Term Paper on "Skepticism Against"

Term Paper 10 pages (2816 words) Sources: 1 Style: APA

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Skepticism

Against Skepticism

One of the key problems in the history of epistemological inquiry is that of skepticism. There are some moderate skeptics who have argued that knowledge is theoretically possible. There are some skeptics, however, who are more radical in their views. They feel that the attainment of true knowledge is not possible. Indeed, the deep truth that that the skeptic brings out is the fact that it is quite difficult to determine from whence knowledge comes. I believe that one finds the answer to this in Reid, who came to the conclusion that there was no real way of knowing how one attains knowledge - whether it derives from purely internal processes, the external world, or some combination thereof.

Against Skepticism

One of the key problems in the history of epistemological inquiry is that of skepticism. The philosophical argument behind skepticism is that one does not have knowledge at a given moment. There are some moderate skeptics who have argued that knowledge is theoretically possible. Some even believe that this was Socrates's view. To be precise, Socrates seems to have felt that if people continue to ask questions, then over time they will develop a form of knowledge. At the moment, however, most people who are not enlightened philosophically do not have this knowledge.

There are some skeptics, however, who are more radical in their views. They feel that the attainment of true knowledge is not possible. One famous example of such a school was the Academicians in Ancient Greece, after the time of Carneades.

There is, however, a third skeptical approach to the problems. That would be to neither accept nor reject the possibility of attaining knowledge.

We can further distinguish between two different types of skeptics: global and local. This distinction can be made regarding whether the skeptic directs their skepticism towards everything in general or specific ideas, respectively. Global skeptics feel that there is no way to absolutely know whether anything is true or false. It is hard to defend such an argument, however, as it requires that absolutely nothing be known - with the exception of the knowledge that nothing can be known, which seems to be a contradiction. Those who identify themselves as global skeptics may attempt to get around this problem by stating that they are "reasonably certain" that their total skepticism is true, while simultaneously refusing to assert that skepticism itself can be "known" to be true. For these individuals, even an argument advanced in favor of skepticism is not necessarily true. While skepticism can thus be upheld in arguing that skepticism itself is subject to skepticism, it also concedes to the fact that skepticism can never be proven or confirmed as a doctrine. Of course, this does not bother a true Pyrrhonian global skeptic, as he will argue that, from a subjective standpoint, he does not know anything and thus cannot make assertions about the true possibilities of knowledge.

Local skeptics, on the other hand, feel that individuals may have knowledge about specific areas. This, of course, is the less radical form of skepticism. Local skeptics tend to be skeptical about certain forms of knowledge, but remain undoubtful about others. In different fields of inquiry, different forms of skepticism may emerge. A person may believe in the existence of the external world, for instance, while remaining skeptical about the existence of certain phenomena in that world.

Those who identify as anti-skeptics typically argue that if an individual does not know anything, then there is no way of knowing that one knows nothing. Thus, that person may indeed know something after all. Such an argument, however, only succeeds when you have an absolute denial of the possibility of knowledge.

Thomas Reid formulated one famous anti-skeptic position. Reid started out by considering the possibility that the skeptic may be right - that perception, through which philosophers have traditionally assumed we use to attain knowledge, is unreliable. At the same time, one must concede that perception is merely one of many cognitive processes. Therefore, if perception is not reliable, then all of one's other cognitive processes must also be unreliable. Since all of one's faculties derive from the same source, Reid reasoned, then all of them must be fallible if one of them is. This also means, however, that the faculty of reasoning, which everyone - including the skeptic - uses in formulating arguments, must also be unreliable. Thus, whenever one reasons, one is bound to make a lot of mistakes. Whenever we dare to make an argument, then, we can never really trust the veracity of what we are arguing. This would have to apply to the skeptic's arguments in favor of skepticism, as well. So even if the skeptic happens to be right, then we should not pay attention to what he is arguing, because the processes he uses to arrive there are inherently flawed. If the skeptic is wrong, then of course skepticism should also be ignored. Thus, it is not necessary to take skepticism seriously, either way.

In formulating an argument against skepticism, it is worthwhile to also take into consideration the famous argument made by G.E. Moore. Moore in many ways elaborated and expounded upon Reid's philosophy through a very simple formulation. Moore's response to the skeptic involved a common "everyday" type of proposition: the idea that the philosopher had two hands. Such a claim must be intuitive. As such, it is inconsistent with the typical skeptic argument that we might be nothing more than headless brains in vats. If the philosopher is aware that he has two hands, then he cannot be a headless brain in a vat. This second claim is also intuitive. From these two claims, Moore deduced that he knows he is not a headless brain in a vat.

While, at the outset, Moore's claim seems to be infallible, a number of objections have arisen in recent years to dash Moore's conclusions. According to Pritchard (2005), chief among these is the dialectical impropriety objection, which may be summarized as follows:

don't know that I'm not a headless brain in a vat.

If I know that I have two hands, then I know that I'm not a headless brain in a vat.

I don't know that I have two hands.

This clearly elucidates what a typical skepticist response might be to Moore's famous postulation. Furthermore, just as Moore's initial formulation was intuitive, so are the first two premises in the skepticist response above. Thus, while the Moorean concludes that he feels secure in his anti-skeptical bias because he has intuitively derived his conclusion from everyday propositions, the skeptic replies that we have no way of truly attaining this everyday knowledge.

A second objection to the Moorean postulation, according to Pritchard (2002), is the impasse objection. This is a critical response that has it that the skeptic response elucidated above has just has much force as Moore's argument, in that both are equally derived from intuition. Thus, Moore's postulation represents little more than a draw with regards to the skeptic argument.

The third objection to Moore, as raised by Wittgenstein, is the conversational impropriety objection. This has it that the way Moore formulates his argument is inappropriate in a conversational manner, in that we do not typically say, "I know that x" when we are asserting our knowledge of something; rather, we just state x itself.

Furthermore, Moore's proposition, when examined closely, contains no supporting epistemology. It contains no proper means for showing us, through empirical means, how we might come to know that we are not just headless brains in vats; thus, it fails to answer the skeptic's chief concern. Connected to this is the inherent simplicity of Moore's argument. Surely, skepticism cannot be so easy to refute with a three-line refutation and no supporting theoretical argument. This shows us that Moore's argument does not bother to diagnose the problem that skepticism poses. It is thus too simplistic in its assertion.

As Pritchard's inquiry continues, however, it soon becomes apparent that chief among the problems with the Moorean formulation is the fact that it does not engage with that aspect of skepticism that targets the evidential basis of knowledge. Such a formulation extends back to the ancient Pyrrohnian skeptical writings, and states that one's knowledge has to be supported by evidence, and the evidential support favors what is believed over alternatives that are known to be incompatible. As Pritchard writes elsewhere,

So construed, the problem seems entirely uncontentious, since it is hard to see how one's evidence could be genuinely supporting evidence if it did not perform this 'favouring' function. The trouble is, however, that once one feeds skeptical hypotheses into this principle then one immediately generates the skeptical problem. This is because if you know that, for example, you have two hands, and you also know that having hands is inconsistent with being a BIV, then it follows, via underdetermination, that your evidence for believing that you have hands must favour your belief that… READ MORE

How to Reference "Skepticism Against" Term Paper in a Bibliography

Related Term Papers:

Doubt Is the Key Knowledge Essay

Doubt Is the Key Knowledge: To What Extent Is This True in Two Areas of Knowledge

"Doubt is the key to knowledge"(Persian proverb) to what extent is this true in… read more

Essay 4 pages (1417 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Philosophy / Logic / Reason

---

Applied Management and Decision Sciences Thesis

management and decision sciences from various theorists; and, analyzes the evolution of managerial decision making from scientific management to the complicated forecasting models used today. The objectives of the Breadth… read more

Thesis 90 pages (25680 words) Sources: 40 Topic: Management / Organizations

---

Believability in Business Research as John Kmetz Term Paper

Believability in Business Research

As John Kmetz implies, the information explosion and concomitant technological developments have had widespread implications for believability in research. Research has become both easier and more… read more

Term Paper 5 pages (1304 words) Sources: 4 Style: MLA Topic: Literature / Poetry

---

Tenure: Perceptions of Online Professors Essay

Post Tenure



The Perceptions of Online Professors Regarding Tenure and Post-Tenure Review



Over the course of several months, researchers here have compiled a wealth… read more

Essay 20 pages (5554 words) Sources: 24 Topic: Education / Teaching / Learning

---

Life After Work Research Proposal

Life After Work: A Case Study

Although retirement is almost never the primary issue in most working young adult's minds, most all Americans have come to expect and even look… read more

Research Proposal 6 pages (1996 words) Sources: 4 Style: APA Topic: Economics / Finance / Banking

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>