I died, therefore I remain a mystery: the death of Descartes

A cheerfully neat article within today's edition of the Guardian beckons the suggestion that a man considered to be the founding father of modern philosophy, Rene Descartes, the arbiter of epistemological doubt and metaphysical speculation, was in fact 'removed' by a member of the cynical Catholic fold on 11th February 1650.

Rene Descartes, aged 53 in the year of his death, was the French philosopher renowned for his studies in mathematics, his contributions to the Scientific Revolution alongside other greats like Locke and Newton and his unique theories on the nature of being; he also tailored his own treatise on the passions, named Passions of the Soul, which was a key element of Rousseau's work.

The nature of Descartes death is synonymous with the beguiling nature of his work. Although it is known officially that Descartes died 11/02/1650, the century 17th in which other philosophers began to instil the movement towards Modern Philosophy, the cause of death remains uncertain.

The most common details attributed to his death suppose pneumonia as the main diagnosis of his condition prior to dying; reasons for this belief stem from the circumstances in which he was operating hitherto death, such as a compromising of his immune system through lack of sleep - he was notorious for fastidious labouring over his notes.

But after a recent publication by Cartesian expert and academic Theodor Ebert of the University of Erlangen, it has been brought forward that Descartes may have actually been the victim of religiously motivated foul play. Ebert purports in his book, entitled The Mysterious Death of Rene Descartes, that Jacques Viogue, a Catholic priest on mission in Stockholm, poisoned the iconic Descartes using a communion wafer laced with arsenic.

This obviously conflicts with traditional folklore relating to Descartes' ambiguous demise, but Ebert provides what he sees as compelling evidence that the eminent mind Descartes did suffer an act of 'forced redemption' at the hands of a defensive Catholic missionary. Ebert's argument inherits a lot of its weight from the fact that Descartes was famous for pushing the boundaries of antiquated dark ages philosophy, which was residual from the classical Greek period of history.

Such intense developments against old world views were mired in controversy by the Catholic church and Rome, who saw liberal thinking and theological expansion as a threat to their cause, or more likely their livelihoods. Ebert reasons that Descartes posed a possible danger to the catholic conversion of the monarch of protestant Sweden at the time.

Ironically enough Descartes claimed to be a devout Roman Catholic, so a conspiracy to have has influence skimmed with a dash of arsenic by none other than a Catholic priest would be akin to the silencing of Galileo for his own astrological endeavours.

The notion itself is tilting towards the humorous, as it concurs with Descartes' critical analyses of all aspects of existence. His cogito hypothesis - I think, therefore I am - is of historical acclaim for its subjective rationalism, but for Descartes' death to be something of speculation and a case of doubt of cause is only to be expected given the whole metaphysical ethos which he fathered.