Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    G.E. Moore's proof from ordinary language demonstrates th... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Problematic idealism — the view that the existence of objects outside us in space is doubtful and indemonstrable — is false.

    G.E. Moore's proof from ordinary language demonstrates that the existence of hands — paradigm external objects — is known with greater certainty than any philosophical premise used to doubt them.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Our direct sensory experience of hands is more immediate and reliable than abstract philosophical arguments about skepticism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rejecting the certainty of hands requires denying the very linguistic competence philosophers rely on to construct doubt.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.We can meaningfully doubt philosophical premises, but doubting hands requires abandoning the framework of rational discourse itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Certainty about language use doesn't guarantee certainty about what language refers to in external reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Skeptical premises (like brain-in-vat scenarios) are logically coherent even if psychologically implausible or linguistically awkward.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Moore assumes ordinary language reflects metaphysical truth, but language conventions can be reliable guides without proving external objects exist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Key Terms

    Certainty (epistemological)(as the kind of knowledge Descartes sought)
    Absolute, unquestionable knowledge where there is no possibility of being wrong about something.
    External objects(what realists believe we can perceive)
    Things that exist outside your mind, independent of whether you're thinking about them—like tables, trees, or other people.
    G.E. Moore(as the creator of the Open Question Argument)
    A highly influential British philosopher (1873-1958) who developed important ideas about how we know things and what words actually mean.
    Paradigm(Kuhn's philosophy of science; reflects the role of conceptual frameworks in mediating the relationship between theory and evidence.)
    A governing framework or model for a scientific community that is not automatically rejected by refractory evidence but is abandoned only when an alternative paradigm comes to seem preferable.
    Philosophical premise(comparing what we can know with certainty versus philosophical assumptions)
    A starting assumption or claim that a philosopher uses as part of their argument to reach a conclusion.
    Proof from ordinary language(Moore's famous approach to solving philosophical skepticism)
    A method of argument that uses everyday, common-sense statements (like 'I have hands') to show that philosophical doubts are actually silly or wrong.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Perception1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Certainty about language use doesn't guarantee certainty about what language ref...Moore assumes ordinary language reflects metaphysical truth, but language conven...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    Our direct sensory experience of hands is more immediate and reliable than abstr...
    Problematic idealism — the view that the existence of objects outside us in spac...
    +3 moreShow less
    Rejecting the certainty of hands requires denying the very linguistic competence...Skeptical premises (like brain-in-vat scenarios) are logically coherent even if ...We can meaningfully doubt philosophical premises, but doubting hands requires ab...