Taking a Look at Skepticism

We know examples of widely held beliefs that we probably heard, but what really are widely held beliefs. The definition of the word belief is an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists. the word widely means by many people or in many places. Put together basically means beliefs that many people agree with. widely held beliefs have always been around since the beginning because it all starts with someone believing in something true or wrong some other people believe it and on and on until it becomes something a large number of people believe in.

In the First Meditation, Descartes gives us the Evil Demon Hypothesis which serves to give him reason to doubt the existence of everything he perceives and believes. He describes a ‘malicious demon of the utmost power and cunning’ that has the sole purpose of deceiving Descartes (Descartes, 2010: 17). I will argue that his hypothesis has proven to be a strong one because only the cogito provides a way for us to frustrate or trick the evil demon.

In the First Meditation, Descartes gives us the Evil Demon Hypothesis which serves to give him reason to doubt the existence of everything he perceives and believes. He describes a ‘malicious demon of the utmost power and cunning’ that has the sole purpose of deceiving Descartes (Descartes, 2010: 17). I will argue that his hypothesis has proven to be a strong one because only the cogito provides a way for us to frustrate or trick the evil demon.

In Descartes’ First Meditation, Descartes’ overall intention is to present the idea that our perceptions and sensations are flawed and should not be trusted entirely. His purpose is to create the greatest possible doubt of our senses. To convey this thought, Descartes has three main arguments in the First Meditation: The dream argument, the deceiving God argument, and the evil demon “or evil genius”. Descartes’ dream argument argues that there is no definite transition from a dream to reality, and since dreams are so close to reality, one can never really determine whether they are dreaming

This essay will attempt to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of Descartes’ dreaming argument and evil demon argument. Through discussion, I will show why the evil demon argument is more plausible than the dreaming argument. The essay will give a brief definition of the two arguments and explain why these arguments are important. Then I will discuss the two arguments, considering both sides and referencing previous work by other philosophers. I will conclude with a short summary of the topics covered.

But in order to further clarify this "thing that thinks,” he admits that there is always the possibility that he may be dreaming or deceived by an evil demon, since he is something that also imagines and senses seen. (13,15). He elaborates on this idea that if he is after

Summarize both thinkers view and how they are similar and different. Three quotes from each.

“ I have no way of describing good from bad omens, much less of intuiting that all aquries really an extension of our own fears”

However, the Meditator realizes that he is often convinced when he is dreaming that he is sensing real objects. He feels certain that he is awake and sitting by the fire, but reflects that often he has dreamed this very sort of thing and been thoroughly convinced by it. On further reflection, he realizes that even simple things can be doubted. Omnipotent God could make even our conception of mathematics false. One might argue that God is supremely good and would not lead Descartes to believe falsely all these things. He supposes that not God, but some "evil demon" has committed itself to deceiving him so that everything he thinks he knows is false. By doubting everything, he can at least be sure not to be misled into falsehood by this demon.

This is representative of Sartre’s “Look”. When we become conscious of other consciousness other than our owns, we feel invaded. As we realize that we are being viewed as objects, we fear how we are portrayed in other minds. (Frame 1) This refers to the concept of bad faith.

I trembled and my heart failed within me, when, on looking up, I saw by the light of the moon the demon at the casement. A ghastly grin wrinkled his lips as he gazed on me, where I sat fulfilling the task which he had allotted to me. As I looked on him, his countenance expressed the utmost extent of malice

Once the foundations of a building are undermined, anything built on them collapses of its own accord; so I will go straight for the basic principles on which all my former beliefs rested. Whatever I have up till now accepted as most true I have acquired either from the senses or through the senses. But from time to time I have found that the senses deceive, and it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once. (384)

He then begins to address the problem of imagination. If he realizes that things are around him, that rules out the possibility that he is imagining such entities. He says that imagination is not essential to his existing, so he removes himself from these thoughts.

It endeavors with portray the nonsensical perspective about man 's nature, will typify nothingness and see it Likewise An widespread sourball about fear, on doubt concepts, Furthermore will underscore experiential solidness.

If the seed of knowledge is belief, what turns belief into knowledge? This is where justification comes in (some philosophers use the term “warrant” to refer to this element). A person knows something if they’re justified in believing it to be true (and, of course, it actually is true). There are dozens of competing theories of justification and there is little consensus about which is the right one. It’s sometimes easier to describe when a belief isn’t justified than when it is. In general, philosophers agree that a person isn’t justified if their belief is: