Parts of Descartes' skeptical method:
Dream Argument
Arch Deceiver Argument
! Senses are unreliable !

The foundation of knowledge that can't be doubted: "I exist"
Doubting--->Doubter
Deception--->Deceiver
Thinking--->Thinker

Contigo ergo sun: "I think therefore I am"
(I exist, at least as a conscious entity)

(Empericist)
Hum's criticism:There is no "I" or self
-The self is a bundle of perceptions
-no thinking thing or substance
-can't go from states of consciousness
to a conscious entity or being
The "mind" is a theater where perceptions perform.
Is the bundle metaphor compatible with the theater metaphor?

(Empiricist)
Berkley-will or intention proves thinking things exist
Decartes:
I exist--> How did I conclude "I exist"?
a priori deduction, "I exist" is
clear and distinct (self evident)
God exists--> "God"is a perfect being-A
perfect being must contain
all perfections
Existence is a perfection
God is no deceiver
Knowledge is possible
An external world exists--> God exists
The senses corrected by reason can be trusted

Hume:one can't concept reality
need to ask of every idea
-from what sense impression is the
supposed idea derived?
Perceptions
-Impressions: lively and vivacious (sense)
-Ideas: faint copies of impressions

Causation:!a) priority in time: cause
preceeds the effects
!b) contiguity: objects, touch
Xc) necessary connection