This short paper is to analyze the possible answers given by David Hume and Renee Descartes
             to the question by Betrand Russell "Is there any knowledge in the world which is so certain no
             man could doubt it?" Descartes thorough his theory would show the existence of person
             beyond doubt, whereas Humes' theory would show that the existence of a person could not be
             valid. While discussing their possible answers I will also explain how their theories
             I will begin with Renee Descartes. I believe his answer to the question by Russell, "Is
             there any knowledge in the world which is so certain that no reasonable man could doubt it?"
             I would be "Yes". Descartes proved through his "Method of Doubt" that a his existence and
             that God existed beyond any doubt. Descartes' philosophical method was the "Method of
             Doubt". He felt that through this method he could establish a basis of knowledge. He had
             four main rules that he follows while considering a problem.
             1) Never accept anything except clear and distinct ideas.
             2) Divide each problem into as many parts as needed to solve it.
             3) Order your thoughts from the simple to the complex.
             4) Always check thoroughly for oversights.
             (Mastin, 2008)
             If the problem could pass his "Method of Doubt" then he would consider it to be a truth.
             He started by doubting everything, his senses included. He doubted that he had a body.
             He argued that the body could be just a dream or an illusion created by an "evil demon".
             This "evil demon" was trying to mislead him. After all, even in dreams he felt he had a body but he was dreaming and not aware. This could have been an illusion to mislead him. The one problem that the "evil demon" could not mislead him about was the "act of thinking". His reasoning here was tha
             ...