Locke's Skeptical Realism

C. Conn
{"title":"Locke's Skeptical Realism","authors":"C. Conn","doi":"10.5206/ls.2022.15152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper I contend that Locke is both a realist and a skeptic regarding the mind-independent bodies which are causally responsible for our ideas of sense. Although he frequently indicates that we have experiential knowledge of these bodies, I argue that this was not his considered position. In support of this conclusion I turn: first, to the basic contours of his accounts of knowledge and perception; second, to his argument for the existence of the material world; and third, to his discussions of judgment and probability. Locke’s considered position, I contend, is that instances of veridical perception do not yield genuine instances of knowledge. Rather, these perceptual encounters give rise to empirical judgments which enjoy a high degree of probability. While this prevents them from being suitable objects of knowledge, since Locke thinks that we can be nearly certain of their truth, he contends that we should not hesitate to think, speak and act as if they were instances of knowledge. I further argue that this account provides us with a more satisfying explanation of Locke’s dismissive attitude towards the skeptical hypotheses which appear throughout the Essay.","PeriodicalId":165811,"journal":{"name":"Locke Studies","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Locke Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5206/ls.2022.15152","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper I contend that Locke is both a realist and a skeptic regarding the mind-independent bodies which are causally responsible for our ideas of sense. Although he frequently indicates that we have experiential knowledge of these bodies, I argue that this was not his considered position. In support of this conclusion I turn: first, to the basic contours of his accounts of knowledge and perception; second, to his argument for the existence of the material world; and third, to his discussions of judgment and probability. Locke’s considered position, I contend, is that instances of veridical perception do not yield genuine instances of knowledge. Rather, these perceptual encounters give rise to empirical judgments which enjoy a high degree of probability. While this prevents them from being suitable objects of knowledge, since Locke thinks that we can be nearly certain of their truth, he contends that we should not hesitate to think, speak and act as if they were instances of knowledge. I further argue that this account provides us with a more satisfying explanation of Locke’s dismissive attitude towards the skeptical hypotheses which appear throughout the Essay.
洛克的怀疑论实在论
在这篇论文中,我认为洛克既是一个现实主义者,也是一个怀疑论者,他认为独立于心灵的身体是我们的感觉观念的因果关系。虽然他经常指出我们对这些身体有经验知识,但我认为这不是他考虑过的立场。为了支持这一结论,首先,我转向他对知识和知觉的描述的基本轮廓;第二,他对物质世界存在的论证;第三,他对判断和概率的讨论。我认为,洛克经过深思熟虑的立场是,真实感知的实例不会产生真正的知识实例。更确切地说,这些感性的接触产生了具有高概率的经验判断。既然洛克认为我们几乎可以肯定它们的真实性,那么这就阻止了它们成为合适的知识对象,他主张我们应该毫不犹豫地把它们当作知识的实例来思考、说话和行动。我进一步认为,这种解释为我们提供了一个更令人满意的解释,说明洛克对出现在《随笔》中的怀疑论假设的不屑一顾的态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信