One of the main questions surrounding the academic of Philosophy is in relation to the external world and its existence. Ever since Descartes Meditations, philosophers have long been engaged in discussion regarding whether the existence of the external world can be proven. On one hand, skeptics’ claim that one cannot know for certain whether the external world exists given that there is no proof thereof. Skeptics’ declare that one cannot begin to know anything about the external world as there is no way of distinguishing between reality and dreams. On the other hand, however, Philosopher G.E. Moore argues that there is a way to prove the existence of the external world. Therefore, this paper will consist of four main parts: an in depth explanation of Moore’s argument and how he defends his argument …show more content…
Skeptic’s argue that Moore can be deceived by his perceptions given that he is unable to distinguish between reality and hallucinations, preventing Moore from being able to separate reality and dreams. Therefore, the Skeptics’ argument is as follows; imagine there are two worlds – reality and a dreamland. In the real world, external objects exist, whereas in the dreamland, external objects do not exist with the exception of the individual. However, everything in the dreamland seems exactly the same as it would in the real world. Therefore: (P1) if an agent cannot distinguish between two situations, then that agent cannot know which of those two situations pertain, (P2) We cannot distinguish between reality and dream-world, (C1) Therefore, we cannot know whether reality or dream-world obtains, (C2) since there are external objects in reality but not in dream-world, we cannot know whether there are any external objects either (Citation