Write a paper argues that Descartes’ method of doubts; doubting a belief (uncertainty) is viewed as a negative behaviour although the use of this method had provided a lot to the world we’re living in today

How doubting helped modern science (doubt leads to knowledge)
– develop an argument
– describe how the cartesian method effected other scientists such as Newton
– describe the outcomes of applying this method
– how did it affect modern science

number of sources is not important but the more the better

+ i attached my proposal it might help

Some comments i got from the instructor regarding my argumentive points:
This paper argues that Descartes’ method of doubts; doubting a belief (uncertainty) is viewed as a negative behaviour although the use of this method had provided a lot to the world we’re living in today, where it’s appliance had supported a variety of scientists in generating other multiple methods that contributed to the emergence of science.Whereas vast scientists that mostly left a fingerprint till our recent time were inspired by that method. lastly, the series of philosophical objections between scientists is basically another method of doubt; where they did doubt each others work but this only spawned answers to unsolved mysteries. Overall, in religious & society basis doubting nature raises a red flag although it only showed positive outcomes.

Cartesian doubt is an example of modern thinking that not only provides modern science with a way of knowing the natural world but also demonstrates the power of skepticism to doubt other traditional elements.

unfolded a method that demonstrates the power of skepticism as you have mentioned; thus in his time it was viewed as abnormal or in other words strange.

when he developed his method it conflicted with many traditional views, although there is (in terms of engagement) consistency with certain Catholic traditions, such as the rigorous academic thinking by Jesuits and even the focus on the importance of rationality by Scholastic thinkers, such as Thomas Aquinas. So, you just need to be specific rather than general as you work through your argument.