When Descartes is sitting in front of the fire and looking at it, he seems to be in the best possible position for coming to know that theres a fire. However, according to the skeptic, he can't know any such thing. According to the skeptic, we do not an

Instructions

When Descartes is sitting in front of the fire and looking at it, he seems to be in the best possible position for coming to know that theres a fire. However, according to the skeptic, he can't know any such thing.  According to the skeptic, we do not and cannot have knowledge of the external world.  Is the skeptic right about this?  Why or why not?  To answer these questions, you'll need to provide and explain the skeptical argument.  You'll then need to evaluate the argument.  Questions you might consider: Is the requirement on knowledge (For S to know that p, S must know that it's not the case that P*, where P* is a possible situation in which p is false) correct?  Is Descartes' interpretation of the requirement on knowledge too stringent?  Is there a weaker way to understand it? [Hint: See Renee Smith's suggestion concerning justification towards the end of her dialogue.] Can we in fact know that skeptical hypotheses don't obtain, especially if we adopt a weaker interpretation of the requirement? [ Hint: you might want to consider what our ordinary practices and standards for assessing knowledge claims suggest.]

Answer

Philosophical SkepticismPhilosophical skepticism refers to the views in philosophy that question the overall possibility of having absolute knowledge, the certainty of knowledge. Under philosophical skepticism, there are those that deny certainty and the possibility of knowledge and those that ideally front the idea for the suspension of overall judgement on the basis of there being inadequate knowledge. The different views and the arguments that are fronted for their overall viability thus lead to the question of the certainty of knowledge or the lack of knowledge thereof. Descartes provides a form of rational skepticism that is potentially counter argumentative to the philosophical skeptic point of view. Thus, the subsequent parts of this paper will explore the philosophical skeptic argu...
To avoid plagiarism, part of the answer is hidden. Click on the button below to order the full answer.
Order Answer Back
Price Calculator
Manage orders
Why we are Ranked the best
  • Unlimited Revisions
  • Free 24/7 Support and chat
  • Money back guaranteed
  • Low prices with discounts
  • Experienced writers.
  • Free Unlimited support

Hear from our customers

Get a quote Chat with support Find an expert Frequently asked questions