<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tamura, Ayumu</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">What does the Premise “a Deceiver Deceives me” Conclude? - Descartes’ Deceiver Argument Reconsidered</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Filozofia</style></secondary-title><translated-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">What does the Premise “a Deceiver Deceives me” Conclude? - Descartes’ Deceiver Argument Reconsidered</style></translated-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cogito</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Deceiver argument</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Descartes</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Meditationes de prima philosophia</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">skepticism</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2019</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.sav.sk/journals/uploads/04141915filozofia.2019.74.4.4.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4</style></number><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">74</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">308-317</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">English</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Descartes insists, “[...] there is a deceiver of supreme power and cunning who is deliberately and constantly deceiving me. In that case I too undoubtedly exist, if he is deceiving me [...]” (AT-VII, 25; CSM-II, 17). In what way can we draw evidence that our existence can be drawn from our being deceived? The interpretations that the earlier studies have shown is not a monolith. Then I will search for some inherent characteristics of deception, and analyse the construction of the reasoning, “if a deceiver deceives me, I exist.” To be concrete, I show: 1) that it is not “I exist” but “I think” that is concluded from the supposition “a deceiver deceives me/I am deceived by a deceiver”; 2) that the attributions of the self as a thinking thing, i.e. understanding, affirming, and denying (AT-VII, 28; CSM-II, 19), are discovered in the very supposition of a deceiver.</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">State</style></work-type><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Articles</style></custom2><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">308317</style></custom3></record></records></xml>