<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Tabriz</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Journal of Philosophical Investigations</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2251-7960</Issn>
				<Volume>5</Volume>
				<Issue>9</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2012</Year>
					<Month>04</Month>
					<Day>20</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Descartes' Doubt as a 'Theory'</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>Descartes&#039; Doubt as a &#039;Theory&#039;</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>1</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>16</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">133</ELocationID>
			
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Masoud</FirstName>
					<LastName>Omid</LastName>
<Affiliation>Associate professor philosophy,Tabriz University</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2011</Year>
					<Month>11</Month>
					<Day>06</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>This article investigates the problem of doubt in Descartes&#039; philosophy from a different viewpoint. I tried to answer the question that if it is possible to have a maximal sight to describe Descartes&#039; methodic doubt? It seems to me we can consider Descartes’ doubt at least in two way (the “minimal” and the “maximal” sight); i.e., doubt as only a method or a principle, and as a theory. &lt;br /&gt;The methodic doubt, according to the most of Descartes&#039; commentators, is not considered as a theory but is a method or a principle. Nevertheless, here, I am trying to show and explain his doubt as a theory. &lt;br /&gt;The meaning of ‘theory’ in this article includes: a doctrine, a methodology, a skill, a function, and an application.</Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">This article investigates the problem of doubt in Descartes&#039; philosophy from a different viewpoint. I tried to answer the question that if it is possible to have a maximal sight to describe Descartes&#039; methodic doubt? It seems to me we can consider Descartes’ doubt at least in two way (the “minimal” and the “maximal” sight); i.e., doubt as only a method or a principle, and as a theory. &lt;br /&gt;The methodic doubt, according to the most of Descartes&#039; commentators, is not considered as a theory but is a method or a principle. Nevertheless, here, I am trying to show and explain his doubt as a theory. &lt;br /&gt;The meaning of ‘theory’ in this article includes: a doctrine, a methodology, a skill, a function, and an application.</OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Descartes</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Methodic Doubt</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Minimal and Maximal Sight</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Theory</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://philosophy.tabrizu.ac.ir/article_133_5842ee4452fc9cdc5fe57d3a0399b33f.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
