Abstract:
The first step in Madaqah epistemology is about the possibility of knowledge, which involves the examination of types, evidences of benefits and harms of skepticism. In this regard, it is possible to examine the types of skepticism, such as comprehensive and localized skepticism, and methodological and real skepticism, etc., and the origins and historical course of this debate from Peiron to Descartes and contemporary skeptics.
Machine summary:
Assuming that "p" is the symbol of any conventional belief (eg: there is a table in front of me), the first type of argument that uses the skepticism assumption can be expressed as follows: if S knows about p, then p is certain The implicit meaning of the second premise of this argument is the Cartesian concept of doubt, which is roughly the following: the proposition "p" is doubtful from the point of view of S if there is a propositionthat 1) S has no reason to deny it; and 2) if it is added to S's beliefs, it reduces the justification of p, in which case S doubts p. However, the relevant question is: if S has a valid reason to believe P (or has knowledge of P); and P (according to S), clear, implies q; And S believes in q based on his belief in P, in this case, does S have a valid reason in believing (or in terms of knowledge) in q? Contemporary sources contain two common responses to the argument that is [raised] in favor of skepticism using a valid account of the transitivity principle. But, it is very important to remember that even if that principle were false in such a way,As long as knowledge requires justification, we can still use the argument presented to prove that p, because it is not justified, is outside of our knowledge. Because if the transitivity principle is true, some forms of internalist explanation of justification must be true, and what justifies S in denying the assumption of skepticism is p itself.