Knowing the characteristics of the external world has long been one of humankind’s greatest problems. Nevertheless, they have always encountered the problem of being able to secure that the knowledge they find there is actually true. Descartes was the most famous philosopher to first approach this problem skeptically. Nevertheless, many after him have found that this is not necessarily true, with G. E. Moore and Immanuel Kant giving compelling arguments for the existence of the outside world. Therefore, through analysis of that which does not belong to the self, one can gain knowledge of the characteristics of the outside world.
Descartes believes that one can separate mind and body, with God allowing humans to know the outside world through his attribute of being trustworthy. In this sense, Descartes does not believe that a person can really know if he or she is dreaming or not. Every possible test to prove the existence of the outside world can be feigned for him.
On the contrary, G. E. Moore believed that, just by raising his two hands, he could demonstrate the existence of the outside world. For him, this was irrevocable proof, showing that there were two differentiated objects that he was aware of. For him, that this premise was different from his conclusion and that there was a logical succession was all he needed in order for this proof to be valid.
Finally, Kant believed that the self was different from all other objects. Therefore, because the self existed, external objects did as well. The way to know the characteristics of these objects would be through a posteriori reasoning, something that would be assured through a rational observance of the natural world.
I believe that the outside world exists because I can see myself as being different than other objects around me. For example, I am different from the computer that I am writing this essay on. Even though I am working on it now, I will leave it afterwards when I go to the class. Therefore, the computer is different from me, meaning that we both exist. These differences in space and time make for different existences. One can obtain knowledge about the external world by analyzing the things that are different from one’s self in a rational and objective manner. This is possible because humans are rational beings.
Descartes would say that these objects could be a part of my imagination, and that I could simply be dreaming everything up. This is significant because it is true: I logically could be dreaming everything up. However, there is no way of knowing that this is the only way to interpret reality. If this were true, it would only be possible for men to dream, and no external reality would actually exist. Nevertheless, the fact that I know myself to be true, and different from other objects, I can say that the external world exists and can study it.
Therefore, even though Descartes’ position should always be taken into account, as it is not falsifiable, it is much more advantageous for man to assume the probable existence of an external world. For example, this has allowed scientists to study it and be able to manipulate it, making me able to write this essay on the computer, instead of papyrus with ink. As one can see, there is importance to knowing the external world.
Reference List
Descartes, R. (2008). Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting One’s Reason and of Seeking Truth in the Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.gutenberg.org/files/59/59-h/59-h.htm#part4
Kant, I. (1998). Critique of Pure Reason. (Paul Guyer & Allen W. Wood, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moore, G.E. (1993). “Proof of an External World.” In Thomas Baldwin (Ed.), G.E. Moore: Selected Writings (pp. 147-170). New York: Routledge.
