The external world cannot be known for certain

[tonyrey]

Are you certain that internal logic and mathematics correspond to external reality?

How else do you explain the astonishing success of science which has transformed our lives and even threatens to destroy all life on this planet? An illusion?

Please note that it is impossible to live as if we don’t exist… or that the planet doesn’t exist…

 

[inocente]

Therefore, one has no certainty of the truth of anything. However, since the concept of existence is the most basic idea, and one that a person is entirely incapable of acting without, then existence itself seems to be a certain truth. But beyond that, I cannot find any certainty.

Are you consciously paraphrasing Descartes here? He too suffered from doubt before rebuilding his philosophy on the same idea of I think, therefore I am.

Although personally I doubt that’s true.

There is humility in doubt. “I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing. I think it is much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers that might be wrong. If we will only allow that, as we progress, we remain unsure, we will leave opportunities for alternatives. We will not become enthusiastic for the fact, the knowledge, the absolute truth of the day, but remain always uncertain … In order to make progress, one must leave the door to the unknown ajar.” - Richard Feynman

 

[Bahman]

By external world, I mean everything perceived. This includes everything perceived through bodily senses, as well as mental perception, such as thoughts and logical conclusions. (I will not say that thoughts are internal, because they can be imposed on us.)

Firstly, we cannot be certain that what we perceive through our physical senses is real. This is because situations can arise where we perceive a contradiction, for example, a mirage, where we see that an oasis exists, but do not feel that it exists. Therefore we have no guarantee that anything felt bodily is real other than an assumption.

Secondly, we may come to reasonable conclusions that something we do not immediately perceive is real. Such as seeing order in the world, and deriving from that that God exists. However, as with our bodily senses, we may come to a reasonable conclusion that contradicts our senses or internal perception, and thus we cannot be certain that our ability to reason can reveal the truth.

Therefore, one has no certainty of the truth of anything. However, since the concept of existence is the most basic idea, and one that a person is entirely incapable of acting without, then existence itself seems to be a certain truth. But beyond that, I cannot find any certainty.

Doubt is the basic step in understanding the mystery of existence so move on.

There is something out there as there is within. What is out there manifest itself as a experience and that is the only thing that we are certain about it. What exactly it is so called objective reality we are not 100% sure but it provide us a good substrate for understanding things.

 

[blase6]

How else do you explain the astonishing success of science which has transformed our lives and even threatens to destroy all life on this planet? An illusion?

Please note that it is impossible to live as if we don’t exist… or that the planet doesn’t exist…

It is possible, but probably not recommendable.

 

[Partinobodycula]

Please note that it is impossible to live as if we don’t exist… or that the planet doesn’t exist…

blase6 isn’t actually suggesting that the world doesn’t exist, he’s simply questioning the nature of that existence. There’s an important difference. If an illusion is all that you have, then it is for you, just as real as if it were made of atoms and molecules. Your anguish is just as real, your doubts are just as real, your hopes are just as real, and your love is just as real. Even if all else is an illusion, that which constitutes the essence of you, is real.

People tend to believe that those who seriously question the legitmacy of the world around them are somehow irrational, but there are people who would say the same thing about those who believe in God, that they’re irrational. In some ways it’s s not so much what a person believes that matters, but how they choose to act, based upon those beliefs. We see this illustrated in the attacks in Paris today. Beliefs, even in a benevolent God, can manifest themselves in many ways. He who is certain of his beliefs is often more dangerous than he who doubts them, and he who finds the truth, is often he who is most willing to question whether he’s already found it.

The amazing thing is that doubting the reality of the world around you, and believing in God, aren’t mutually exclusive. You can question the reality of one without needing to abandon your belief in the other. One of the most enduring arguments against the existence of God, is the existence of evil. How could a loving God create a world with such suffering. Perhaps the answer is, that He didn’t. Perhaps the only one suffering is me, and perhaps what I’ve gained from the experience is worth far more than the discomfort that I have endured. Yes, I have suffered, but in the process I have gained compassion, and sympathy, and faith, and hope, and love, and perseverance. And if the only one suffering is me, then what I have gained is well worth the price. It may be that the only suffering that God created is mine, and much of that is of my own doing. It may be that the glory of life isn’t found in what one has, but in what one has overcome.

Men wonder how a loving God could have created such suffering, but perhaps He didn’t. Perhaps the only one suffering is me. Questioning the reality of the world around you doesn’t mean that you must abandon faith, it simply demonstrates just how dependent you are upon it.

 

[AndrewW94]

However, as with our bodily senses, we may come to a reasonable conclusion that contradicts our senses or internal perception, and thus we cannot be certain that our ability to reason can reveal the truth.

You may want to think that one through a bit more carefully.

 

[blase6]

You may want to think that one through a bit more carefully.

The idea that human reason and logic will reveal certain truth is only an assumption. There is no guarantee.

 

[ChainBreaker]

The idea that human reason and logic will reveal certain truth is only an assumption. There is no guarantee.

Well a square is not a triangle so we do have a reason to think that we exist in a fundamentally logical reality because we know that we exist and we have no knowledge of not existing.

 

[Rhubarb]

By external world, I mean everything perceived. This includes everything perceived through bodily senses, as well as mental perception, such as thoughts and logical conclusions. (I will not say that thoughts are internal, because they can be imposed on us.)

Firstly, we cannot be certain that what we perceive through our physical senses is real. This is because situations can arise where we perceive a contradiction, for example, a mirage, where we see that an oasis exists, but do not feel that it exists. Therefore we have no guarantee that anything felt bodily is real other than an assumption.

Secondly, we may come to reasonable conclusions that something we do not immediately perceive is real. Such as seeing order in the world, and deriving from that that God exists. However, as with our bodily senses, we may come to a reasonable conclusion that contradicts our senses or internal perception, and thus we cannot be certain that our ability to reason can reveal the truth.

Therefore, one has no certainty of the truth of anything. However, since the concept of existence is the most basic idea, and one that a person is entirely incapable of acting without, then existence itself seems to be a certain truth. But beyond that, I cannot find any certainty.

Let me introduce you to GE Moore. He’s one of my favorite philosophers. He had a lot to say about skepticism of this sort. The basic overview is here. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_is_one_hand

 

[blase6]

Let me introduce you to GE Moore. He’s one of my favorite philosophers. He had a lot to say about skepticism of this sort. The basic overview is here. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_is_one_hand

If you see two hands, then they exist at least as concepts you are perceiving. But you cannot then conclude that since you are seeing two hands, that they are physically present. That is where it goes from definite existence in one form to the assumption of existence in another form.

 

[Rhubarb]

If you see two hands, then they exist at least as concepts you are perceiving. But you cannot then conclude that since you are seeing two hands, that they are physically present. That is where it goes from definite existence in one form to the assumption of existence in another form.

The point is that you don’t just see two hands. You feel two hands. You’ve been acquainted with two hands your whole life. You are intimately connected to these two hands and there is a consistent flow of moments where the hands behave in every way that you have learned they should. Everything you have ever experienced brings you back to the fact that you have two hands - and indeed people in general have two hands. (Ceteris paribus, of course) Moore’s argument is that with an application of common sense, these hands are self-evident. Once you get to there, the Moorean shift is simple logic.

 

[blase6]

The point is that you don’t just see two hands. You feel two hands. You’ve been acquainted with two hands your whole life. You are intimately connected to these two hands and there is a consistent flow of moments where the hands behave in every way that you have learned they should. Everything you have ever experienced brings you back to the fact that you have two hands - and indeed people in general have two hands. (Ceteris paribus, of course) Moore’s argument is that with an application of common sense, these hands are self-evident. Once you get to there, the Moorean shift is simple logic.

…and the thought that common sense is not wrong is an assumption too! When you throw out assumptions to the extreme degree, you realize how so much of your life is based on uncertain assumptions.

 

[Rhubarb]

I am very sympathetic to epistemological infalibalism, don’t get me wrong. However, Arguing that (assuming you do have two hands) that you do not have two hands by dismissing the piles and piles of evidence to the contrary is a much bigger bullet to bite than an appeal to a particular kind of common sense in this context. At least, I think it is.

 

[blase6]

I am very sympathetic to epistemological infalibalism, don’t get me wrong. However, Arguing that (assuming you do have two hands) that you do not have two hands by dismissing the piles and piles of evidence to the contrary is a much bigger bullet to bite than an appeal to a particular kind of common sense in this context. At least, I think it is.

Living in a world where you can almost never have “certain” but only “reasonable due to evidence” is extremely frustrating.

 

[oldcelt]

By external world, I mean everything perceived. This includes everything perceived through bodily senses, as well as mental perception, such as thoughts and logical conclusions. (I will not say that thoughts are internal, because they can be imposed on us.)

Firstly, we cannot be certain that what we perceive through our physical senses is real. This is because situations can arise where we perceive a contradiction, for example, a mirage, where we see that an oasis exists, but do not feel that it exists. Therefore we have no guarantee that anything felt bodily is real other than an assumption.

Secondly, we may come to reasonable conclusions that something we do not immediately perceive is real. Such as seeing order in the world, and deriving from that that God exists. However, as with our bodily senses, we may come to a reasonable conclusion that contradicts our senses or internal perception, and thus we cannot be certain that our ability to reason can reveal the truth.

Therefore, one has no certainty of the truth of anything. However, since the concept of existence is the most basic idea, and one that a person is entirely incapable of acting without, then existence itself seems to be a certain truth. But beyond that, I cannot find any certainty.

An almost frightening, but very reasonable statement. I have often thought of this when looking at a scene of particular beauty, or an event of extraordinary enjoyment.
Nicely written.

John

 

[Linusthe2nd]

My faith is in living as if the teachings of the Church are correct. I realized a long time ago that faith and certainty are separate things. You need faith for everything, not just God. But that doesn’t change the fact that there is still the possibility one may be wrong.

Your premise was that the external world cannot be known with certainty because there are instances of confusion due to mental imbalance, illness, accident, etc. You have invalidly concluded that the exception proves the rule. But philosophers, theologians, Divine Revelation, and the teaching of the Church disagree. They all assume that we cannot only know the existence of the external world with certainty but that we can know that God exists with certainty from the evidences provided by his creation and that we can know with certainty our moral obligations and the path to salvation with certainty.

Linus2nd

 

[blase6]

Your premise was that the external world cannot be known with certainty because there are instances of confusion due to mental imbalance, illness, accident, etc. You have invalidly concluded that the exception proves the rule. But philosophers, theologians, Divine Revelation, and the teaching of the Church disagree. They all assume that we cannot only know the existence of the external world with certainty but that we can know that God exists with certainty from the evidences provided by his creation and that we can know with certainty our moral obligations and the path to salvation with certainty.

Linus2nd

…Because they define “certainty” differently from me. The certainty they claim is possible is really not, at least for me.

The uncertainty comes in where perception of a reality is different from an objective reality.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

…Because they define “certainty” differently from me. The certainty they claim is possible is really not, at least for me.

The uncertainty comes in where perception of a reality is different from an objective reality.

It is shows a great lack of trust in God to think he would give us an intellect designed to know truth and then make it impossible for us to know it with certainty.

Further, just because you claim not to know with certainty. it does not follow that others do not or cannot. Perhaps you should examine where your problem lays.

Linus2nd

 

[blase6]

It is shows a great lack of trust in God to think he would give us an intellect designed to know truth and then make it impossible for us to know it with certainty.

Further, just because you claim not to know with certainty. it does not follow that others do not or cannot. Perhaps you should examine where your problem lays.

Linus2nd

To know something certainly it must be that, for it to be incorrect, is necessarily impossible. You have not made any sufficient argument against this.

So far I am certain of existence. That cannot be denied. Maybe since God is existence, then that is why his existence is certain. But the nature of this God is uncertain, and believing in divine revelation does not change this.

It is not relevant to my argument what someone else thinks is certain. Since “someone else” is part of an external world.

 

[Partinobodycula]

Further, just because you claim not to know with certainty. it does not follow that others do not or cannot.

And therein lies the problem, for if you say that you are certain of things which you cannot possibly know, then you are either lying, or in self-denial. But in either case your opinion becomes worthless because your objectivity cannot be trusted. You become simply one of a multitude of humans throughout history who’s pride has led them to proclaim a wisdom which they couldn’t possibly possess. You become a resounding gong and a noisy cymbal. Any wisdom that you may possess, counts for nothing.

Wisdom not tempered by humility serves no man but himself.