This paper examines Descartes' wax argument from Meditations II, in which he uses the physical transformation of melting wax to demonstrate that sense-perception is an unreliable guide to knowledge. The paper explains how Descartes' conclusion — that only the intellect, as a "thinking thing," can yield certain truth — connects to his broader epistemological project. It then compares this position with Plato's treatment of knowledge and opinion in The Republic, identifying key points of agreement and divergence between the two philosophers regarding the origin and nature of genuine knowledge.
The paper demonstrates comparative philosophical analysis: rather than summarizing one thinker in isolation, it places Descartes in dialogue with Plato to illuminate what is distinctive about each position. By first establishing agreement and then carefully delineating where the two philosophers diverge, the author shows how contrast can clarify meaning in intellectual history.
The paper opens by situating Descartes' epistemology within the broader tradition and introducing the wax argument. It then unpacks the argument itself using a primary-source quotation. The middle sections draw parallels with Plato's knowledge/opinion distinction before identifying key divergences — particularly regarding the source of knowledge. The conclusion synthesizes both threads, restating Descartes' core claim about intellect and absolute truth.
Descartes' philosophy heavily deals with the "thinking thing" — the relationship between perception, knowledge, and what each can reliably tell us about the world. Like Plato's views on knowledge and opinion, Descartes concludes that human perception — or opinion, in Plato's terms — is faulty. However, unlike Plato, who takes sense-perception in stride and allows its use as a stepping stone toward knowledge, Descartes discards sense-perception entirely, determining that it is an unreliable path to true and certain knowledge. In Meditations II, Descartes further develops this argument through his now-famous example of a piece of wax.
Prior to his example with the wax, Descartes has logically deduced that he is "a thing which thinks," and that a thinking thing has the inherent ability to "doubt, understand, conceive, deny, will, refuse, and also imagine and feel." In order to affirm his status as a thinking thing, he examines the case of a piece of wax.
In this example, a piece of wax is held near a fire, where it gradually changes shape over time, acquiring a different set of sensory properties. It remains wax — yet Descartes argues that this recognition does not come from one's perception of the wax melting into a different shape. How does one know what shape the wax takes at the end of the process? Descartes argues forcefully that the wax can take on an infinite number of shapes, far more than one's imagination could anticipate. As he writes in Meditations II:
"What then did I know so distinctly in this piece of wax? It could certainly be nothing of all that the senses brought to my notice, since all these things which fall under taste, smell, sight, touch, and hearing, are found to be changed, and yet the same wax remains."
Descartes argues that sense-perception cannot be a reliable means of determining the existence or true nature of an object. As a thinking thing, the mind and intellect are the only certain proofs of one's existence; everything else remains unknown and unverified. The wax's essential nature — its identity as wax — is grasped not by the senses but by the intellect alone. This is the cornerstone of Cartesian rationalism: reason, not sensation, is the foundation of genuine knowledge.
In a similar vein, Plato agrees that there is a fundamental divide between sense-perception and the knowledge inherent in a thinking being. The Republic argues at length over the difference between knowledge and opinion. To Plato, knowledge is the certainty discoverable from within, whereas opinion is rooted in one's imagination — unreliable and a mere "shadow" of the real world. In this respect, both philosophers hold that knowledge or intellect yields certainty, and both acknowledge that sense-perception and opinion lead to false or incomplete truths.
Descartes and Plato, while agreeing on the fundamental distinction between sense-perception and genuine knowledge, diverge significantly in their accounts of where that knowledge originates. For Plato, knowledge flows from the Good — the highest form, the ultimate source of truth. For Descartes, intellect is the affirmation of a thinking being's existence, grounded entirely in the self. His wax argument fully articulates the nature of perception and makes the case that human intellect, not the senses, is the sole faculty capable of arriving at absolute truths.
You’re 77% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.