Is Philosophical Certainty possible?

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Is Philosophical Certainty possible?

  • Yes
  • No
  • Can’t be certain
0 voters

Is Philosophical Certainty possible? You would be hard pressed to find a single philosophical topic on which there is universal consensus, and even if you can find a few, they are clearly in the vast minority.

Free Will vs. Determinism, Subjective vs. Objective morality, Theism / Atheism, Empiricism vs. not, there is debate on all sides - and most people don’t just lean in a certain direction, but rather vehemently.

This may suggest that, in Philosophy, it is impossible to be certain of anything. We can accumulate different arguments, but the arguments will never be 100% conclusive. But is this certain lack of certainty even possible? If it is certain that certainty is impossible, we have a clear contradiction, and so there must, at least occasionally, be such a thing as certainty.

This seems to suggest to me that Philosophy is merely being done poorly, and that philosophers spend more time on semi-convincing arguments than they do on conclusive proof.

Thoughts?

2

“In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” --Benjamin Franklin

Ooh, and tautologies are True.

One of the problems philosophy deals with is that of constant change. We are always trying to reconcile previous beliefs with new findings and bracing for the next hit. The point is not to achieve absolute certainty but to avoid absolute uncertainty.

red

red

roze

3

I am certain of certain things, so I must vote yes.

4

It’s possible to be certain about some things.

What isn’t possible is to be correct in being certain.

5

navigator makes a good point. but i don’t think certainty always has to do with rational, deductive argument, in any case. i’ll vote yes.

6

Haunted by the spectre of my own doubts, ravished by an ocean of uncertainties, I subsided to my idiosyncratic weakness and voted no. There’s no taming the shrew here, gentlemen; we’re left to our own device.

I know at least one Quine that would put that under inquiry.

7

I’d argue that the very nature of philosophy doesn’t allow for certainty.

Because if there was, there would be no philosophy at all.

Philosophy stems from the ability to question something.

If we question it, we render our perception of it ‘uncertain’.

Therefore, philosophy is the moving towards certainty, but always remaining uncertain.

Therefore, philosophy can never allow certainty as one of its basic premises.

Certainty of logic? That our logic is certain?

The certainty of something can always be questioned, therefore uncertainty and certainty will always exist.

and for us to say “what we are certain of is that nothing is certain”

Is like using a table which has no legs and calling it a table.

“what we are certain of is that nothing is certain” simply says to me that it is not an argument, not even a statement, simply outlines the definition of ‘uncertainty’ because you have to know what is certain in order to define uncertain.

Philisophically, though, this cannot be achieved.

Emphasise ‘philisophically’.

Outside of philosophy, sure.

Inside it, certainty becomes irrelevant.

8

While it may be possible to be ‘certain’ :laughing:
:laughing: Why would that make you ‘right’?

9

Philosophical certainty isn’t possible but regular certainty is.

10

It would take strict universality to prove any contextually invariant knowledge. If we could group all the contexts under which an item of knowledge has an interpretation, and prove it to be true in all cases, then philosophic certainty would be possible. But how on earth one could verify that categorical treatment of every context is, in fact, exhausted results in regress.

11

HEY! NO CHEATING!!

That wasn’t part of the question!
:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

12

I’m skeptical.

Aren’t there any philosophies that validate certainty? I could certainly whip one up myself if need be. :wink:

13

Can you please do so Membrain? :smiley:

14

It was a joke :wink:

But you see where I was going…

15

Hehe. OK.

16

Um, ok…

Here goes…

“I think, therefore I am certain”.

=D>

17

You think therefore you are certain… of what?

Certain that your thoughts are occuring?

18

If the argument is 100% certain, how is it philosophy?

19

Remember I am creating a “philosophy”. This isn’t about me.

Notice I put the original statement in quotes.

So I could create the philosophy: “I think therefore I am certain that my thoughts are occurring”.

It says nothing as to whether I believe in the philosophy or not. I just wanted to make the point that philosophies can be created at any time.

Arguments for and against the validity of the philosophy, tallies of how many people are for and against the philosophy, etc. can then be done; but the creation of the philosophy itself seems to be easy to do.

20

Ah, I understand Membrian. When you said you could whip up a philosophy I thought you meant use one that you can whip up a philosophical defense for, not just provide an examine of another philosopher’s conclusion.

My mistake.

It was a problem of me interpretting “validate” as your own opinion of that philosophy truly being valid (which is why I expected you to validate it).