In his third meditation on first philosophy, Rene Descartes proceeds to ponder the

possibility of a god while exploring potential ways to logically verify his existence.
On his mental journey, Descartes acknowledges that before verifying the existence
of a perfect being, he must first verify what knowledge he is certain of as to
establish a foundation on which his analysis may rest. This audacious endeavor
reduces Descartes to nothing more than a state of existence from which he begins
to differentiate between intrinsic precepts, extrinsic ideas, and conceptual
fabrications.
At this point, Descartes begins discriminating between different varieties of though
as he eventually comes to prod at the very nature of ideas and whether they
represent other existences besides himself. After some syllogistic deliberation,
Descartes concludes that he does indeed have a certain awareness of existences
other than himself. He affirms this by associating the formal reality of an idea with a
cause, or original existence, and the objective reality of an idea with the effect, or
internal existence. As such, Descartes argues that an effect cannot exist without a
cause, and that for an idea to exist, even be it fabricated by ones self or a deceiver,
one must have first observed or based the idea of some basic corporeal existence.
It is at this point, upon the confirmation of corporeal existences besides ones self,
that the question must be begged; is math a form of certain knowledge? Descartes
fails to answer this question consistently. At times he appears to suggest that two
plus three will always result in an outcome of five, while at other times he surmises
that mathematical precepts as we know them could just as easily be the fabrication
of an omnipotent deceiver.
I would personally concur with the second Descartes that even the most basic of
mathematical concepts cannot be deemed indisputable knowledge. There are
certain qualities of the universe that host properties of an infinite expanse such as
the endless frontier of space or the infinite divisibility of matter. This provides
infinite instances in which mathematical concepts can attempt to theoretically
represent something as it is in the universe. It is at this point that math must be
acknowledged as an extremely accurate measure of the world as it is as opposed to
a precise representation. This is because the mathematical process is inherently
derived from trial and error. When we are children and we are first confronted with
the mathematical problem of one plus one, we do not innately know the answer.
Instead, we are taught that the answer is two, and we proceed to prove this to
ourselves counting out two objects. This is trial one, and over the course of our life
we continue to put one plus one to the test, each time increasing the likelihood that
next time the answer will be two. But because math is a process of trial and error,
we can only establish rules to a degree of accuracy and never certainty. While the
three interior angles of a triangle may have added up to 180 degrees in every
combination we have tried thus far, it is impossible for a human with a finite
lifespan or even a computer with a finite processing power to test the Pythagorean
Theorem for every possible fraction of a degree. If we are attempting to use math to

describe the world as it is, we will never be able to obtain one hundred percent
accuracy with a trial and error process as there would have to be infinite trials
conducted.
While this infinitesimal degree of doubt in mathematical possesses is negligible in
our daily lives, it is entirely prevalent in the philosophy of Descartes as he argues
that any amount of uncertainty is enough to omit an idea as non-foundational to his
concept of first philosophy.