The problem of Skepticism - Essay Example

Skepticism Unit Introduction There is so much of epistemology that has risen in opposition or defense of skepticism. Chisholm (1992), claims that one can classify a number of theories in terms of knowledge according to their responses of skepticism. For example, some of the people that can be viewed as skeptical are rationalists, in terms of the possibility of empirical knowledge at the same time not being skeptical on the possibility of prior knowledge but not in regard to empirical knowledge. Additionally, there are views about philosophical traditional problems, For example, the problem of induction and other minds are seen as forms of restricted skepticism which holds that we all cannot have knowledge of any proposals in any particular domain that we think to be within our understanding. In this regard, this essay will focus on the problem of skepticism, in terms of if we can ever be justified in claiming to know something and has risen repeatedly in the history of epistemology, as well as expound if the challenge of skepticism can be answered in my area of study, communication and advertising ( Feldman & Richard, 2003). Skepticism questions our knowledge in many ways, as well as domains where by we think that knowledge is possible. However, the problem of skepticism has risen repeatedly in the history of epistemology, in that some philosophers think that the main purpose of epistemology is to rebut and meet the challenge of skeptical. For example, Philosophical skepticism is a school of thought which crosses cultures and disciplines. In addition, many skeptics have critically examined the meaning of the systems and the examination often results to doubt or ambiguity. Skepticism also ranges from disbelief in philosophical contemporary solutions and rejecting the external world to reality (Chisholm, 1992). The challenge of skepticism cannot be answered by the field of study in communication and advertising because, the problem of skepticism is lacking empirical evidence. DeWeese & Moreland (2005) adds that we are all skeptical on some things, particularly since opposition and doubt are not always distinguished. Some skepticisms are old movements with a number of contrasts and variations with a vies that there is only one thing that is certain, but on the other hand, if being certain means unconditional or absolute certainty, then Chisholm (1992), asserts that it is rational or doubtful to be sure about anything. Indeed, the philosophers were right when they claimed that one thing that is certain makes a person dogmatist. Additionally, skepticism denies the opportunity of certainty in knowledge, instead of subjecting knowledge in terms of scrutiny with the main goal of sorting true from false. Sometimes we think that people fail to have knowledge in many ordinary cases. For example, sometimes we really think that we know exactly what we want in life, but Chisholm, (1992), claims that we do not really know what we want. If we were to look further we would see that we want more than we think we want. This is a good example of a case that is ordinary doubt and some ways are available for removing the doubts. The grounds can be false, true, or neutralized (Wadsworth & Thomson, 2001). However, in order to remove the doubts for grounds, one does not need to show that the supposed grounds are false. Skepticism explains knowledge in many ways; it does not define knowledge in one ground. It twists its angle in alternative angles leaving a person confused and grounds of doubt. Wadsworth &Thomson (2001) claims that doubts occur within a context that things are undoubted. If a person doubts something, some things will be held fast because doubt assumes that there are always ways of removing such doubts. We doubt what we exactly want in life, as well as we think that generally, the world is right or right enough in that it provides us with both grounds of doubt, as well as right enough in that it provides us with both grounds and ways of removing doubt. There are ordinarily some of the features of the world which occurs against a certain background of beliefs in the world. We do not doubt that we have any knowledge of the world, but far from it we assume that we know some things about the world, but in the real sense we do not know. Nevertheless, skepticism tends to render every member of class doubtful of propositions in that we think that we fall within our knowledge, and another member of class does not pity another. However, the grounds for withholding assents to such claims that we have such knowledge or else we deny having such knowledge can be explained that there is no likely way to either neutralize or answer them by appealing to other members of the class because every other member of the class has the same doubt. Therefore, skepticism does not necessarily come to an end (Feldman & Richard, 2003). Skepticism sometimes makes us believe that the world is at a certain stage and all men and women are bad. The main point is that if we had not developed doubts, then principally there are ways to resolve them if they arise, Doubts are quite general, and as much as people determine that the world is only a dream world, and there is no real world with its effects and causes. However, Guignon (1983), contends that there is some evidence that is available for determining what such cases really are, and therefore, skeptic confronts our ordinary assumptions in that it provides ordinary assumptions that are evident and helps in discriminating counterfeit and the real world, in which the counterfeit world appears to us as the real world. On the other hand, skepticism comes in the context of other propositions which are similar sort that is taken to be known, and can be removed by discovering the truth for some propositions which are of the relevant type. As a result, the proposition derives considerations, which cannot be removed from appealing to other propositions of other skeptic claims. The debate of whether skepticism can be justified in claiming to know something takes place within the evidence on account of knowledge, which holds that knowledge is true and can be justified as sufficient belief. The debate is said to be over, on grounds like making a belief to be justified in order for a responsible epistemic to be entitled for the proposition (Feldman & Richard, 2003). The problem with academic skepticism is that the concerned skeptics only think that their views can only be shown or proved to be correct by only one argument. They maintain the confidence of the ability to settle matters in a reasonable way, in regard with the knowledge of the propositions. It also claims that there is nothing like certain type of knowledge on the external world on the basis of our senses of testimony. However, even though our senses may mislead us, we can neutralize them based on doubt by bringing out what we term as trust. Thus, DeWeese & Moreland (2005) explains that some world knowledge is gained from our sense in order to neutralize the doubt. In other words, skepticism lacks arguments for claims that whatever is responsible for the state of being is capable of making the being in such a way that one would be natural. Skepticism cannot be used to answer questions on communication and advertising because it assents to propositions which arrive at the epistemic arguments of the state of being as not legitimate. The skeptics refer to knowledge as adequate knowledge and therefore, can be replaced by justified accent. DeWeese & Moreland (2005) speaks of knowledge instead of beliefs in which communication or knowledge is entitled, but seems irrelevant when it comes to issues concerning the lack of sufficient source of reasons or evidence. He therefore, claims that the most important thing is to note that the same belief that entails to the same justification must be used into believing that the supposed belief or evidence is not disguised. Some skepticism does not also address all questions about beliefs which leave us with no choice than to doubt our knowledge. Conclusion Skepticism seem to have many definitions but generally, it refers to the altitude questioning of facts, knowledge, beliefs, or opinions as well as doubt which are taken for granted in some areas. Many types of skepticism have risen in the history of epistemology, in that some philosophers think that the main purpose of epistemology is to rebut and meet the challenge of skeptical. However, the problem of skepticism cannot be used to answer its questions in communication and advertising field of study. This is because, it lacks empirical evidence in terms of the fact that we are all skeptical on some things, particularly since opposition and doubt are not always distinguished. Some skepticism are old movements with a number of contrasts and variations with a view that there is only one thing that is certain, but on the other hand, if being certain means unconditional or absolute certainty. Additionally, it tends to render every member of class doubtful of propositions in that we think that we fall within our knowledge, and another member of class does not pity the other. References Chisholm, R. M. (1992). The foundations of knowing. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press DeWeese, G. J., & Moreland, J. P. (2005). Philosophy made slightly less difficult: A beginners guide to lifes big questions. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press. Feldman& Richard, (2003) Epistemology. Prentice Hall (Pearson). Chapters Six and Seven. Retrieved from: http://www.basicincome.com/bp/epistemological.htm Guignon, C. B. (1983). Heidegger and the problem of knowledge. Indianapolis, Ind: Hackett. Wadsworth/Thomson (2001).Pojman, L.P., What Can We Know? An Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge. Retrieved from: http://www.geocities.com/Krishna_kunchith/dcs Read More