1 An Evaluation of Rene Descartes’ Methodic Doubt By Ian Mart H. Lomboy I. Introduction In the realm of philosophical investigation of human knowledge, many theories were developed and endeavored to give different notions regarding the truth of knowledge or on the possibility of the certitude of knowledge. One of those theories was Skepticism; Skeptics believed and edified that truth in knowledge or certainty is impossible to attain and “this principle has come to be understood as the view that we know nothing, or that nothing is certain, or that everything is open to doubt”. 1 In the modern period, Rene Descartes argued that the human mind can attain certainty through a method which he called Methodic Doubt. This method explained that a person must first doubt all knowledge that has been accumulated, either previous or new knowledge, and then examine it to arrive at the point of certitude. The difference between the two theories, Skepticism and that of Rene Descartes, regarding the idea of Doubt in the approach of knowledge is that the skeptics begin in doubt and only end in doubt while for Descartes albeit started in doubt and in the end attempted to attain certainty. In line with the statements stated above the question was raised: Is the methodic Doubt of Rene Descartes a reasonable attempt to attain certainty? This study will endeavor to answer the question above to explain Rene Descartes’ theory of Methodic Doubt and to evaluate the plausibility of the theory. a. Scope and Limitation The scope of this study will be an evaluation and explanation of Rene Descartes’ concept of the Methodic Doubt. Since Rene Descartes’ Methodic Doubt is vague, the study will limit 1 Bary Stroud, The Significance of Philosophical Scepticism, (USA: Oxford University Press, 1984), vii.