Descartes Vs Hume

Through this essay I will compare similarities and differences of two major philosophers of our philosophical history, René Descartes and David Hume. Like many others they both had the objective tounderstand and explain what knowledge was and where it came from. They both approached this objective through a skeptical point of view leaving no room for absolute knowledge. They both had differentideas and concepts and I will compare them in this essay.
Descartes and Hume were both skeptical about what knowledge was and how it could be achieved however in order to be able to compare thedifferences and similarities of both their arguments we must first know what being skeptical is. Skepticism is that “we cannot have knowledge of any propositions in some particular domain normallythought to be within our ken” (Peter Klein). In other words we cannot have an absolute knowledge or truth of something. They both were skeptical however they differ in their responses to skepticism. Forexample, Descartes, who was a Rationalist (one who believes in reason as the best guide for belief and action), could be viewed as skeptical about the possibility of empirical knowledge while notbeing skeptical with regard to a priori knowledge as to Hume, a Empiricist (one who believes the doctrine that knowledge derives from experience) could be seen as skeptical about the possibility of apriori knowledge but not so with regard to empirical knowledge. You might now ask yourself “How can Descartes and Hume have things in common if their ideologies are almost contradictory?” Well they havesimilar views on certain things even if they end up with a different final opinion or ideology.
One thing they have in common is that they both had a believe that in order to really understandknowledge or make parallel progress we would have to modify preconceived opinions. This can be considered Foundationalism which is to set a good and basic foundation of beliefs or ideas in order to...