Epistemology
Part I – Descartes
The first person we discussed in Epistemology was Descartes. Descartes’ Epistemology
is composed of two parts: Skepticism and Foundationalism.
Skepticism = How could one possibly arrive at the conclusion that human beings don’t
have knowledge. Actually, it is quite easy. Let’s start with the definition of knowledge.
In order for a person to have knowledge what is necessary?
1) Belief
2) Truth
3) Justification
This understanding of knowledge claims that humans have knowledge if and only if they
have justified true belief. This seems like a plausible definition. However, it has
problems.
Lottery Example:
Imagine that you enter a lottery in which there are 1 million tickets. You get ticket
number 345,892. There is only a one in a million chance that you will win the lottery.
Because of this you believe that you will not win the lottery. The lottery is drawn and
you do not win. Therefore, your belief is true. Finally, you had justification for your
belief. There was only a one in a million chance that you would win. That’s pretty good
justification. However, did you KNOW that you would not win? No, it seems that you
did not know that you would not win the lottery. Why? You could have been wrong.
What this example shows that knowledge requires more than justified true belief. It
requires certainty. In order to have knowledge, it has to be impossible for you to be
wrong. Here is the first premise of skepticism:
1) Knowledge requires certainty
So you probably think that there are some beliefs that you are certain are true. For
example, you think you are certain that there is a table in front of you. You think that
you are certain that you are reading something about skepticism right now. You think
that you are certain that 2+3=5. Are you really certain about these things?
Descartes argues that in these cases you are really not certain. Lets take one example.
I am certain that there is a table in front of me.
Are you really certain? Is it IMPOSSIBLE for you to be wrong about this? Of course
not! Perhaps you are hallucinating a table in front of you. There are people in mental
institutions right now that believe that they are living in ancient Rome and are fighting in
the arena. To them, their beliefs seem as true as your beliefs seem to you. Likewise,
when you dream you don’t realize that you are dreaming. Your dream seems real within
the dream. Are you CERTAIN that you are not dreaming right now and that there is no
table in front of you? Descartes imagines the possibility that his mind is controlled by an
evil deceiver who tricks him in to seeing things that are not there. The movie “The
Matrix” makes a similar point. Are you CERTAIN that you are not in the Matrix. It
seems that for any belief, we lack certainty.
Of course, Descartes is not saying that it is likely that an evil deceiver is controlling your
mind. However, it is a possibility. Since it is a possibility that you can’t rule out, you are
not certain about any of your beliefs. This is the second premise of skepticism.
(Remember in the case of the lotto there was only a one in a million chance that you were
wrong. Isn’t there a one in a million chance that you really are dreaming right now?)
2) We never have certainty
This premise along with premise 1 entails skepticism
1) Knowledge requires certainty
2) We never have certainty
C) We never have knowledge
It is a valid argument! The only real question is: are the premises true? We should also
note that Descartes claim is not as terrible as you might think. Descartes is not claiming
that all beliefs are in fact wrong. Mostly likely, a lot of them are true. Likewise,
Descartes is not claiming that we don’t have any reason for having our beliefs. He is
only claiming that we never have knowledge.
Foundationalism
Descartes wanted to refute Skepticism. How could he do this? The argument is valid so
Descartes must deny one of the premises. He thinks that premise 2 is actually false.
There are some beliefs that we are certain about.
“I exist as a thinking thing”
Descartes thinks that it is impossible to doubt this belief. Why? In the very act of
doubting that you exist is a thinking thing, you affirm the fact that you do exist as a
thinking thing. You can doubt that your body exists. However, you cannot doubt the
existence of you mind. The very act of doubting requires that you exist in order to doubt.
This is the foundation of knowledge according to Descartes. All other knowledge must
be built up upon this foundational belief. Descartes all adds that we can be certain about
the contents of our own mind. For example;
“There is a table in front of me” You can doubt this. Maybe there isn’t a table in front
you.
“I believe that there is a table in front of me” You can not doubt this. Maybe there is not
a table in front of you. However, you know that you believe that there is a table in front
of you. You can know your own mind with certainty.
The next steps in Descartes foundationalism are confusing. Don’t worry too much about
the exact argument. What is important to understand is how foundationalsim works. It
attempts to find beliefs that we are certain about then it tries to show that all knowledge
can be built on top of this foundation of certainty.
1) I know I exist and I know what my beliefs are
2) I know that I have an idea of God as a perfect being
3) The idea of perfection can only come from a perfect being
4) God exists as a perfect being
5) A perfect being would not allow me to be deceived
6) My sense perception and reasoning is, to a large degree, accurate
This is a very rough outline of Descartes’ foundationalism. Again, don’t worry about the
details of this argument. Make sure you understand Descartes Skepticism and how he
tries to refute it.