A song of opposites

I really dislike Descartes apparent dismissal of the senses, because he didn’t dismiss them at all. He says that the senses can deceive us since, using the classic example a stick appears in water to be bent even though it isn’t, thus we should distrust the senses, according to him. But how does he know that the stick isn’t actually bent? He has already trusted the senses prior to tell him that the stick is actually straight and not soft or malleable. And all the properties he gives to wax, that it is extended etc. and then goes on to say that these things are things that the intellect perceives, how can he be sure that the senses are not deceiving him there? If the senses aren’t to be trusted, how can he be sure that the wax has even changed form? If he dismissed entirely the feel, taste, smell, sight, and sound? of the wax melting, he wouldn’t even know there was a piece of wax there at all. He has trusted his senses enough to tell him that.. All the intellect does in this case is add concepts to the event which aids understanding of it.

On another note Wittgenstein seems exponentially more interesting as the days go by and I may have to break my ‘no reading philosophy treatise outside of lesson until the summer’ rule.