ipl-logo

The Skeptical Argument Analysis

1495 Words6 Pages

The Skeptical Argument: Hands and Brains-in-Vats (BIVs) Premise 1 (P1): If I know that I've hands, I know that I'm not a handless brain-in-a-vat. Premise 2 (P2): I don't know that I'm not a handless brain-in-a-vat. Conclusion (C): So I don’t know that I’ve hands. (P1,P2) This essay considers the argument above. If the argument is sound, we must necessarily accept the conclusion that we do not know that we have hands. We ordinarily take having hands to be something we know. This argument, if sound, thus pushes us into skepticism. Nevertheless, this essay will show how our intuitions and an examination of the argument suggest that the argument is in fact sound, in spite of its skeptical implications. Thereafter, an objection from Dretske will be considered. Dretske argues that P1 is false and that consequently, the argument is unsound. Dretske's argument attempts to disprove P1 by denying closure under known entailment …show more content…

According to the sensitivity theory, sensitivity is a necessary condition for knowledge (Ichikawa and Steup, 2014). Ichikawa and Steup (2014) defined sensitivity to be as such: “S's belief that p is sensitive if and only if, if p were false, S would not believe that p”. In a nearest possible world, if I did not have hands, I would no longer believe that I have hands. Therefore, my belief that I have hands is sensitive. However, my belief that I am not a handless BIV is not sensitive. In a nearest possible world, if I am indeed a handless BIV, I would not come to believe that I am a handless BIV. Then, according to the sensitivity theory, I do not know that I am not a handless BIV. Thus, even if I know that I have hands, and know that having hands entails not being a handless BIV, I would not know that I'm not a handless BIV (Tang, 2016). Evidently, if we subscribe to the sensitivity theory, K and P1 are false, rendering the skeptical argument

Show More
Related
138 Words | 1 Pages

In Ben Robert-Smith’s opinion piece published in the Herald Sun on the 16th of January, 2017 “We Are One but We Are Many”, Robert- Smith addresses he Addresses the Australian public with the argument that is changing the date of Australia day from January 26th. He argues that the date should remain the same but should be undertaken in a manner that is “inclusive and respectful” of other Australian’s interpretation of the day. Comparatively, in Kevin V. Russell’s Letter to the Editor he presents the argument from an alternate perspective.

Read More
1012 Words | 5 Pages

Reasonable Doubt To begin, the ad uses specific animation and details to make the strongest argument against the offenders. Throughout the video, many gestures were used to dramatize the wrongdoing actions made towards the woman. (Patty Heartz) The producer used actions to convince his audience that it is wrong to hold someone against their reasonable doubt.

Read More
738 Words | 3 Pages

Much to the consternation of each figure depicts, it is to be argued that no entity knows his or her blindness--even

Read More
123 Words | 1 Pages

During the mid 1800s, the pro-slavery argument was at its strongest. The Proslavery Argument by Boundless, an online textbook, discusses the famous Mudsill Speech of James Henry Hammond which stated that the pro-slavery political argument, an ideology that defended a class-sensitive view of American antebellum society. He believed that many past societies carried the burden of the existence of a class of landless poor. Continually, other southern pro-slavery theorists felt that this class of landless poor was “inherently transient and easily manipulated, and as such often destabilized society as a whole” (Boundless). Thus, the greatest threat to democracy was seen as coming from “class warfare that destabilized a nation's economy, society and

Read More
804 Words | 4 Pages

Long before philosopher, Edmund Gettier came along, knowledge was thought to be equal to justified true belief, which is to say that: “You know p iff, i) p is true, ii) you believe that p, iii) and you are justified in believing that p” (Gettier, 1963) However, Gettier argued that ‘p’ cannot simply be known because you are justified in believing that ‘p’. He proposed several counter-examples to the Justified True Belief theory (JTB theory) and they are known as Gettier cases. In this paper, I aim to explain how a Gettier-style case spells trouble for the view that knowledge is justified true belief.

Read More
1164 Words | 5 Pages

Similarly, to determining the truth of a proposition, the rational justification of a proposition is also dependant on the other background assumptions associated with the given proposition. For example, when determining the truth of the proposition: “Is Mary to the left of Suzy?” , we would require many also background assumptions like the premise “I am looking from the front”. Likewise, I believe the same rules apply to the rational justification of a proposition. For example, the justification for my belief that Mary is indeed left of Suzy would require many other “second-level” beliefs including the assumption that I can see both Suzy and Mary in-front of me and that my mind is not deceiving

Read More
152 Words | 1 Pages

Therefore I can understand how a person might become fearful when imaging how their tolerance

Read More
948 Words | 4 Pages

Furthermore, an understanding of a concept can already mean its existence in the mind, and does not require a certain definition that has to be mutually shared by everyone. By addressing these main problems with Anselm’s argument, Gaunilo has ultimately been successful in his

Read More
771 Words | 4 Pages

In this essay, Elbow leans towards the believing game and tries to persuade the reader to leave the doubting game behind. Elbow states rules for each game that are used to form a plausible conclusion. The

Read More
1261 Words | 6 Pages

In the 1963 philosophy paper titled “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?”, Edmund Gettier attempts to deconstruct and disprove the philosophical argument that justified true belief is knowledge. Justified true belief, also commonly referred to as JTB, is used as a certain set of conditions that are used to explain someone s knowing some sort of proposition p. More specifically, JTB is used to say that s has knowledge of p if and only if p is true, s believes that p is true, and s is justified in believing that p is true. Gettier offers main points as the conclusion of his argument against this claim. First, he states that s can be justified in believing that p is true while p is actually false.

Read More
1919 Words | 8 Pages

Conclusion: The mind is substantively different from the body and indeed matter in general. Because in this conception the mind is substantively distinct from the body it becomes plausible for us to doubt the intuitive connection between mind and body. Indeed there are many aspects of the external world that do not appear to have minds and yet appear none the less real in spite of this for example mountains, sticks or lamps, given this we can begin to rationalize that perhaps minds can exist without bodies, and we only lack the capacity to perceive them.

Read More
1608 Words | 7 Pages

To Descartes, this is the strongest argument for skepticism. For this reason, from now on, I will focus on how the Cogito relates to this skeptical argument. Descartes needs a foundation to progress his argument in the rest of the Meditations in order to prove the existence of God, and of Body. From now on, we will assume that Descartes successful proved that our senses, our body, and anything that we believe to be true is not reliable. If we cannot rely upon anything, then there are no premises to use to prove anything.

Read More
2041 Words | 9 Pages

Ironically, in arguing that he has been deceived by his senses, Descartes also argues that we can see through these deceptions. I do not claim that we are never deceived, just that we can overcome such deceptions. Therefore we can trust our senses as long as we are aware and cautious. Thus, Descartes’ argument does not validate the degree of skepticism

Read More
785 Words | 4 Pages

Since Edmund Gettier published his work on justified true belief as knowledge, there have been a plethora of philosophers poking holes in his theory while attempting to discover alternate solutions to his theory. Linda Zagzebski is one of the many philosophers who criticizes and attempts to resolve the Gettier problems in her article, “The Inescapability of the Gettier Problems,” providing concice reasoning as to why they are truly inescapable. According to Zagzebski, the contradictions between reaching the truth via the correct casual connection and the use of warrant, or justification, for obtaining truth are the root issues of the Gettier Problems, and knowledge can only be obtained by means of meeting certain conditions. One of the key

Read More
1155 Words | 5 Pages

When I had first opened Ben Goldacre’s book “Bad Science”, I did not know what was to be expected. Know that I have read and assessed the book I feel as though I have learned something that has given me the confidence to voice my opinion and have evidence to support my arguments on how some products claim to have scientific proof. That being said, fish oils, vitamins, detox, and brain gym are all bullshit creations that should not be sold to the public. Now, I say this only after having read Bad Science, because these techniques are criticized and challenged by Ben Goldacre. I have learned that some detoxification methods are bogus and can be disproven in my very own kitchen, and I don’t have to be an accredited university scientist to be able to prove this.

Read More

More about The Skeptical Argument Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document