Untitled Essay Research Paper Question Can scepticism

  • Просмотров 172
  • Скачиваний 5
  • Размер файла 18

Untitled Essay, Research Paper Question: Can scepticism be defended, perhaps in a limited form ?1. Introduction This essay centres around what it means to know something is true and also why it is important to distinguish between what you know and do not or can not know. The sceptic in challenging the possibility of knowing anything challenges the basis on which all epistemology is based. It is from this attack on epistemology that the defence of scepticism is seen. 2. Strong Scepticism Strong scepticism states that it is not possible to know anything. That is we cannot have absolute knowledge of anything. This can however immediately have the reflexive argument turned on it and have the question begged of it: “If it is not possible to know anything then how is it you know

that nothing is knowable ?”. Strong Scepticism is therefore unable to be defended. 3. A Definition of Knowledge Knowledge can be said to be information that the brain has received that meets a certain set of criteria. When someone states that they know something they must also believe that, that something is so. If they did not believe in it then how could they take it in as knowledge ?, they would instead be doubtful of it and look for evidence or justification as to why they should believe it. Secondly for someone to believe in something they must also believe that it is true. If they did not believe that it was true then what is mentioned above would not occur. So, so far it is decided that knowledge should be true belief. How does one come to the conclusion that something

is true however ?. We seek justification. The justification really is the most important part of the criteria because without it one cannot say something is true and therefore cannot say that one believes. This does however bring up the question of how does something become justified ?, do we hear it from other people ?, see it on the news ?. The justification of something really depends on its predictability. If something becomes predictable then it can becomes justified aswell. For example, I know that the sun will rise tomorrow is a fair thing to say because I believe this is so, I believe this is true, and I am justified in believing this due to my past experience* of the predictableness of the sun rising each day. The only problem with meeting the set of criteria laid out

above is that one must use one senses to do so and as shall be shown in the next section they are not the most reliable of instruments. 4. Perceptions A persons sensual perceptions are generally their means of receiving information but how much can we trust our senses ?. Two examples of a persons sensual perception leading them astray are as follows. Two people are looking at a white object. The first person is looking at the object through a transparent red sheet and the other through a transparent green sheet. Neither person knows that the sheets are there so both come away with different conclusions and perceptions as to what colour the object in front of them is. (Cornman, Lehrer, Pappas, 1992, pp. 46-47) Another example is when two people are looking at an oblong object from

different angles one may see a perfect rectangle the other a perfect square. (Cornman, Lehrer, Pappas, 1992, pp. 46-47) The point I am making here is that sensual perceptions are all relevant to the position of the observer. This is not a good situation for something that we contrive to get justification for our knowledge from. 5. The Brain in the Vat Argument This argument is similar to the one in Plato’s republic in that it involves an imaginary situation where the people or person involved believes that they have knowledge (Plato, Cave Analogy, Book VII). In the brain in the vat example the brain believes that it is a fully functioning human being and there exists an external world around it. The reason for the brain believing that it knows this is that it has reasonable