The Problem of Scepticism
Course
Tutor
Institution
City/State
Date
The Problem of Scepticism
Introduction
Scepticism is defined as the attitude of doubting knowledge. Sceptic philosophers from different generations acquired different principles and arguments on the certainty of knowledge. Still, their views could be summarised as the denial of the possibility of knowledge and the suspension of action due to inadequate proof (Griffin, 1992). In our usual life, practically every person is sceptical about the claims of specific knowledge. However, philosophical sceptics doubted the possibility of knowledge beyond the contents of what was experienced. Since ancient times onwards, sceptics have developed arguments to challenge ideologies highlighted by theologians, scientists, or even philosophers (Hall, 1945). These sceptical arguments have played a vital role in reshaping both the problems and the solutions provided in the view of Western philosophy. This essay will focus on describing the problem of scepticism according to Bertrand Russell’s response, and highlight an analysis of the argument.
Bertrand Russell’s response on scepticism
Russell begins his response by highlighting the differences between the two terms, appearance and reality. According to Russell, knowledge is gotten from how we perceive the world around us. However, he notes that individual perception is often misleading since it is prone to error (King, 2007). Russell describes that if three people, one who’s had three martinis, one with a fever, and one who is colour blind are made to see a table, there is a higher likelihood of them seeing different objects (Hall, 1945). If the same table is submerged in water, or placed under a glass pane, the object will still look different. This description highlights that there is a distinction between appearance and reality (King, 2007). If the perception of the same object could vary among the three individuals, it then speaks volumes about the real object, the truth and lies surrounding it.
Further, Russell brings in the concept of “sense-data” in a bid to demonstrate the relationship between appearance and reality. Sense data refer to mental images that we experience from the mention of different objects in the physical world (Griffin, 1992). Similarly, it could apply to items that individuals perceive during sensation. For instance, when an individual walks into a hotel, the smell of tea, chicken, or any other food is an example of sense-data (King, 2007). From the case highlighted above, the same table can generate different sense-data (Griffin, 1992). While sense-data is related to the object they represent in the physical world, the exact nature of the relationship is unknown (King, 2007). The sceptical argument being propelled by proponents was that sense-data does not describe the reality of the object.
While Russell had the common sense to believe the sceptical arguments, like the highlighted above, he did not believe them. For instance, a hundred people may have different kinds of sense-data on the same table being viewed, but each agrees that there is vision is stuck at the same table (Hall, 1945). This consistency, according to Russell, highlights that we should at least believe the existence of the table. Also, Russell adds that physical objects manipulate sense-data we perceive, and therefore we uniquely respond to them.
The act of sensation, according to Russell, results in different types of knowledge. Russell highlights two kinds of knowledge, perceptual and prior. Perceptual learning refers to information gathered through experience (Hall, 1945). On the other hand, prior knowledge is defined information generated through self-truths due to logic. According to Russell, perception knowledge provides empirical data while the prior knowledge informs us on how to process data (King, 2007). Further, Russell highlights that expertise can also be gotten through acquaintance and description (Hall, 1945). Knowledge by acquaintance is obtained when an individual is directly ware of an action without an intermediary informing him or her on the possible consequences (King, 2007). For instance, when an individual sits on a blue chair, one becomes acquainted with varied sense data relating to the chair because one is aware of its smoothness, blue-ness, and hardness.
On the contrary, for one to know that the object is called a “chair”, requires more than an acquaintance with the object. To be aware of the term described above, according to Russell, we must possess knowledge by description, which requires the person to make inferences based on the general understanding at hand, and acquaintance to similar objects (Hall, 1945). For instance, some of us know by the description that Everest is the tallest mountain in the world even though few of us have been there. As such, we have to rely on the information provided by others to comprehend the fact (Griffin, 1992). However, to be indeed acquainted with the knowledge that Everest is the tallest mountain in the world, one must actually visit and measure all mountains (King, 2007). Hence, it is safe to say that no person is acquainted with such knowledge.
Besides, Russell highlights that just like we know objects, we can understand truths either immediately or derivatively. Just like knowledge, immediate information on truths is referred to as intuitive facts, which are self-evident concepts. For instance, 1+1=2 is one such evidence that we hold to be true (King, 2007). However, derivative information of truths requires adequate understanding from deductions and analysis of the self-evidenced realities. Overall, Russell highlights that the source of knowledge is by acquaintance (Hall, 1945). On the contrary, without developing an understanding through the description, an individual may never pass beyond the limits of his or her own experience (King, 2007). As such, the different types of knowledge highlighted above that is perceptual knowledge, prior knowledge, and knowledge by acquaintance and description, work together to form human experience.
Russell provides an example of a moving and hungry cat to illustrate the significance of simplicity in our reasoning. If a cat appears in one place and later at another, Russell highlights that the process is natural and that the cat has moved (Hall, 1945). However, on the view of private experience that describes sense data, the cat could not have been in any other place except where the person can see it. Russell insists that if the cat does not exist, then it is impossible to imagine that it is hungry. Russell further notes that the idea of hunger is an expression that becomes indescribable when viewed in terms of sense-data (Hall, 1945).
Further, Russell extends the cat example to people (King, 2007). He notes that when people are speaking, we perceive their lips as moving and making sounds, and we believe that these people are expressing their thoughts (Hall, 1945). Through this approach, we draw an analogy of our own behaviour and how we perceive the actions of other people (King, 2007). Thus, it would be difficult to imagine that a person exists independently.
Analysis
The Problems of Philosophy highlights an attempt by Russell to elaborate epistemology, or theory relating to human knowledge. Russell elaborates that the different kinds of knowledge should be considered if they can be reasonably appealed to the goal of Principia Mathematica, which is the ability to identify truths relating to believing in certain facts in mathematics (King, 2007). The mathematical and philosophical view of Russell work seeks to promote steadfast devotion to accept any resolution without any logical or concrete reason to do so. With Russell work on Our Knowledge of External Work and beyond, he sought to establish the relationship between knowledge, physics, and perception.
The fundamental narrative of Russell’s theories was that the physical world exists. Russell had earlier rejected the idealism in favour of realism, which was the belief that the existence of objects is independent of our perception (Hall, 1945). The theories of epistemology described above fit adequately in the empiricist tradition of the British, where they claim that data gotten from personal and immediate experience is the foundation of human knowledge.
According to Russell, any idea understood by description must be composed of things that we know by acquaintance. If this assumption is taken to be accurate, then there are some repercussions on what is to be recognised by description (King, 2007). For instance, if we claim that Adolf Hitler initiated World War II by first invading Poland, we are not yet acquainted to him since we have not yet had direct experience with the man (Griffin, 1992). What i preconceive in my mind is a description of him since I do not have direct knowledge of him. Instead, I am gathering facts and ideas about Hitler, which I am not acquainted with (King, 2007). Hence, no matter how many facts we can research about Hitler, we can only know him by description. It is impossible to reach a point where we can know him by acquaintance (King, 2007). The logical assumption of this argument coincides with Russell’s work on logical atomism which argues that a statement can broken-down into a series of individual assumptions (Hall, 1945). Similarly, for this case, we can safely say that when we refer to Hitler, we analyse a series of facts and descriptions we have heard of him.
The Problem of Philosophy was meant to serve as an introduction into the field, but the arguments are not as thorough as expected from the founder of philosophy. Russell erred on illustrating his points rather than clearly describing them out (King, 2007). While the content of the essay appeals to all principles of common sense, there are still unclear elements. One of these unclear elements is the proposition of intuitive knowledge. Russell does not provide evidence on how truth becomes self-evident (Griffin, 1992). Also, he does not give examples of intuitive and immediate facts (King, 2007). Moreover, Russell does not provide a framework for distinguishing between two self-evident truths that contradict each other.
Further, the concept of sense-data, as proposed by Russell is problematic. Russell highlights that sense-data is the foundation of perception. For instance, when we observe a table, we take note of its hardness, rectangularity, or smoothness. From these perceptions, we form the idea of the existence of a table (Griffin, 1992). Other philosophers hold the view that upon seeing a table, an individual is immediately aware of the object as a table. However, these philosophers argue that is only when we stop concentrating on what we see that we consciously take note of the colour of the object, the shape, or texture (King, 2007). These thinkers highlight that the concept of sense-data as elaborated by Russell is outdated because of the propagation of the principle of experience, which requires much effort to notice the object.
Finally, the other problematic concept is the idea propagated by Russell that all knowledge is built by self-acquaintance or direct of personal experience. This sentiment represents a Cartesian point of view, where he argues that the basis of philosophical inquiry is built on a person’s perspective and consciousness (King, 2007). However, this argument contradicts logic since how can a theory of knowledge founded on private experiences be applied to all human beings?
Conclusion
Summarily, from the perspective of Bertrand Russell, philosophical sceptics doubted the possibility of knowledge beyond the contents of what was experienced. Russell response highlighted the differences between the two terms, appearance and reality. This perspective noted that knowledge is gotten from how we perceive the world around us and that individual perception is often misleading since it is prone to error. Through the example of using a table, Russell noted that if the perception of the same object could vary among the three individuals, it then speaks volumes about the real object, the truth and lies surrounding it. More so, Russell provided an example of a moving and hungry cat to illustrate the significance of simplicity in our reasoning. If a cat appears in one place and later at another, Russell highlighted that the process is natural and that the cat has moved. On the contrary, an analysis of the Russell response highlighted unclear elements even though the principles had logical appeal. Some of the problematic areas included the concept of sense-data. Russell highlights that sense-data is the foundation of perception. However, using the table as an example, thinkers highlight that the concept of sense-data as elaborated by Russell is outdated because of the propagation of the principle of experience, which requires much effort to notice the object. Other problematic principles developed included the principle of acquaintance and the spread of intuitive knowledge.
References
Griffin, N., 1992. The Legacy of Russell’s Idealism for His Later Philosophy: the Problem of Substance. Russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies, 12(2).
Hall, E., 1945. The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell. Bertrand Russell, Paul Arthur Schilpp. Ethics, 56(1), pp.75-77.
King, J., 2007. Popular Philosophy and Popular Economics: Bertrand Russell, 1919-70. Russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies, 27(2).