Skepticism And Inference On The Best Explanation Essay

Better Essays

Skepticism and Inference to the Best Explanation: Analysis Jonathan Vogel wrote Skepticism and Inference to the Best Explanation as a solution to accept the real world hypothesis over any skeptical hypothesis. Vogel presents a compelling argument for a definitive reason to accept that the world we are experiencing is in fact the real world. I believe that Vogel’s argument falls short of proving a reason for accepting the real world hypothesis over a skeptical one. In this paper I will clearly explain Vogels argument, explain some important concepts to understand, and attempt to refute the argument. To understand Vogel’s response to skepticism of the real world hypothesis, we need to know what skepticism is. Vogel’s definition of skepticism has two premises and a conclusion. Premise 1 states that: (1) Your sensory experiences either occur due to ordinary perception or your experiences are caused by deception. (Vogel 328) The first part of the premise suggests that one explanation for your sensory experiences is that what you sense (see, hear, feel, etc) is real. The second suggestion is that all your sensory experiences are caused by some sort of deception, like the brain in a vat hypothesis that Vogel raises. Premise 2 of Vogel’s definition is: (2) You have no way to decide whether your experiences arise from reality or deception. (329) Vogel’s second premise draws from the underdetermination principle. This principle is the idea that if there is no reason to believe one

Get Access