Epistemology Flashcards
What is the difference between local and global scepticism?
Local- A specific claim about some area/branch of supposed knowledge
Global- Scepticism extends without limit. It’s focused on having no knowledge of an external world with physical objects.
What is philosophical scepticism?
Our usual justifications for claiming knowledge is inadequate so we don’t have knowledge, especially about the external world.
What are Descartes’ 3 waves of doubt?
Illusion, dreaming and deception
Illusion- Descartes doubts his perception as it’s deceived him in the past (like a straw bending in water)
Dreaming- Doubt is cast on all current perceptions claiming I could be dreaming. In dreams there are still basic ideas common to dreams and reality. If my perceptions aren’t part of reality then I can’t claim certain knowledge.
Deception- Doubt on knowledge of mathematical and logical truths. Instead of a God there is an evil demon deceiving our perceptions so our external world is not how it appears.
What are the issues with Descartes philosophical scepticism?
-Descartes cannot theoretically doubt all his beliefs because if he could then doubt that all his beliefs are doubtful. So at least one opinion is not doubtful. If he wants to doubt all beliefs he has to abandon the belief he had previous beliefs to doubt. Descartes has to take some beliefs that could be certain to doubt others. There are limits to scepticism.
-It’s not fair to reject something on the claim there’s slight doubt. It would make more sense to reject those beliefs that have reasonable doubt as you are know left with very little to know. You could technically find a way to doubt everything.
-Descartes uses his foundationalism
belief to destroy all beliefs based on their main principles they are based on. It could be more logical to do it piece by piece so it’s thorough and no mistakes are made. If he gets rid of everything there’s no beliefs to work with or to function.
What is Descartes response to his own scepticism?
-The cogito to establish himself and defeat the evil demon
-Developing clear and distinct ideas to prove mathematical truths
-Now stuck at idealism, he proves God’s existence with the trademark argument and used C+D ideas to prove Gods nature.
-As a non deceiver God would not allow us to make errors and so we can form true beliefs, so there’s no evil demon. God can bring about any clear and distinct idea so there are physical objects.
-We aren’t dreaming so our memory matches our perceptions coherently but not in dreams. Our senses confirm our perceptions
Locke’s response to scepticism?
Our cognitive abilities are limited so we can’t find certain knowledge in everything. There’s a great deal in the universe about which we must remain ignorant. Human reason alone cannot establish certain claims about the world.
We are capable of knowing all that we need to for the conveniences of life. Our reasoning is confined to our senses and we can’t get past the veil of perception.
We do have conclusive reasons to infer of a physical world-
-Involuntary sense experience
-Coherent senses
Reliable strategy to distinguish illusions, dreams etc. It only deals with local scepticism however.
Hume’s response to scepticism?
Descartes is doubting the reliability of our most basic reasoning processes. It casts away our only tools available to us to construct beliefs. He would be stuck in solopsistic doubt.
Hume says we are psychologically incapable of accepting solipsism in our everyday lives. Philosophical scepticism is irrelevant to belief in everyday contexts. Our instincts(like flinching at a dog biting at you)forced upon us the conviction our sense experience provides an accurate representation of M.I objects. We possess natural dispositions forcing us to hold certain beliefs. We don’t need justification as we can’t live in a way without belief of a physical world. We can’t expect reason alone to give us sufficient knowledge claims.
What is intuition?
To inwardly look upon an intellectual object and grasp basic truths prior to any reasoning or inference. The mind simply grasps the rational rules immediately.
What is deduction?
The inference of something as following necessarily from some other propositions which are known with certainty. You infer what must follow on from other facts.
What is the intuition and deduction thesis?
(Descartes) A theory of how knowledge is gained. We are able to gain some knowledge a priori and a posteriori to build a secure world of knowledge.
How do rationalists build up knowledge using the intuition and deduction thesis?
The mind intuits the foundational beliefs through clear and distinct ideas. (Like the cogito or maths) The rest of knowledge is deduced from these foundations.
Criticisms of clear and distinct ideas
1)Not clear and distinct enough
A more detailed account of those terms is needed if they are to be used correctly
2)Generalises this principle and claims that any belief he can conceive of clearly and distinctly is true. It’s based on thin evidence.
3)Are we sure they are true?
Descartes claims a good god would not deceive us and make a being whose clearest and most distinct thoughts are false. But this is a fundamental error under the cartesian circle. He used C+D ideas to show God is true then used God to show clear and distinct ideas true.
Humes response to intuition and deduction thesis- Hume’s Fork
Hume claims we have knowledge of just two sorts of claim:
Relations of ideas- discovered purely by thinking. They are intuitively or demonstratively certain. Necessary, analytic, a priori.
Matters of fact- Propositions about what exists and what is the case. Aposteriori, synthetic, contingent.
Anything that doesn’t fit on the fork is meaningless.
