Responses to scepticism- in detail

Rationalism vs Empiricism

Rationalism-

the belief that knowledge can be come to through deduction via reason.

often they will be believe that this is the best justification for our knowledge.

can include the some of our concepts are innate.

Empiricism-

the belief that all knowledge comes from experience via the senses.

we are all born with no knowledge and gain it through our lifetime.

there are no innate concepts or knowledge that can be derived through thinking alone.

Descartes approach

Descartes was a rationalist - he used rationality and logical reasoning to help him out of his scepticism.

Locke’s response

Uses imagination to get round scepticism. Our imaginings are voluntary while our perceptions are involuntary. This means it makes sense if there exists external objects that force these perceptions onto us rather than just being purely ideas.

Trotter-Cockburn’s response

Our senses correspond with each other- we can even confirm and predict one sense perception from the existence of another. e.g i see fire so i will soon experience smell/heat.

Makes sense for there to be mind independent external objects that always bring these senses together.

Russell’s best hypothesis response

Either physical objects exist and cause my sense data or physical objects do not exist and do not cause my sense data.

I can’t prove either claim is true or false.

Therefore, I have to treat them as hypotheses.

The hypothesis that physical objects exist and cause my sense data is a better hypothesis.

Therefore, physical objects exist and cause my sense data.

What can Realism explain?

Previously objects haven not disappeared in my perceptions - why should they when i don’t perceive them?

Things remain the same between perceptions of them - they are still in the same place I left them when i perceive them again.

Other objects and people act as if they are still in existence even when I don’t perceive them.

Even if I can’t experience them through one of my senses, I can sense them through other senses (at least the primary qualities).

I can’t experience something if it is not there so it must be.

Idealism response

there is no difference between how something appears and how something actually is (reality).

we have no reason to believe that real computers exist so it makes the most sense to believe that the way things appear is the only way things are - so not brains in vats.

Problem with empiricists responses

They give no reason why globally, it is a better hypothesis that there are things in the world.

We have as much evidence that we are a brain in a vat as we have that we aren’t- nothing can prove to us either way.

Arguments may work for local scepticism but not for global.