Early modern philosophy · 1596–1650

René Descartes

Descartes turns doubt into a method, dismantling inherited confidence in search of foundations that can survive the strongest challenge.

Descartes in a shaded warm-grey editorial portrait, holding a plumb line with a muted-gold plumb bob.

René Descartes was a French philosopher and mathematician whose method of doubt helped shape modern rationalism. His work on mind, knowledge and analytic geometry made him central to both philosophy and science.

KnowledgeMind

The question he enters

The question René Descartes enters

What remains certain when the senses, the world and even your own reasoning are treated as possible sources of error?
RationalismRationalismThe view that reason can provide substantive knowledge independently of, or prior to, sensory experience.EpistemologyEpistemologyThe branch of philosophy that studies knowledge: what it is, how it is justified and where its limits lie.Substance dualismSubstance dualismThe view that mind and body are fundamentally distinct kinds of substance.

The central move

Doubt deliberately, then rebuild

Cartesian doubt is not permanent indecision. Descartes intensifies sceptical possibilities until the activity of thinking becomes impossible to doubt while it occurs. From that first-person certainty he attempts to reconstruct knowledge, mind, body and world through clear reasoning.

Key ideas

Terms that carry the argument.

Methodic doubt
A controlled suspension of uncertain beliefs used to test whether any foundation is indubitable.
Cogito
The act of thinking confirms the existence of the thinker while that thought occurs.
Clear and distinct perception
Descartes' proposed mark of intellectual certainty, whose reliability becomes a central point of dispute.
Substance dualism
The view that thinking mind and extended body are fundamentally different kinds of substance.

Where the view strains

Objections and limits.

How does mind move body?

If mind is unextended and body is extended, their causal interaction becomes difficult to explain.

Does certainty set the bar too high?

Ordinary knowledge may be fallible yet responsible; requiring indubitability can make successful inquiry look impossible.

Sources and routes

Read the work. Follow the argument.

Philosopher Compendium

Agreement is a poor substitute for understanding the move.

Philosophy Lab