Elucidation and Verification of the Brain In a Vat Philosophy: Are We Or Are We Not - Essay Example

? Elucidation And Verification Of The ‘Brain In a Vat’ Philosophy: Are We Or Are We Not? Paper Type 2nd March, 1500 words Institutional Affiliation Elucidation And Verification Of The ‘Brain In Vat’ Philosophy: Are We Or Are We Not? Over a long period of philosophy and argument’s evaluation, the illustration of the global or Cartesian theory has been referred to by the ‘Brain in a Vat’ theory and/or experimented to be a brain being put in a vat and attached to wires by a program. For the possibility of individuals to think that they are merely a brain in a vat the argument has a positive and a negative side. Why so? The validity of the argument may or may not be provided but for students of philosophy this thought is always pondered upon; whether them believing if they are a brain in a vat could stimulate the external experiences human beings go through while having it inside their skulls. What has been put forth as sarcastically doubtful is the possibility of the above explanation, which refers to the idea that the possibility of human beliefs being false cannot be removed if the surety of to provide human beings with a good reason to believe they are not a brain in a vat. Thus, for the explanation provided by many philosophers over a long period of time, the gained sequences add to the information in such a manner that if human beings know that something (let it be x), then they are not brains in a vat. On the other side of the argument the statement expounds that if human beings are not sure of being brains in vat than they have no what so ever idea about x. Thus, amongst many of the reasons that will be provided further, one belief to prove that people are not just brains in a vat is the human consciousness of realizing and strengthening their confidence with certainty. As modern philosophers are continuously disapproving a conflict and spar is seen in the assessment and differentiation between skepticism and realism. Due to this, the Cartesian doubt has been talked about thoroughly with reference to its chances of being untrue. This issue is being dealt with Putnam’s theory of realism and knowledge for giving human beings the reason to believe that they are not just brains in a vat. Amongst the many reasons to defend the claim Putnam’s (1982) verification of the idea that human beings cannot be brains in vat due to the presence and reliability of the outlines of realism against skepticism or the Cartesian doubt1 have been called upon. It is due to the sole fact that the nature of the claim advanced by the modern philosophers is such that the philosophy of the human mind and language is being reviewed under central thesis. The reasons have been presented to be the moderateness of the theories that lead people to believe that they are brains in a vat which has resulted in doubting the effects in situations for the debates on realism. Hence, in accordance with the power of the arguments provided by the Cartesian theory and the Putnam argument, the verification has been assessed and is still not clear when it comes to the approval for reasons to believe that humans are not just brains in a vat. As for the verification of the situation, which has been continuously perplexing people let them be philosophers or not towards doubting the existence of the values or beliefs. Sitting at a breakfast table, wondering just because an individual saw something in their dreams that didn’t exist means that those poached eggs don’t exist in real life too? That probably would result in the consideration ‘Oh well let’s eat them and check’, so the eggs would pretty much be eaten and ingested, period. No theories, no speculations and above all, no doubts in the reality of the metaphysical nature of objects that surround us. But still people ask for reasons for the explanation of the mere belief why they are labeled as brains in a vat by philosophers. As human minds have thoughts and reasoning without any immediate objects to hold onto by itself other than its own ideas, the knowledge we have depends upon the confidence of our theories. Contrary to this, the knowledge itself is a set of instructions that prepares the functioning and the behavior of a human body and its measurements around its environment. The second reason to clarify that human beings are not just brains in a vat is that the mind judges things in the basis of the strength of the knowledge of the environment, or disagreement and inappropriateness of our beliefs (which wouldn’t have existed then) and nothing else. Hence, the reality lies in the fact that even though the aspect of skepticism has enormously existed in philosophical evaluations but for the justification of the Cartesian doubt not all human beliefs can be rated as deceased. Just because people fancy huge houses, expensive cars, diamond rings, and perfect jobs, doesn’t mean that their dreams of having something that they don’t need lead to the conclusion that these things don’t exist. If someone wants to have a huge house, Thus, Putnam’s verification of realism against skepticism provided by Norris (2002) can be justified in accordance to the certainty of the cemented knowledge that leads individuals to follow the philosophers in believing that two ideas contract and/or are analogous.2 Just because human beings believe something is something, doesn’t mean that the actual nature of that particular object can be changed in accordance to the thoughts. Here, the Cartesian theory of doubt implies with reference to the actuality of human beliefs and its relation with realism. For the presentation of Locke’s assessment, the verifications provide somewhat the same evaluation that for the Cartesian doubt theory there are four aspects of conflicts when it comes down to the verification whether human there is an argument to prove that human beings are not just brains in a vat.. This diversity of the argument and its aspect contains the sides of identity of realistic knowledge, which points towards the interpretation that it is the nature of knowledge with which people confuse the differences puts forth Putnam in the thought processions of the same knowledge, and ponder upon being brains in the vat. Thus, Putnam has provided along with Locke’s (2004) verification that there is a relation and not just a conflict between skepticism and realism.3 Hence, the lines that fall between opinion and knowledge along with the special concentration on the opinion side of the line; the claim of human beings being brains in a vat is considered worth a while for exploration. The question that needs to be raised is “regarding knowledge for which we have no certainty what should be the guide that varies our level of its understanding and concern?” Thus, for the elimination of the confusion for the argument for reasoning whether human beings are not just brains in a vat there is a simple formula for resolution. It is the nature of human beings to inquire in detail regarding the origins of knowledge for its validity, thus this process shall be further advanced by making sure from where knowledge comes and by understanding the validity of the knowledge and to match these two. At the end, the nature of the knowledge shall be compared with the possibilities of beliefs and values which shall be correlated and interlinked with the knowledge. This at the end will provide the third reason of the justified knowledge that individuals are not just brains in a vat. As far as the verification is concerned, their nature cannot be true or false. This is due to the fact that ideas are perceptions; in our mind it is their foundations that matter. The foundation i.e. the knowledge that lies behind ideas has to be either true or false. If Newton believed that every action has an equal but opposite reaction, why does everyone so strongly believe it? It is due to the fact that Newton provided us with the basis of his theory, the formulas, and the appropriateness of the existence of objects. Just because people doubt the existence of their beliefs doesn’t mean that Newton was a ghost! Thus, it is the metaphysical sense that has been put into consideration by philosophers when it comes to dealing with the true or false nature of our beliefs. It is a natural mental proposition that whenever our minds are introduced to the thoughts that don’t have any basis to our knowledge gathering, that specific idea is adequate enough to become a candidate to skepticism. In turn, in accordance to the verification of Putnam’s assessment provided by Devitt (1991) our mind automatically fixes the idea of being either right or when it is questioned people start thinking that they are maybe brains in a vat.4 Hence, as Warfield (1995) clarified by providing that human beings are not brains in a vat just because they depend on self knowledge.5 Thus, in conclusion it can be elucidated even though this issue is strictly philosophical, it has yet sorted itself out for those who know an accurate understanding of self and surroundings. From my perspective, it is just the lack of interest that adds another glass to the anti-realistic theory and can be attested by this clarification itself. Bibliography: Devitt, Michael, Realism and truth, New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 1991. Locke, John. “An Essay Concerning Human Book IV: Knowledge." Understanding Early Modern Texts (2004) http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/pdf/lockess4.pdf (Accessed March 2, 2012). Norris, Christopher, Hilary Putnam: realism, reason and the uses of uncertainty, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2002. Putnam, Hilary. Reason, Truth and History, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. Warfield, Ted. “Knowing the World and Knowing our Minds.” (1995) 55 Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 525-545. Read More