Why Did Rene Descartes Do Not Exist

In Descartes’ First Meditation, Descartes reasons through the idea of whether he is dreaming or not, based off his Criterion of Doubt. Descartes claims that you know something only if you have no reason to doubt it. Descartes beliefs are grounded in a priori truths, and he will not take knowledge from experience into consideration when defining knowledge. Descartes considers that the only thing he can know for sure, is that he exists. Even though he exists as some form of thinking thing, he would still argue that he cannot know whether he has a physical body in which his mind exists. Descartes would make the following argument for the fact that he cannot know whether he has a physical body or not:
Premise 1: I know something only if I have no reason to doubt it.
If the second premise is extended, it would state that: ‘I have reason to doubt that I have a physical body, because I come to know of my physical body through my senses, and knowledge acquired a posteriori is uncertain.’ The argument for the reliability of a posteriori truths was already addressed when examining the first premise. If we are left with a basket of perfectly good apples, is there still a reason to doubt a physical existence? Yes, but it isn’t because I can’t trust my senses. If my entire life has been a lie, and everything I see, including my physical body, are configurations of my mind, then I cannot know whether this is reality. Reality could be that I am just my mind, and that I have no body. I cannot determine whether there is a body attached with my mind in this reality, as this has been the only reality I have experienced in my lifetime. Descartes would go about the second premise by making a similar argument, only he would assert that he could possibly be dreaming, because he cannot trust his sense. There is still reason to doubt that I have a physical body, because of the possibility that I could be dreaming and everything in the dream is a