The Arising Ethical Aspect in Philosophical Skepticism

Knowledge came into life a very long time ago. It can be traced back from the first civilized people who had a sense of wonder in the world. They began to ask questions that also put themselves into answering them. Some had left unanswered so the next generations took over them and held responsible for them. Some had sparked other questions to arise and so the cycle continued.

Throughout the years, knowledge has evolved, become modified and more developed than how it was before. Alongside the development of knowledge are the growing questions about itself.

In D.W. Hamlyn’s book, The Theory of Knowledge, some fundamental questions were being laid out about knowledge; first, the nature of knowledge in general and the conditions that must be satisfied by any genuine claim to knowledge; second, the scope of knowledge; and third, the epistemological issues that roll out in special fields and disciplines of knowledge. However, adding fuel to the fact that they still hasn’t been solved, an unexpected thought came into light and introduced itself as what we may call, philosophical skepticism.

This paper would tackle about philosophical skepticism in a different point of view that it’s not that terrible as we feared it to be. I wish to pave the way for the recognition of skepticism’s side that is good in some way. Mainly, I also wish to show the ethical aspect involve in practicing skepticism, on how to do it less complicated without risking anything.

Philosophical skepticism, as defined in the book, raises fundamental doubts about the possibility of knowing anything at all. I think the way the word “skepticism” was provided definition here is a bit over insofar that it was not given a chance to be looked at as something good in the first place. The definition robbed the word of its own meaning — to be casted doubt on — for it stood firmly and certain that this is the meaning of this word when paired with “philosophical”. Nothing else will matter. This is exactly where an ethical aspect comes to play.

Philosophy is about endless inquiry. In order for one inquiry to get off of our mind is to acquire knowledge about it, to answer the question we, ourselves formulated when we were first unfamiliar of a particular thing. However, if the hold of skepticism is so strong, what’s the point of all of these inquiries? How exactly are we supposed to live if we can’t be sure of anything? What’s the point of living a life? How could we be able to continue the search for answers of the three main questions concerning knowledge?

This philosophical skepticism will just get on our way every single time we prioritized it. Instead of knowing more, we will put into a halt for we chose to doubt more. I believe that skepticism is a state of mind that allows the right kind of doubt to flourish and it can be also applied to seeking knowledge. There comes a time when this kind of skepticism has done its work, and this is when we should have gotten to the common-sense ideal of good enough.

As for me, it’s alright to cast doubt on things not to the point of doubting if you are really doubting. In this case, if you are knowing anything at all. That is because I’m certain that it will continue to a much worse level of doubting which is not anymore highly recommended. You might come to a point of targeting the essence of what you are doing all your life, when you don’t gain anything at all. Before even reaching that point, a need for balanced skepticism is a must have.

Skepticism might be intimately tied to the idea of progress, but no could go on if one lacks a certain balance. Who knows if we would open ourselves to practicing balance in knowing and doing skepticism only would our other questions be answered. Well, for now our tasks are: to learn when and where to draw the line and be always reminded that thoughts have boundaries and skepticism is a default position.

To doubt is to be human because to doubt is to know. We should learn when to accept certainty and uncertainty. How to know when to do it is now up to us.