immediacy in itself。 For ‘I’ is just certainty itself； but in all else this
certainty is only predicate； my body is certain to me； it is not this certainty itself。 （11） As against
the certainty we feel of having a body； Descartes adduces the empirical phenomenon that we often
hear of persons imagining they feel pain in a limb which they have lost long ago。 （12） What is
actual； he says is a substance； the soul is a thinking substance； it is thus for itself； separate from all
external material things and independent。 That it is thinking is evident from its nature： it would think
and exist even if no material things were present； the soul can hence know itself more easily than
its body： （13）
All else that we can hold as true rests on this certainty； for in order that anything should be held as
true； evidence is requisite； but nothing is true which has not this inward evidence in consciousness。
“Now the evidence of everything rests upon our perceiving it as clearly and vividly as that certainty
itself； and on its so entirely depending from； and harmonizing with this principle； that if we wished
to doubt it we should also have to doubt this principle likewise” （our ego）。 （14） This knowledge
is indeed on its own account perfect evidence； but it is not yet the truth； or if we take that Being as
truth； it is an empty content； and it is with the content that we have to do。
c。 What comes third is thus the transition of this certainty into truth； into the determinate；
Descartes again makes this transition in a na？ve way； and with it we for the first time begin to
consider his metaphysics。 What here takes place is that an interest arises in further representations
and conceptions of the abstract unity of Being and Thought； there Descartes sets to work in an
externally reflective manner。 “The consciousness which merely knows itself to be certain now
however seeks to extend its knowledge； and finds that it has conceptions of many things — in
which conceptions it does not deceive itself； so long as it does not assert or deny that something
similar outside corresponds to them。” Deception in the conceptions has meaning only in relation
to external existence。 “Consciousness also discovers universal conceptions； and obtains from them
proofs which are evident； e。g。 the geometric proposition that the three angles of a triangle are
together equal to two right angles is a conception which follows incontrovertibly from others。 But
in reflecting whether such things really exist doubts arise。” （15） That there is such a thing as a
triangle is indeed in this case by no means certain； since extension is not contained in the immediate
certainty of myself。 The soul may exist without the bodily element； and this last without it； they are
in reality different； one is conceivable without the other。 The soul thus does not think and know the
other as clearly as the certainty of itself。 （16）
Now the truth of all knowledge rests on the proof of the existence of God。 The soul is an
imperfect substance； but it has the Idea of an absolute perfect existence within itself； this perfection
is not begotten in itself； just because it is an imperfect substance； this Idea is thus innate。 In
Descartes the consciousness of this fact is expressed by his saying that as long as the existence of
God is not proved and perceived the possibility of our deceiving ourselves remains； because we
cannot know whether we do not possess a nature ordered and disposed to err （supra； p。 226）。
（17） The form is rather a mistaken one； and it only generally expresses the opposition in which
self…consciousness stands to the consciousness of what is different； of the objective； and we have
to deal with the unity of both — the question being whether what is in thought likewise possesses
objectivity。 This unity rests in God or is God Himself。 I shall put these assertions in the manner of
Descartes： “Amongst these various conceptions possessed by us there likewise is the conception
of a supremely intelligent； powerful； and absolutely perfect Being； and this is the most excellent of
all conceptions。” This all…embracing universal conception has therefore this distinguishing feature；
that in its case the uncertainty respecting Being which appears in the other conceptions； finds no
place。 It has the characteristic that “In it we do not recognize existence as something merely
possible and accidental； as we do the conceptions of other things which we perceive clearly； but
as a really essential and eternal determination。 For instance； as mind perceives that in the
conception of a triangle it is implied that the three angles are equal to two right angles； the triangle
has them； and in the same way from the fact that mind perceives existence to be necessarily and
eternally implied in the Notion of the most perfect reality； it is forced to conclude that the most
perfect reality exists。” （18） For to perfection there likewise pertains the determination of
existence； since the conception of a non…existent is less perfect。 Thus we there have the unity of
thought and Being； and the ontological proof of the existence of God； this we met with earlier （p。
63； seq。） in dealing with Anselm。
The proof of the existence of God from the Idea of Him is in this wise： In this Notion existence is
implied； and therefore it is true。 Descartes proceeds further in the same direction； in so far as after
the manner of empirical axioms he sets forth： “There are different degrees of reality or entity； for
the substance has more reality than the accident or the mode； and infinite substance has more than
finite。” “In the Notion of a thing existence is implied； either the merely potential or the
necessary；” i。e。； in the ‘I’ there is Being as the immediate certainty of an other…being； of the
not…I opposed to the I。 “No thing or no perfection of a thing which really exists actu can have the
Nothing as original cause of its existence。 For if anything could be predicated of nothing； thought
could equally well be predicated of it； and I would thus say that I am nothing because I think。”
Descartes here arrives at a dividing line； at an unknown relationship； the Notion of cause is
reached； and this is a thought indeed； but a determinate thought。 Spinoza says in his explanation；
“That the conceptions contain more or less reality； and those moments have just as much evidence
as thought itself； because they not only； say that we think； but how we think。” These determinate
modes as differences in the simplicity of thought； had； however； to be demonstrated。 Spinoza adds
to this step in advance that “The degrees of reality which we perceive in ideas are not in the ideas
in as far as they are considered merely as kinds of thought； but in so far as the one represents a
substance and the other a mere mode of substance； or； in a word； in so far as they are considered
as conceptions of things。” “The objective reality of Notions （i。e。； the entity of what is represented
in so far as it is in the Notion）； 〃demands a first cause in which the same reality is contained not
merely objectively” （that is to say in the Notion）； “but likewise formally or even eminenter —
formally； that is perfectly likewise： eminenter； more perfectly。 For there must at least be as much
in the cause as in the effect。” “The existence of God； is known immediately” — a priori —
“from the contemplation of His nature。 To say that anything is contained in the nature or in the
Notion of a thing is tantamount to saying that it is true： existence is directly contained in the Notion
of God。 Hence it is quite true to say of Him that existence pertains of necessity to Him。 There is
implied in the Notion of every particular thing either a possible or a necessary existence — a
necessary existence in the Notion of God； i。e。 of the absolutely perfect Being； for else He would
be conceived as imperfect。” （19）
Descartes likewise argues after this manner： “Problem： to prove a posteriori from the mere
Notion within us the existence of God。 The objective reality of a Notion demands a cause in which
the same reality is not merely contained objectively” （as in the finite）； “but formally” （freely；
purely for itself； outside of us） “or eminenter” （as original）。 （Axiom。） “We now have a Notion of
God； but His objective reality is neither formally nor eminenter contained within us； and it can thus
be only in God Himself。” （20） Consequently we see that with Descartes this Idea is an
hypothesis。 Now we should say we find this highest Idea in us。 If we then ask whether this Idea
exists； why； this is the Idea； that existence is asserted with it。 To say that it is only a conception is
to contradict the meaning of this conception。 But here it is unsatisfactory to find that the conception
is introduced thus： ‘We have this conception；’ and to find that it consequently appears like an
hypothesis。 In such a case it is not proved of this content in itself that it determines itself into this
unity of thought and Being。 In the form of God no other conception is thus here given than that
contained in Cogito； ergo sum； wherein Being and thought are inseparably bound up — though
now in the form of a conception which I possess within me。 The whole content of this conception；
the Almighty； All…wise； &c。； are predicates which do not make their appearance until later； the
content is simply the content of the Idea bound up with existence。 Hence we see these
determination