None

Descartes philosophical aim and method in Meditations is somewhat complex. In first Meditation Descartes tells us how many, if not all things, can come into doubt. This is possible as long as we don't have any past teachings or foundations in concerns to what is in doubt. With no past foundations, we will no longer be able to have doubt placed upon something. From there we can finally discover the truth. Descartes basic premise is that we aren't willing to doubt, because of the foundations that have been given or taught to us. We can't begin to doubt until we clear or reconstruct our foundations.

Descartes speaks of an absolute and unshakeable foundation in Meditation. This idea to me means, when we begin to doubt or question the truth of something, we must be able to do so from a pure beginning. Our foundation, which is what we already know or have been taught, must be cleared. We can't take into consideration what we think we know. We have to be ready to take in new information and examine it to find the truth. When we don't know if our foundation is truthful we are allowed to be in continuous doubt. Descartes says we should have a "general demolition" and begin on an absolutely unshakeable ground. Without the process of general demolition and an unshakeable foundation everything will continue to be uncertain. We can not just take everything for granted, but we will have no choice to unless we test and question our foundation's truth. Descartes gives us the example of his dream argument. He says that it is hard to distinguish between being asleep and being awake. One would think that when asleep is the only time you can dream, but is that necessarily true. Our foundation has told us that we can't dream and be awake. Has this notation been questioned or doubted? It must be doubted, and we must continue to doubt it until we revamp our beginnings.

Almost all things should be doubted, but Descartes introduces his method of radical doubt. Descartes' radical doubt is the method of not accepting anything as true unless it hits him as distinctively true. He says that there is no need to doubt every individual opinion; we need only to undermine the foundations, attack the principles. Everything is able to be doubted, but there are things that you should not have to doubt. You should not have to continue to doubt these things because your foundation was already true and