L12 - Simulation & Skepticism

Question 1

Describe how philosophers have defined knowledge and explain what is meant with this.

Answer 1

• tried to understand the nature of knowledge by exploring relationship between beliefs, truth and justification
• The widely accepted definition is that “Knowledge is justified belief” = for a belief to qualify as knowledge, it must meet three criteria:
  1. it must be justified, meaning there are good reasons or evidence supporting it;
  2. it must be true, aligning with objective reality;
  3. it must be a belief, reflecting a subjective acceptance of the proposition.
• This definition encapsulates the interconnected nature of justification, truth, and belief in the realm of epistemology, providing a foundational understanding of what constitutes knowledge

Question 2

Describe and explain the general method and goal of Descartes’ epistemological project.

Answer 2

Descartes’ epistemological project is the Cartesian scepticism
Goal: looking for a true foundation of knowledge (justified, true belief), starting from radical doubt (That is assuming the most hostile epistemic environment possible) what do we have reason to believe?
His basic argument structure is:
1. If I know that p, then there are no genuine grounds for doubting that p is true.
2. There is a genuine ground for doubting that p is the case, namely: X.
3. Therefore, I do not know that p.

Question 3

Explain how Descartes revealed that most of what we believe is not actually knowledge by describing and clarifying his three sources of doubt.

Answer 3

Descartes reveals and clarifies three source of doubt.
1. Illusion
2. Dreams
3. An evil genius

1. Illusions:
   Our senses can deceive us. Perceiving p is no good reason to believe p. Knowing something requires having no good reasons to doubt it. There is a genuine ground for doubting that we know what the external world is like, namely: the existence of illusions / sense deceptions. Therefore, I do not know what the external world is like. Doupting aspects of the world.
   If we return back to the basic argument we can now state that knowing something requires having no good reasons to doubt it. There is a genuine ground for doubting that we know what the external world is like, namely: the existence of illusions/sense deceptions. Therefore, I do not know what the external world is like.
2. Dreams: Is there a trustworthy way of distinguishing reality from dreams. Casting doubt on some kinds of knowledge, but not all knowledge about the external world. Dreams have no consistency that reality has. Doubting the current state of the world.
3. An evil genius: Similarly, we are not justified to believe he does not! This means that we are not in any way justified to believe whatever we think we know: we might be deceived. All our perceptions, sensations, thoughts, imaginings, and beliefs might just be fed to us by the deceitful demon = Global skepticism

Question 4

Explain how Descartes still defended that there is at least one thing we know.

Answer 4

Cogito ergo sum: I think, therefore I am. Even if you are in the most hostile epistemic environment (illusion, dreaming or deceived) , you are still thinking. Doubt itself is a form of thinking. If there is thinking, there must be a thinker. I exist. You can doubt the content of your thoughts, but they are still thoughts.

Question 5

Evaluate both Descartes’ doubt and point of certainty in light of current technologies: Is his doubt still relevant? And is his point of certainty still as trustworthy as he thought?

Answer 5

Skepticism about consciousness / the self
Is there truly “a thinker”, or only the thoughts?
What does it mean to say that you are conscious?
Could not we be AI: Simulated and programmed to feel
as if we are a thinking and conscious subject?

Evaluation:
- Relevance of Doubt: Descartes’ doubts about illusions and deceptive realities remain pertinent in the era of advanced technology, where simulations challenge our perception of reality.

• Trustworthiness of Certainty: While the “Cogito” endures, the accuracy of perceptions is more nuanced in our technologically advanced era, where the distinction between genuine and simulated thought becomes complex.

Question 6

Reconstruct Chalmers’ master argument for skepticism. Give and explain the premises and clarify how they lead to global skepticism about the external world.

Answer 6

1. You cannot know you’re not in a simulation.
   How would you?
   A simulation simulates reality. How would you know it isn’t ‘actual reality’?
   Moreover, even if it’s a bad simulation, how would you know if it’s all you know?
2. If you cannot know you’re not in a simulation, you cannot know
   anything about the external world.
   “Paris is in France.”
   That might be true in the simulation, but maybe Paris does not actually exist

So: You cannot know anything about the external world.

Global skepticism:
You can doubt that your subjective experiences are veridical (that is: that they correspond to something that actually exists). But you cannot doubt that you have them, right?

Question 7

Describe and explain one sim and one non-sim sign that is discussed by Chalmers. Evaluate whether they are useful when trying to answer the question that you yourself are a sim or not.

Answer 7

Sim-sign: