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
    You do know that you have hands, despite being unable to ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    You do know that you have hands, despite being unable to discriminate between having hands and being a brain-in-a-vat.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moore's proof establishes that common-sense certainties about the external world serve as the bedrock from which philosophical skepticism must be evaluated, not vice versa.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The epistemic weight of 'I have hands' exceeds the epistemic weight of any skeptical premise that entails its denial, so modus tollens favors retaining the common-sense belief.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Wittgenstein's 'On Certainty' shows that hinge propositions like 'I have hands' are not subject to doubt within the language-game of empirical inquiry, making skeptical challenges category errors.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Nozick's sensitivity condition requires only that if P were false, S would not believe P—not that S can rule out every metaphysically possible P-falsifying scenario.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.In the closest possible worlds where you lack hands, you do not believe you have hands, satisfying the sensitivity condition even without ruling out brain-in-a-vat scenarios.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Brain-in-a-vat scenarios are not among the closest possible worlds to actuality, so their epistemic inaccessibility does not defeat knowledge claims grounded in tracking relations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Knowledge requires only the ability to discriminate between a proposition and relevant alternatives, not all alternatives.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Being a brain-in-a-vat is not a relevant alternative to having hands.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.You can discriminate between having hands and the relevant alternatives (e.g., having stumps, hooks, or prosthetic hands).
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Being a brain-in-a-vat is not a relevant alternative to having hands.Brain-in-a-vat scenarios are not among the closest possible worlds to actuality,...In the closest possible worlds where you lack hands, you do not believe you have...Knowledge requires only the ability to discriminate between a proposition and re...
    +5 moreShow less
    Moore's proof establishes that common-sense certainties about the external world...Nozick's sensitivity condition requires only that if P were false, S would not b...The epistemic weight of 'I have hands' exceeds the epistemic weight of any skept...Wittgenstein's 'On Certainty' shows that hinge propositions like 'I have hands' ...You can discriminate between having hands and the relevant alternatives (e.g., h...

    Similar

    You know that you have hands only if you can discriminate between actu...95%You cannot discriminate between actually having hands and being a hand...91%Being a brain-in-a-vat is not a relevant alternative to having hands.85%The proposition that one has hands cannot itself serve as evidence for...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: epistemology
    View source passageHide passage
    Next, we will examine various responses to the BKCA argument. According to the first, we can see that (C2) is false if we distinguish between relevant and irrelevant alternatives. An alternative to a proposition p is any proposition that is incompatible with p. Your having hands and your being a BIV are alternatives: if the former is true, the latter is false, and vice versa. According to the thought that motivates the second premise of the BIV argument, you know that you have hands only if
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit