Midcentury was a time when many great thinkers were contemplating life

and meaning of it. This is because new discoveries were being made in
science and geographical exploration. One of them was Ren Descartes great French philosopher, famous scientist and mathematician. He did a lot
of works and writings which are still up-to-date and valuable. One of such
important writings was the method of doubt and certainty. He came to this
method by his refusal to accept authority of other philosophers and to trust
to his own senses. His method was based on doubting everything that exists.
He was aiming to avoid knowledge that was uncertain and indubitable.
However knowledge was understood in terms of certainty. These caused a
dilemma among modern thinkers and identified some flaws in Descartes
argument as well. The aim of this essay is to analyze how Descartes resolves
problems of doubt and certainty in terms of life example, also to determine
flaws and fallacies in the arguments towards uncertain matters.
The method of systematic doubt defeats the skeptical views of different
things. He rejected everything as absolute false and distrusted it if there is
the least doubt in it in order to identify anything that is indubitable, certain
and full truth. This is due to his assumption about how human feelings can
be deceitful. In Russells The Existence of Matter illustrated connection
between certainty and doubt through several examples in life: physical
existence of the brown table and cat in the room. Despite of doubt he found
certainty in several things. One of them was his existence, which it was
defined as an absolute truth because he assumed that if he did not exist, no
demon could deceive him. (Russell 2009)Furthermore, he developed theory

of the dualism of body and mind which means that mind is immaterial
substance and distinct from body. Mind causes body to act, therefore body
might not exist. Thats why he found his essence as an undeniable matter
due to the immateriality of the mind.
However, there are some oppositions and logical fallacies towards his
method. As in Discourses IV cited he argues that everything is doubtful, but
his existence is taken for granted as a matter that could not be questioned
by saying I think therefore I am (Discourses by Rene Descartes). It is
actually a logical fallacy and not affirmed properly because it is subjective
opinion and egoistic senses of the philosopher. It interprets him as arguing in
circles and contradicts to his statements. In order to convey the possibility of
doubt to readers, Descartes should take into consideration the least entity
with reality of uncertain things. Secondly, there is another flaw in his
argument towards the external existence. He proposes that when we close
the eyes the outside world did not exist and it is illusion of our mind.
Nevertheless, there is no consideration of human biological senses such as
eyes an not see everything around because they are being closed by the
person itself. For example, if an individual is blind or has another eye issues
and does it mean that the external reality do not exist for that person. He
succumbs to his feelings and perceptions despite of his assumption about
peoples sense-data, where he claims: If our scientific knowledge came to
us through the senses, we could not even be sure that anything outside of us
existed.( Discourses by Rene Descartes) On the contrary Russell contradicts
to this assumption by arguing:" This is the fact that different people have
similar sense-data, and that one person in a given place at different times
has similar sense-data and there is permanent public object which underlies

or causes the sense-data of various people at various times.( Russell 2009)

Basically, all people have the same prime sense-dates and perceptions: to
hear, to touch, to smell.
To conclude all aforementioned thoughts and arguments about the
method of doubt and certainty, the irrelevance of Descartes statements and
theories as well, I want to indicate that they are still relevant today and pose
a lot of debates among critics. In addition I think that he did not managed to
resolve problems with certainty and doubt properly due to the some
inaccuracies and failed in arguing the existence of matters.

Reference list:
1. Ryan Nichols, Thomas Reid, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
( Edition 2000) . Last modified September 23, 2014.
http://www.anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/dcarg.htm
2. Janet Broughton, Descartes's Method of Doubt (Princeton university
press, 2001), accessed February 17, 2016,
http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i7298.html
3. Department of Philosophy, Texas A&M University, Descartes'
Methodic Doubt, accessed February 17, 2016,
http://philosophy.tamu.edu/~sdaniel/Notes/descar1.html
4. Bertrand Russell, The problems of philosophy, released May 2, 2009,
chapter II. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/5827/5827-h/5827-h.htm
5. Ren Descartes, Discourse on Method, Part IV.
http://www.academia.edu/9765116/Descartes_Discourse_on_the_Metho
d_Part_IV

6. Bryan Register, Reid Against the Theory of Ideas, University of Texas

at Austin, 1997. Accessed February 17, 2016,
http://enlightenment.supersaturated.com/essays/text/bryanregister/rei
d_ideal.html
7. Karen Detlefsen (2006). Dialogue, 45, pp 404-406.
http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=
%2F11607_F9DF3347020DEFFD673272FDCEE8C1D3_journals__DIA_DI
A45_02_S0012217300000767a.pdf&cover=Y&code=cb022b7b34dccc9
e00828a47df480146