Objects	Quality	Objects	Quality
Knowledge of God	Easy and Clear	Knowledge of World	Eas Difficult and Unclear
Knowledge of Soul	Easy and Clear	Knowledge of Body	Difficult and Unclear
Knowledge of Myself	Easy and Clear	Knowledge of Others	Difficult and Unclear

Criteria:	Strictly speaking the above analogy suggests only that we should not look into the world of objects but to our own inwardness as the source of reliable knowledge. It does not support other Cartesian characteristics (criteria) of knowledge: clarity, easiness, obviousness, validity, etc. They are Descartes' own standards of knowledge that he now regards as commonly accepted. What does he profess to accomplish? To provide demonstrations that will be: easy, clear, valid, obvious, certain, evident, reliable, exact.
Characteristics	The following list is a partial inventory of Cartesian attributes for knowledge:
	Rational Easy Clear Careful Exact Demonstrable Evident Certain Obvious Methodical Fundamental Critical Reliable Valid
Origin:	What is the origin of these criteria? Mathematics. Certainty, obviousness, clarity, exactness, validity are terms that make sense when applied to mathematical propositions. Descartes is to be credited with the introduction of these criteria into modern scientific thinking which gradually emerged in the 17th century. What is the implicit objective of these parameters (certain method, carefully elaborated, critically applied)? Mastery over nature, control over the world.
Method	Only methodical knowledge deserves to be regarded as knowledge and only methodically secured procedures are exempt from further doubts.
Proofs	Almost all arguments for the existence of God and the immortality of soul are "valid demonstrations". So there is no need for new ones - it is questionable whether new arguments could be invented at all. Therefore the task is just to select "critically and carefully" the best ones and to provide a clear and exact presentation of them. This is the reason why Descartes did not give a comprehensive survey of them - this would be necessary only if there is none absolutely certain and convincing.
Novelty	Descartes denies the novelty of his proofs and his method. The proofs are taken from the history while the method is as old a the truth itself. But he cannot conceal that his presentation of the proofs and his application of the method are in fact new.
	"I have put in this treatise everything that I was able to discover about this subject." I (ego subject) -> Subject (object) Bearer of perceptions Bearer of qualities
Soul	Soul is a composite entity. Plus an ambiguous idea. Hence it is difficult to define it, let alone to prove its immortality. Descartes believes he can circumvent the problem by insisting only on its distinct nature vis-a-vis the body. The refutation of epiphenomenalism should be the basis for the proof of soul's immortality. This revision of the traditional argument is the decisive innovation that strenghtens Descartes in his belief that he has resolved the controversy. Which explains why Descartes now speaks just about the distinction and not about the immortality of the soul.
Demonstrations:	Descartes says that his philosophical demonstrations should equal those of geometry. In itself this is quite a statement. But he also adds that they will even surpass them? How is it possible? The answer is to be found in the 2nd and 3rd Meditation. The truths of mathematics could be affected by an evil demon, the truths of epistemology are resistant to the machinations of a powerful trickster.
Requirements	- Freedom of Prejudices (including common sense); - Detachment from the Senses; - Ability to Discern Intricate Arguments; - Capacity to follow Protracted Arguments; These pretty demanding requirements hold both for Mathematics and Philosophy; however, common perceptions of mathematics and philosophy are very different.
Differences:	There is no valid demonstration in mathematics that has ever been disputed, let alone rejected. There is no demonstration in philosophy that has ever been accepted as the ultimate and irrefutable truth. On the contrary, it seems that philosophy argues for both sides which only aggravates the situation. In philosophy people tend to play devil's advocate at all rate. This explains why so many valid demonstrations about the existence of God and the immortality of the soul have been unrecognized.
	Expectation Argumentation Position Inclination Geometry Everything could be demonstrated. Arguing only one way and side Acceptance based on Authority Acceptance of defective demonstrations. Philosophy Almost nothing could be demonstrated. Arguing either side in multiple ways Dismissal based on Incomprehension Rejection of valid demonstrations.
	He thought that his arguments were like complicated and prolonged geometrical proofs that are understood by a few but accepted by all on the basis of the expert authority. What makes these arguments difficult to understand?
Difficulties	The arguments are lengthy. The arguments are involved. The arguments require freedom of prejudices. The arguments require freedom of sensory images.
Limitation:	Independent from these difficulties Descartes realized the limitations of his epistemological criteria. Ultimately these are subjective and psychologically conditioned. Very few people are fitted for philosophical arguments and demonstrations. In fact, much fewer can comprehend them than geometrical proofs. Therefore, despite all their convincing features, philosophical demonstrations cannot persuade the many, and especially not the outsiders and the atheists. Descartes does not want to produce new arguments. Only to sort out those that are most evident and certain from the tradition and to present them properly. But even then he cannot expect universal acceptance without public approbation of the authorities.
Approbation:	Why did Descartes ask for approbation / support of an ecclesiastical body (the faculty of Sorbonne was not just an educational institution and certainly not a research oriented group)?
	How can we decide what was really on his mind? This is what he himself says about his expectations from the theologians. To provide support. To correct possible errors. To add what is necessary. To make the work complete. To give advice. To improve the work. To grant approbation.
Awe	It was not unrealistic to expect that theologians could have corrected and completed the work in a way conducive to Descartes' goals. They were in high esteem not only in the "divine philosophy" (theology) but also in "human philosophy" (worldly philosophy). If this was his motive then the dedication came because he truly respected the Church, the theological faculty of the Sorbonne, and was a sincere believer, though a bit presumptuous and misguided. The fact is that he criticized the atheists, and regarded himself a faithful.
Self-Protection	Another possibility would surmise a deliberate attempt to use the authority of theology to avoid persecution. In other words Descartes turned to the powerful theological faculty because he was smart and eager to 'cover his buts'; he did not want to experience the same fate as Galileo particularly in view of his deviation from the accepted theological procedures.
Benefit	There is a third possibility that combines both previous theories but adds some other motives. The theologians were supposed to provide protection and authority for the work at once. He believed that the existence of God needed to be secured in order to be able to establish other truths. He was convinced that the two main doctrines could be proved without the assistance of theology, but he knew that the intricacy and length of his proofs would prevent many to accept them without the support of an authoritative body.
Promotion	He was more interested in promoting his work than in securing self-protection. Descartes sincerely believed that this sponsorship could be beneficial for the acceptance of his arguments simply because he knew the power of authority and the strength of human inclination to go with it. Thus his reasons were rather psychological and practical than "logical". He truly hoped that public approbation would efface all false (contrary) opinions from the minds of the people. If everything went well everyone would be eventually convinced in the correctness of his arguments. First the learned and the wise will subscribe to the truth, then atheists will follow suit and finally the broad public (the many).
Explanation:	The main reason for requesting the sponsorship is therefore the wish to get certain ideas across. Descartes wanted to be effective in promoting his views on the existence of God and the immortality of the soul. He wanted to reach both the educated and the uneducated. Theologians were needed to provide the expected support and authority for the new claims. Basically Descartes offered the theologians to serve religion by serving his plan. In their eyes, this was certainly presumptuous which explains their cold reaction.