Skip to main content

New answers tagged

0 votes

"i think therefore i am", revist, does criticisms really hold?

"i think therefore i am", revist, does criticisms really hold? I do not understand the word "revist". With that in mind, here's my answer. Fisher's comment is indeed a puzzler. ...
Mark Andrews's user avatar
  • 6,294
4 votes

"i think therefore i am", revist, does criticisms really hold?

What he is saying is that Descartes wants to establish the indubitable truth that there is a particular res cogitans, ie. a specific thinking substance, that is me. Fisher points out that given the ...
Philip Klöcking's user avatar
  • 14.2k
0 votes

Scott Aikin's "modest, but not self-effacing" transcendental argument

The central move is to show that "Transcendental Pessimism" (= we have no knowledge or have no reliable means to assess knowledge) is self-defeating, since it is "epistemically worst&...
John Bollinger's user avatar
6 votes

Scott Aikin's "modest, but not self-effacing" transcendental argument

Here’s my first attempt at absorbing the article: There have been arguments throughout the history of philosophy for deep uncertainty about even basic judgments or beliefs (Hume, Foucault, ...
Julius Hamilton's user avatar
3 votes

Scott Aikin's "modest, but not self-effacing" transcendental argument

I guess, there might be possible evidence, why not? Even if the deceiver leaked some evidence, by that assumption we'd still be unable to recognize it as such. Indeed, the point of "...
Julio Di Egidio - inactive's user avatar

Top 50 recent answers are included