Q&A: Skepticism
Skepticism
Question
I heard a question from a skeptic: apparently it is more reasonable that reality is not real than that it is real (and the same would apply to many other claims that are based on intuition). The argument goes like this: we see reality; one interpretation of reality is that it is real, but there are also infinitely many other interpretations that explain what we see. It follows that the chance that the intuitive interpretation is correct is one out of infinitely many interpretations. I tried to answer him that according to his own view, if one cannot rely on intuition then one also cannot rely on probabilistic calculation, since its source is intuition. But I am not sure about this. I would be happy to know what you think. Thank you very much.
Answer
This calculation assumes that all the possibilities carry equal weight. But they do not.
Discussion on Answer
Not true. Suppose for the sake of discussion that there are two possibilities: either my eyes are deceiving me or they are not. It seems clear to me that they are not deceiving me, and therefore the possibilities are not equal.
Anonymous, sorry for jumping in,
I think the opposite. Let’s go with your approach: then think that all the skeptical possibilities have identical weight, and there are infinitely many such possibilities. If so, the probability of each possibility is quite negligible.
On the other hand, there is the possibility that you are aligned with the world and all that, and if you believe in that then you increase its weight. So in a simple calculation, even if you give that possibility only one-tenth of a percent of confidence, relative to the other possibilities it will easily win.
In any case, I think
that you should look at it differently: regarding all the skeptical possibilities, you are not aware of their weight at all, so you have no way to assess their weight. Only the possibility that you are aligned is one you are aware of and can assess its weight. In other words, you need to distinguish between a logical possibility and an epistemic possibility.
Happy Holiday.
Thank you very much. Assuming my intuition may be misleading me, is the probability I wrote down correct? I am unsure, because you can calculate each possibility on its own and then the chance is 1 out of many, and you can also look at it like this: either my perception is correct or it is not, and then there are 2 possibilities. In general, what is the value of such an imprecise probabilistic calculation where, due to lack of knowledge, I assume each possibility has equal weight? One last question: does probability originate in intuition?
If your intuition is misleading you, then there is no point dealing with probabilities. They too are based on it. Any application of any mode of reasoning to the world is a product of intuition. In any case, probability based on ignorance is a fairly dubious tool.
You didn’t answer the first part of the question: what is the right way to look at this?
You can calculate each possibility on its own and then the chance is 1 out of many, and you can also look at it like this: either my perception is correct or it is not, and then there are 2 possibilities.
I did answer. There is no calculation here, and there is no point speaking in terms of probabilities. There is a lack of information.
Apparently, when there is no way to calculate, then all the possibilities should receive equal weight. Another question: does probabilistic calculation come from intuition? Thank you very much.