Knowledge Tree
skeptical arguments
Also known as: skeptical argument
Facts (10)
Sources
Naturalized Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Jul 5, 2001 6 facts
claimSkeptical arguments often rely on hypotheses such as dreams, hallucinations, or the manipulation of a brain in a vat by an evil neuroscientist to call knowledge into question.
claimA priorists can evaluate skeptical arguments by analyzing whether knowledge actually requires the specific conditions described in the skeptical premises, a task that can be performed without empirical data.
claimTraditional epistemologists often view the scientific study of cognitive systems as only distantly related to the effort to reply to skeptical arguments.
referenceRichard Fumerton published "Metaepistemology and Skepticism" in 1995 through Rowman and Littlefield, examining the nature of metaepistemology and skeptical arguments.
claimSkeptical arguments considered by traditional epistemologists typically rely on premises that specify a necessary condition for knowledge and premises that assert people's beliefs fail to satisfy that condition.
quoteIn typical skeptical arguments, we invariably find that we are more certain of the of the knowledge seemingly denied us than we are of some of the premises. Thus it is not reasonable to adopt the skeptical conclusion that we do not have that knowledge. The rational stance is instead to deny one or more of the premises.
Social Epistemology – Introduction to Philosophy - Rebus Press press.rebus.community 2 facts
referenceDaniel Massey discusses traditional skeptical arguments in Chapter 4 of the volume 'Introduction to Philosophy: Epistemology'.
claimRational permissivism is unlikely to effectively counter skeptical arguments because a large range of permitted attitudes is implausible, while a narrow range does little to mitigate conciliationist skepticism.
Epistemic Justification – Introduction to Philosophy: Epistemology press.rebus.community 1 fact
claimUnderstanding epistemic justification can assist individuals in finding flaws in skeptical arguments, settling disagreements regarding which beliefs to hold in areas like religion, ethics, and politics, and determining what makes knowledge more valuable than true belief.
Epistemology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy/Fall 2019 Edition) plato.stanford.edu Dec 14, 2005 1 fact
procedureThe skeptical argument against knowledge typically proceeds in two steps: first, by identifying a proposition the subject agrees they do not know (a skeptical hypothesis), and second, by arguing that because the subject does not know that hypothesis, they cannot know the original proposition (e.g., that they have hands).