Radical skepticism

Definition

Radical skepticism is a philosophical position that questions the very possibility of knowledge and asserts that we cannot have certain or justified beliefs about the world. It challenges the reliability of our senses and reasoning, suggesting that if we cannot be sure of anything, including our own existence or perceptions, then all claims to knowledge are potentially false. This viewpoint is crucial for understanding broader discussions around skepticism and the problem of knowledge.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Radical skepticism raises the question of whether any beliefs can be justified beyond mere opinion, leading to challenges against commonly held knowledge.
2. One significant argument in radical skepticism involves the possibility of being deceived by an external force or illusion, such as the concept of an evil demon or a brain in a vat.
3. This form of skepticism has been influential in shaping modern philosophy, prompting philosophers to develop theories of knowledge and belief justification.
4. Radical skepticism does not imply that one should abandon all beliefs; rather, it encourages critical examination of the grounds upon which those beliefs are held.
5. Responses to radical skepticism include external world theories that attempt to establish knowledge despite skeptical challenges, such as pragmatic approaches and coherentism.

Review Questions

• How does radical skepticism challenge the foundations of knowledge?
  • Radical skepticism challenges the foundations of knowledge by questioning whether we can truly know anything with certainty. It suggests that if our senses can deceive us and our reasoning can lead us astray, then even our most basic beliefs about reality may be unfounded. This leads to a profound inquiry into what constitutes justification for belief, compelling philosophers to explore alternative theories that attempt to establish some level of certainty.
• Discuss how radical skepticism relates to Cartesian Doubt and its implications for epistemology.
  • Radical skepticism is closely related to Cartesian Doubt, as both emphasize rigorous questioning of accepted beliefs. René Descartes used doubt as a method to seek indubitable truths, ultimately concluding 'Cogito, ergo sum' (I think, therefore I am) as a foundation for knowledge. This interaction between radical skepticism and Cartesian approaches has significant implications for epistemology, as it prompts deeper exploration into what can be considered true knowledge amidst pervasive doubt.
• Evaluate the effectiveness of responses to radical skepticism in contemporary philosophy.
  • In contemporary philosophy, responses to radical skepticism have evolved significantly, with various approaches like pragmatic theories and coherentism aiming to address its challenges. For instance, pragmatism suggests that truth is not solely about certainty but also involves practical consequences and utility. Coherentism argues that beliefs are justified through their coherence with other beliefs rather than foundational truths. Evaluating these responses reveals ongoing debates regarding their effectiveness in countering radical skepticism's claims and highlights the continuing relevance of these discussions in understanding knowledge today.

Related terms

Empiricism: A philosophical theory stating that knowledge comes primarily from sensory experience, often contrasted with rationalism.

Foundationalism: The view in epistemology that certain basic beliefs provide the foundation for knowledge and can be known with certainty.

Cartesian Doubt: A systematic process of being skeptical about the truth of one's beliefs, famously associated with René Descartes, who doubted everything except his own existence.