1. A letter to Mersenne, dated 15 April, 1630 (AT I, p.144) [As translated by Cottingham, Stoothoff, Murdoch, and Kenny in The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Volume III “The Correspondence”. (Cambridge University Press/ New York. 1991) p.22].

2. 15 April, 1630 (AT I, p.145) [p.23].

3. Indeed, this passage is repeated in the Fifth Set of Replies to The Meditations, with a small, though significant, addition: “But just as the poets suppose that the Fates were originally established by Jupiter, but that after they were established he bound himself to abide by them, so I do not think that the essences of things, and the mathematical truths which we can know concerning them, are independent of God. Nevertheless I do think that they are immutable and eternal, since the will and decree of God willed and decreed that they should be so.” (AT VII, p.380) [As translated by Cottingham, Stoothoff, and Murdoch in The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Volume II. (Cambridge University Press/ New York. 1984) p.261]

4. Descartes’ The World, Chapter 7 (AT XI, p.47). [As translated by Cottingham, Stoothoff, and Murdoch in The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Volume I. (Cambridge University Press/ New York. 1985) p.97].

5. From Descartes’ Discourse on the Method of rightly conducting one’s reason and seeking the truth in the sciences, Part Five (AT VI, p.41). [The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Volume I. p.131].

6. A letter to Mersenne, dated 6 May, 1630 (AT I, p.149) [The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Volume III “The Correspondence”. p.24].

7. 15 April, 1630 (AT I, p.145) [p.23], emphasis mine.

8. 6 May, 1630 (AT I, p.150) [p.24].

9. The Third Meditation (AT VII, pp.38-9) [The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Volume II. p.27].

10. Indeed, Descartes is quite clear concerning the apprehension of truths, whether of corporeal or non-corporeal things: “... the mind does not receive any corporeal semblance; the pure understanding both of corporeal and incorporeal things occurs without any corporeal semblance.” (From The Fifth Set of Replies (AT VII, p.387) [p.265])

11. The Fifth Meditation (AT VII, p.64) [The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Volume II. p.45].

12. A letter to Mersenne, dated 27 May, 1630 (AT I, p.152) [The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Volume III “The Correspondence”. p.25].

13. The completeness here is not inconsistent with the notion that the infinite necessarily exceeds comprehension. The completeness of the intellect’s apprehension is framed entirely with respect to the inferential framework within which a particular object (or aspect of some object) exists.

14. The Fifth Set of Replies (AT VII, p.368) [p.253]. Some of the translators’ language has been altered for clarity; most significantly, I have chosen to replace “grasp” with the more literally accurate “comprehend” in those places I felt the meaning was being unnecessarily obscured (leaving “grasp” in place were that word’s connotations were appropriately revealing).

15. The Fifth Meditation (AT VII, p.67) [p.46].

16. The Fifth Meditation (AT VII, pp.67-68) [pp.46-47].

17. The Fifth Meditation (AT VII, p.68) [p.47].

18. 15 April, 1630 (AT I, p.146) [p.23].

19. 6 May, 1630 (AT I, p.150) [p.25].

20. The Sixth Set of Replies, in the Objections and Replies to The Meditations (AT VII, p.429) [The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Volume II. p.290].

21. The Fifth Meditation (AT VII, p.66) [p.46].

22. The Sixth Set of Replies (AT VII, p.436) [p.294].

23. 27 May, 1630 (AT I, p.153) [p.26].

24. The Sixth Set of Replies (AT VII, p.432) [p.291].

25. The Sixth Set of Replies (AT VII, p.436) [p.294].

26. 27 May, 1630 (AT I, p.152) [p.25].

27. The Sixth Set of Replies (AT VII, p.436) [p.294].

28. See note 25.

29. The Sixth Set of Replies (AT VII, p.428) [p.289].