In his “Proof of an External World,” G.E. Moore addresses the skeptical argument concerning our knowledge of the external world. Simply put, the problem concerns the question of whether we can have any knowledge regarding the world around us. This is an extremely controversial issue in the world of epistemology, and many philosophers continue to offer their opinions on the matter. Barry Stroud, for example, argues that a solution to the problem is nonexistent. Not in the sense that there is not an external world, but in the sense that it is impossible for us to know whether one exists. Moore, on the other hand, takes a relatively unique approach to this problem. More specifically, Moore addresses the problem by appealing primarily to common sense and his own certainty. Unlike various other philosophical camps, Moore believes that there are certain propositions which do not necessitate a “philosophical proof,” a logical form of argumentation, to be considered knowledge. Indeed, Moore’s proof was certainly innovative in terms of producing a newfangled philosophical approach. I will argue, however, that while Moore’s argument does present a noteworthy methodological significance as well as a substantial practical application, …show more content…
In terms of providing a proof for the existence of an external world, Moore attempts to prove the existence of external objects; specifically, human hands. He believes he can prove the existence of two human hands by holding each of his own hands up and pronouncing “Here is one hand” and “here is another hand.” Let us consider his proof as it is placed in logical