Skepticism
scepticism
The position that knowledge is unattainable or radically uncertain — from Pyrrho to Descartes' demon.
In practice
A forecast is defended by the track record of the model. The skeptical question is what the track record would look like if the model were fitting noise, and whether you could tell the difference.
The common mistake
Confusing philosophical skepticism with cynicism. The position concerns the standards evidence must meet, and Pyrrhonists in particular declined to assert that knowledge is impossible.
Skepticism is the practice of withholding assent where the grounds are insufficient. It functions both as a philosophical position and as the standard pressure test applied to every claim in epistemology.
The ancient schools
Pyrrhonism, traced to Pyrrho and systematized by Sextus Empiricus, was a way of life rather than a doctrine. For every argument the Pyrrhonist produced an opposing argument of equal weight, suspended judgment, and reported that tranquillity followed — ataraxia. The school was careful never to assert that knowledge is impossible, since that would be a claim of the kind it declined to make.
Academic skepticism, which took over Plato's Academy, argued the stronger line that nothing can be known, and was attacked for the self-refutation that invites.
Descartes's method
Descartes used doubt as a tool rather than a conclusion. In the Meditations he set aside anything that could be doubted: the senses deceive, dreams are indistinguishable from waking, and a powerful deceiver could falsify even mathematics. What survived was that he was thinking, and therefore existed — the cogito. His aim was to rebuild knowledge on that foundation, though most readers have found the rebuilding less convincing than the demolition.
Modern forms
The brain-in-a-vat scenario updates the deceiver: if your experiences were produced artificially, everything would seem exactly as it does. Since nothing in experience distinguishes the cases, it is unclear what rules the scenario out.
Responses divide. Some argue that knowledge does not require ruling out every alternative, only the relevant ones. Others argue that such scenarios are self-undermining, because a word's meaning depends on causal contact with what it refers to. Skepticism is rarely defeated outright; it is used to force accounts of knowledge to state exactly what they demand.
Concept web
Open the full webQuestions
What is skepticism in philosophy?
Skepticism is the withholding of assent where evidence is insufficient. As a position it questions whether knowledge is attainable; as a method it tests what any claim to knowledge actually requires.
What is the difference between Pyrrhonian and Academic skepticism?
Pyrrhonists suspended judgment on all questions, including whether knowledge is possible, seeking tranquillity. Academic skeptics made the stronger claim that nothing can be known, which invites the charge of self-refutation.
What is the brain-in-a-vat argument?
A thought experiment in which all your experiences are artificially produced. Since experience would be identical either way, it challenges you to say what rules the scenario out and what your knowledge claims rest on.