Philosophical skepticism (
UK spelling:
scepticism; from
Greek σκέψις
skepsis, "inquiry") is a family of
philosophical views that question the possibility of
knowledge.
[1][2] Philosophical skeptics are often classified into two general categories: Those who
deny all possibility of knowledge, and those who advocate for the
suspension of judgment due to the inadequacy of evidence.
[3] This distinction is modeled after the differences between the
Academic skeptics and the
Pyrrhonian skeptics in
ancient Greek philosophy.
Philosophical skepticism begins with the claim that one currently lacks knowledge.
Skepticism can be classified according to its scope.
Local skepticism involves being skeptical about particular areas of knowledge (e.g.
moral skepticism, skepticism about the external world, or skepticism about other minds), whereas
radical skepticism claims that one cannot know anything—including that one cannot know about knowing anything.
Skepticism can also be classified according to its method.
Western philosophy has two basic approaches to skepticism.
[4] Cartesian skepticism—named somewhat misleadingly after
René Descartes, who was not a skeptic but used some traditional skeptical arguments in his
Meditations to help establish his
rationalist approach to knowledge—attempts to show that any proposed knowledge claim can be doubted.
Agrippan skepticism focuses on justification rather than the possibility of doubt. According to this view, none of the ways in which one might attempt to justify a claim are adequate. One can justify a claim based on other claims, but this leads to an
infinite regress of justifications. One can use a
dogmatic assertion, but this is not a justification. One can use
circular reasoning, but this fails to justify the conclusion.
Philosophical skepticism is distinguished from
methodological skepticism in that philosophical skepticism is an approach that questions the possibility of
certainty in knowledge, whereas methodological skepticism is an approach that subjects all knowledge claims to scrutiny with the goal of sorting out true from false claims. Similarly,
scientific skepticism differs from philosophical skepticism in that scientific skepticism is an epistemological position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking
empirical evidence. In practice, the term most commonly references the examination of claims and theories that appear to be
pseudoscience, rather than the routine discussions and challenges among scientists.
[5]
en.wikipedia.org
