What Can We Know

Skepticism refers to the questioning attitude of the facts or opinions proved to be a standard fact. It may also refer to an attitude of doubt towards a certain fact projected by an individual. Various philosophers have the character of skepticism. They critic the facts of other philosophers with the aim of coming up with a judgmental opinion regarding the same (Meiden, 1986).

State What You Believe To Be the Best Argument for Skepticism

Knowing something does not only entail believing it, but one needs to have a concrete reason to believe it. This means that a belief is unknown unless an infinitely long chain of other believes supports it.

According to Abraham Meiden, arguments for skepticism are real scenarios. They seem to show certain statements to be doubtful. For instance, if a person denies that the sun will rise tomorrow, then this individual is a fool. In the context of skepticism, these arguments imply that individuals are more irrational than a fool is. This brings the problem of skepticism (Meiden, 1986).

In the history of philosophy, philosophers use their knowledge to get rid of certain problems through discovery of ways justifying statements that people take it to be true. Nonetheless, these attempts end in a worse way. Bottom line, no one knows the system of justifying empirical statement.

State What You Believe To Be the Best Argument against Skepticism

The knowhow of an individual presupposes a background of issues held certain. This is because these issues help to fix the comprehensive meaning of the claims about the things I know or doubt. Subjection of claims about the background cannot be known since it is hard to claim doubt on the subject. Furthermore, knowledge and doubt are symmetric. Looking at the philosophical skepticism point of view, any attempt to cast doubt on the background explains the meaning of the argument.

Although the comprehensive meaning of words coming out of my lips are fixed by the background, an attempt to doubt on the background destabilizes the connotation of the words used to attempt to frame a cynical doubt. For instance, if I use “here is a hand” to explain to someone the meaning of the word ‘hand’, then by saying “Is this really a hand?” will just show that the speaker is not aware of the meaning of the word hand. Bottom line, one cannot put the skeptical doubt into words.

Discuss How the Allegory of Plato's Cave Impacts the Issue of Skepticism

The book The Republic has ideas describing the meaning of justice as an Allegory of the Cave. The Allegory of the Cave describes how people are chained to a wall facing it. Behind them is another wall containing figures walking across it with a pit of fire behind the wall. This firelight casts shadows to the wall in front of the people chained to it. A clear understanding explains that, at times, people find their way out of the wall for safety. Others chained will try to advice them back to the wall, but they disagree. These people go out in the real world and experience the facts about the world. Despite all these efforts of detaching from the chain, those chained to the wall will refuse to leave. People are afraid of the unknown. When chained to the wall, one is content in the belief of truth rather than thinking and learning for oneself (Weiss, 2008).

State Which Argument (For or Against Skepticism) You Believe Is Stronger and Why

I believe the argument for skepticism is stronger. This is because of some arguments that cannot change. Some of empirical arguments defined by nature cannot face skepticism unless backed up by a concrete belief. Existence of some things needs explanations for a strong belief. Philosophers should dwell on the idea behind explanations of natural things rather than challenging their existence.

Order now

Related essays