scepticism Flashcards
what is philosophical scepticism
- one or more of our usual methods for justifications for claiming our beliefs are knowledge are inadequate
- so we do not in fact have knowledge
what are the two types of scepticism with examples
- local = doubting ONE particular domain of knowledge or truth —> existence of God or other minds
- global = doubting ALL domains of knowledge or truth —> doubting existence of external world —> BinaV or evil demon
what is the difference between philosophical scepticism and normal incredulity
- normal = can be alleviated with ordinary evidence, has a practical impact and is a part of everyday life, challenges a SMALL NUMBER OF beliefs
- philosophical scepticism = cannot be alleviated with evidence, theoretical, more extreme, challenges MANY/ALL justifications/beliefs
what is the role of philosophical scepticism
- TEST the strengths of our knowledge
- REVEALS where we may be making unwarranted assumptions
- can ensure our reasoning is rigorous by testing all our claims
what is Moores response to scepticism of the external world and does it even work?
- two hands argument
- certain that he has two hands = a FOUNDATIONAL BELIEF = hard to reject it
- doesn’t actually solve concerns of existence of external world, how are we certain we have two hands
what was Lockes argument from involuntary senses
- used inductive argument
- we experience specific examples of INVOLUNTARY PERCEPTION so MOST LIKELY caused by MID external objects
- locke adds up each instance of his perceptions which are INVOLUNTARY and argues they constitute a good enough reason for thinking the external world exists
how does lockes argument from involuntary and coherent senses respond to scepticism of the external world
- our senses = involuntary = uncertain = caused by something external = external world
- NOT. a certain conclusion as INDUCTIVE arguments cannot lead to certain conclusions
what are two flaws with Lockes argument from involuntary perception
- IV alone is not enough to claim the EW likely exists
- we don’t control our dreaming but these are caused by our own mind
what was Lockes argument from coherent senses?
- senses = “stick together” and don’t cohere or contradict
- we can have the same perception of an object many times over
- or our other senses can support a different one
- BUT INDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
how does Lockes argument from coherent senses respond to scepticism of the existence of the external world
- senses = coherent = external world exists
- not a CERTAIN CONCLUSION as inductive arguments CANNOT lead to certain conclusions, only ones that are likely
- alone, not enough to reject BinaV
why might Lockes argument from coherent senses not be convincing
- we can have coherent dreams that seem like ordinary life but they obvs aren’t real
what does Locke actually think about scepticism
- impractical
- if we truly believed it didn’t exist we would act dangerously but there are consequences so we don’t actually bother
- another inductive argument but helps build convincing case with coherent senses and involuntary senses argument
- BUT sceptic = evil scientist is programming our perceptions to seem coherent/involuntary
what was Russels argument that the existence of the external world is the best hypothesis
- if we take the total of our perceptions and consider the best explanation, then we logically reach the conclusion for the EWs existance
- pet cat example, feed in morning, hungry by night so cat must be MID
- does exist = best hypothesis as it BEST EXPLAINS all our perceptions
how would Russel use his best hypothesis argument to respond to scepticism
- abductive argument - used in science - explain evidence from experiment
- strong as doesn’t rely on building up evidence on a case by case basis
- UNLIKE LOCKE, cannot be objected to by finding counter examples
two reasons why Russels best hypothesis argument is not convincing
- still doesn’t give us certainty
- idealism hypothesis = stronger
