Related questions:
v Discuss any two traditional answers to scepticism.
INTRODUCTION
Over the centuries, even from the ancient times, philosophers have sought to analyse the concept of knowledge by presenting their various ideas. However, their various ideologies were met with dashing criticisms from the sceptics. In an attempt to hold ground, these epistemologists gave their rebuttals with specific arguments which are known as the “traditional answers to scepticism”. In this write-up, we intend to analyze just two of these answers.
PHILOSOPHY AS THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH
This is more than just an epistemological definition of philosophy. It is an appraisal of a very crucial role that philosophy plays in the search for meaningfulness as regarding knowledge. This is why the epistemologists would not give up, even at the most daunting criticism of the worst sceptic.
SCEPTICISM: A BRIEF ANALYSIS
· What Scepticism is
Scepticism is a school of thought in epistemology, which consciously attempts to doubt the very possibility of all claims to knowledge. Basically, there are two types of scepticism which are;
i. Mitigated scepticism
ii. Universal scepticism
i. Mitigated Scepticism is a brand of scepticism that doubts the possibility of knowledge, but in a partial sense. This is the type of scepticism that is appreciated in philosophy, as it helps in the expansion of the frontiers of knowledge.
ii. Universal Scepticism is radical scepticism, as it entirely and totally rejects the human ability or epistemic possibility to acquire or understand knowledge. The universal sceptics had many followers in the ancient period of philosophy, but they were first criticized by Antiochus in the 1st Century B.C.
· Sceptical postulations
Sceptical reactions to the possibility of knowledge are quite a number, but some would be considered here.
i. Gorgias’ scepticism
Gorgias was a sophist in the ancient Greek days. He was a universal sceptic who radically doubted the possibility of any claim to knowledge. His popular sceptical postulation thus;
...nothing exists
...even if it does, it cannot be known or understood
...even if it is understood, it cannot be communicated to anyone
ii. Pyrrho’s scepticism
Pyrrho who lived in the 3rd century B.C. can be described as a mitigated sceptic as he postulated that the human mind cannot penetrate into the inner nature of things. He added that, we cannot know the way things really are in themselves but only the way they appear to us. Immanuel Kant’s “noumena-phenomena” ideology relates to this.
TRADITIONAL ANSWERS TO SCEPTICISM
In this regard, I would be considering that of “Saint Augustine” and that of “Rene Descartes”.
i. Saint Augustine’s answer
The answer to scepticism of Saint Augustine was mainly directed at the Universal sceptics (the academicians). His answer can be broken down into three parts.
Firstly, Augustine pointed out the self-contradiction evident in universal scepticism. Like Antiochus, he argues that universal scepticism is impossible as the person who says nothing can be known at all, at least knows what he is saying. If he knows what he is saying, then at least one thing has been known. So, the idea of the sceptics that “...nothing can be known at all” is self-contradictory.
Secondly, Augustine maintains that even if the universal sceptic is not sure of anything else, he is at least sure of his own existence, which he cannot doubt. As regards this, the universal sceptic could re-claim that a person could be deceived into thinking that he exists.
Thirdly, Augustine maintains that to be deceived is a proof of one’s existence, since nobody can be under an illusion or deceived, if he doesn’t exist. In other words, being deceived is possible to those who are living. Thus, Augustine postulated the philosophical dictum “Si fallor sum”, meaning “...if I am deceived, then I exist”.
Saint Augustine’s attack on scepticism can be found in his work “Contra Academicos” – “against the academics”.
ii. Rene Descartes’ answer
Descartes philosophy of the “methodic doubt” is his ideology to handle scepticism in philosophy. Descartes discovered that philosophy was full of doubts because it was very subjective in approach, as philosophers hardly agree on issues (the general sceptical attitude of philosophers). Thus, he intended to neutralize the basic foundations of philosophy, doubt all its postulated theories; then proceed to build philosophy on a strong and sure foundation such that it would be so certain and impossible to doubt.
In this regard, he postulated the “methodic doubt” (his answer and solution to scepticism in philosophy). Descartes sort of, used scepticism to solve scepticism. He decided to doubt and reject all he had ever known, until he found out in the midst of his doubt that he was thinking. And when he wanted to doubt this, he found out that he could not; as to doubt, is to think; and to think implies to exist.
Descartes thus formulated his new philosophical discovery thus, “corgito ergo sum”, meaning “...I think, therefore I am”. This became his firm and unshakable truth, of which became the sure foundation of the new philosophical structure he intended to construct.
(YOUR PERSONAL CRITICISMS)
CONCLUSION
Scepticism is truly an indispensable part of Epistemology as it acts as a triggering element to spur epistemologists to work harder. In this process, several theories such as the ones analysed in this write-up have sprung up as answers to the sceptics. This factor has engineered knowledge, epistemology as well as philosophy in general.
