The Argument Of Skepticism Is All About

1495 Words Aug 10th, 2016 6 Pages
Maryam Quraishi
Professor Leon
Philosophy 101
August 9, 2016
In this paper, I will first discuss what the basic argument of skepticism is all about, then I will provide the defense of the argument: the three cases (Judy/Trudy Case, Crow/Raven and Coke/ Generic Coke case). After that, I will talk about the responses to the argument, specifically about the criticisms from Descartes and Moore; how Moore feels that perceptual evidence is enough and we can reject premise 1 and how descartes thinks that we can rule out the skeptical scenarios with our evidence. Finally, I’ll provide my opinion on all this and what I personally have to say about skepticism, whether I am a skeptic or not or if I reject either of the premises. The basic argument of skepticism goes somewhat like this:
1. If you know that you’re in class, then your evidence is good enough to rule out that you’re in the Matrix.
2. Your evidence (that you’re in class) isn’t good enough to rule out that you’re in the Matrix.
3. Therefore, you don’t know that you’re in class.
If put into simpler words, what it’s trying to say is that as long as you know something, your evidence is good enough to rule out a claim, but if your evidence is not good enough, then doubts and uncertainty may be present about your claim. Skepticism is all about attitude of doubt or uncertainty, either in general or toward a specific thing, or to any doubtful attitude or…
Open Document