Descartes' Method of Doubt?

Question

I'm no expert in this subject, just a student trying to write a paper. But in the middle of it, I got stuck and his method did not make sense to me anymore.

I wrote:

"Although each opinion could be examined for a fallacy individually, starting from the foundation of these which they built upon would demolish numerous opinions at once. For example, rather than analyzing that..."

And then I couldn't think of an example with an opinion that had a foundation that questioned anything other than its own existence. "Do I exist... Does this exist... etc" Isn't that the foundation for everything? What else can be considered as a foundation for anything other than questioning its existence?

I know I have this completely wrong. So could someone give me examples of what he meant?

Thank you :]

Answer 1

To avoid being deceived he started from an extreme position of skepticism.

As such he reasoned that he should doubt he existed.

But things that do not exist are not capable of doubting that they exist.

He was forced to conclude that he exists because he was capable of doubt.

If you are going to refute Descarte, then you will have to show how he or rather "I" is does not exist.

Answer 2

he was afraid of demons playing tricks much like illusions that you see in magic shows. because there is doubt as whether something is true, he rejects it. in the end, he arrive at his famous i think therefor i am, which basically means thought itself exist. in other words, if he doubted, then something is doing the doubting therefore at least the doubter exist, even if it's just a thought.

there are systems that does not question itself. one could be found in very simple and unprofound system. indeed, a system of sufficient power is incomplete, inconsistent, and/or contain funny statements where it describes about itself as well as other things, which again could be argued it expressing itself. metaphysically, one can escape the system of sufficient power with nonduality, transcendence, or quasi-logic.