Doubt, limits of knowledge, and epistemic humility
9,076 ideas in this topic
2950 of 9076 ideas have perspectives(33%)
The created exemplar cannot provide certain and infallible knowledge of a thing.
A minimally rational agent need only make some of the valid inferences that follow from the agent's beliefs, not all of them.
DePaul's argument against the final value of true belief fails
Exponentiation is not provably total in IΔ_0
Exponentiation is not provably total in IΔ₀
Frankfurt's interpretation of Descartes is self-contradictory.
Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit should be regarded as a propaedeutic to philosophy rather than an exercise in philosophy itself.
It is possible to self-ascribe anti-expertise
Non-deterministic Turing machines cannot be employed as a practical model of probabilistic computation
Non-deterministic Turing machines cannot serve as a practical model of probabilistic computation
PRAM machines are not considered a reasonable model of computation
Philosophy proper did not thrive in the Roman or medieval world.
There is no need to suppose that religious beliefs are true
(Cons) can express a truth at a vat-world only if the speaker of (Cons) is not in a vat-world
(K) is not known
A 'person' caused by the aggregates provides no answer to doubts about personal identity.
A 'theory of knowledge' is itself impossible
A Kantian-style graphical demonstration of the Intermediate Value Theorem is inadequate as a proof
A PRAM machine is not a reasonable model of computation
A Weyl geometry, in which length transfer is non-integrable, can nonetheless cohere with observable experience in which length transfer appears to be integrable.
A belief can be both subjectively and objectively immune to doubt and yet still have a relatively low degree of warrant.
A belief can be epistemically justified even when it originates from a tainted causal source, provided the causal history is not accessible to the subject
A belief that meets condition (2) may still be false
A blanket ban against attributing human-like qualities to animals begs the question
A brain in a vat cannot grasp the meanings of general terms such as 'tree', 'brain', and 'vat'.
A case for the Liar sentence being both true and false does not establish a case for Brisbane being and not being in Australia.
A child first being taught simple moral principles does not yet have a justification for those principles based on self-evidence
A circular argument is acceptable when justifying a fundamental form of reasoning
A cognitive architecture that collapses distinctive attitudes (imagination and belief) on the basis of borderline cases is unlikely to be fruitful in explaining psychological phenomena
A coherent set of beliefs about Gliese 581d would not provide a priori justification of all of them
knowledge
Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.
epistemology
A normative enterprise that tells us how we ought to reason from evidence and how we ought to justify our beliefs, as distinct from merely describing how we do reason or justify beliefs
justification
The condition on a knower's belief that excludes mere luck — the belief must be held in a way that is appropriate or warranted, not merely accidentally correct.
Evidence
Factors extrinsic to a hypothesis that raise or lower its probability
Premise
A premise is a statement or fact that you assume to be true as a starting point for reasoning or making an argument. Think of it as the foundation or building block you use to reach a conclusion—for example, "All dogs are animals" and "My pet is a dog" are premises that lead to the conclusion "My pet is an animal." Premises are essentially the evidence or claims you offer before drawing a final conclusion.
proposition
The content expressed by a sentence, individuated at least in part by the subject matter of the sentence and the contents of its subsentential expressions.
hypothesis
A construction that imaginatively utilizes both theoretical ideas and perceptual facts to forecast the possible consequences of various operations
Kant
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was an influential German philosopher who argued that our minds shape how we experience reality, and that we can only truly know things as they appear to us, not as they are in themselves.
Topics that share ideas with Skepticism
Help Build This Topic
6126 propositions still need supporting arguments.