Revisiting Moore’s Anti-Skeptical Argument in “Proof of an External World”

Abstract This paper argues that we should reject G. E. Moore’s anti-skeptical argument as it is presented in “Proof of an External World.” However, the reason I offer is different from traditional objections. A proper understanding of Moore’s “proof” requires paying attention to an important distinc...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Stratman, Christopher (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Brill 2021
In: International journal for the study of skepticism
Year: 2021, Volume: 11, Issue: 4, Pages: 289-311
Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains:B Moore, George Edward 1873-1958, Proof of an external world / Scepticism / Rejection of / Argumantation
IxTheo Classification:AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism
VA Philosophy
Further subjects:B Ontology
B Epistemology
B G. E. Moore
B Skepticism
B Knowledge
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Description
Summary:Abstract This paper argues that we should reject G. E. Moore’s anti-skeptical argument as it is presented in “Proof of an External World.” However, the reason I offer is different from traditional objections. A proper understanding of Moore’s “proof” requires paying attention to an important distinction between two forms of skepticism. I call these Ontological Skepticism and Epistemic Skepticism. The former is skepticism about the ontological status of fundamental reality, while the latter is skepticism about our empirical knowledge. Philosophers often assume that Moore’s response to “external world skepticism” deals exclusively with the former, not the latter. But this is a mistake. I shall argue that Moore’s anti-skeptical argument targets an ontological form of skepticism. Thus, the conclusion is an ontological claim about fundamental reality, while the premises are epistemic claims. If this is correct, then the conclusion outstrips the scope of its premises and proves too much.
ISSN:2210-5700
Contains:Enthalten in: International journal for the study of skepticism
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/22105700-bja10014