example how the emotion anger may physically manifest in someone’s face turning red and their heart rate increasing, this is not to be confused as them being one concurrent entity. Rozemond’s ‘Real Distinction’ argument[9] encapsulates this, beginning with the premise that ‘I’ can doubt that I am extended but I cannot doubt (that is, I am certain) that I think. For any intrinsic properties α and β, conceptually speaking, if it is possible to doubt that something is β whilst not doubting (or being certain) that it is α, then α is not a mode or feature of β. With this in mind, knowing that extension is the principal attribute of the body, through the process of elimination, I can say that extension is not the principal attribute of the mind insofar as every substance is believed to have exactly one principal attribute. The substance of the mind, our thoughts, is not an extension of the substance of the body, ergo the mind is a different substance from the body. Working from this, if A and B are different substances, they must be really distinct, meaning that the mind must also be really distinct from the body out of essentiality. Descartes then proceeds to throw a ‘C’ into the mix – God. Certainty of perfect knowledge must rely on some universal standard of perfect knowledge, one which presupposes all other types of knowledge. To summarise his trademark argument, the mere fact that one exists and has within their perennial nature the ability to idealise over a perfect being like God proves that God exists, for all ideas are derivative apart from the idea of God[10]. Gassendi evaluated on Descartes’ proposition that an infinite entity (God) has more representative reality than that of a finite entity (humans). For surely as the human intellect is not capable of conceiving infinity, so too can’t it contemplate, or even have, any idea representative of an infinite entity[11]. Descartes held it to be false that the infinite is understood through the negotiation of a boundary or limit, for there is no limit to God’s power, the world has been created in such a way to reflect that it is for example simply impossible for God to create a rock which is too heavy for him to carry[12]. He draws on Gassendi’s claim that to attribute such divine traits is to use our intellects to simply amplify our own, adding that in amplifying these traits we make them greater than what they originally were, and although we don’t know everything there is to know of God, all the attributes we recognise are truly there. Moreover, he attends to the underestimation of questioning the cause of existence (as the causes of coming into existence were widely academically commented on up until that point). For example, the architect is the cause of the house, and a mother is the cause of her child, works only in the causes of their coming into being. Once the work on the house is completed and the child is born, they remain in existence with no further input from this kind of cause. But, the sun is the cause of the light it emits, and God is the cause of created things such as the sun, not just as causes of the coming-into-existence of these things, but als>