• Log In

The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast

A Philosophy Podcast and Philosophy Blog

Subscribe on Android Spotify Google Podcasts audible patreon
  • Home
  • Podcast
    • PEL Network Episodes
    • Publicly Available PEL Episodes
    • Paywalled and Ad-Free Episodes
    • PEL Episodes by Topic
    • Nightcap
    • Philosophy vs. Improv
    • Pretty Much Pop
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • (sub)Text
    • Phi Fic Podcast
    • Combat & Classics
    • Constellary Tales
  • Blog
  • About
    • PEL FAQ
    • Meet PEL
    • About Pretty Much Pop
    • Philosophy vs. Improv
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • Meet Phi Fic
    • Listener Feedback
    • Links
  • Join
    • Become a Citizen
    • Join Our Mailing List
    • Log In
  • Donate
  • Store
    • Episodes
    • Swag
    • Everything Else
    • Cart
    • Checkout
    • My Account
  • Contact
  • Mailing List

Ep. 308: Moore’s Proof of Mind-Independent Reality (Part One)

January 9, 2023 by Mark Linsenmayer Leave a Comment

https://podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/secure/partiallyexaminedlife/PEL_ep_308pt1_12-18-22.mp3

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 46:19 — 42.5MB)

Subscribe to get parts 1 and 2 of this now, ad-free.

On G.E. Moore’s "Proof of the External World" (1939) and "Certainty" (1941), featuring Mark, Wes, Dylan, and Seth.

Similar to the essay we covered in our last episode, Moore is defending common sense realism against idealists who claim that the external world is not mind-independent but is instead made up of ideas, and also skeptics who claim that we can't know (or know with certainty) anything about the external world. Instead of considering general claims that everyone presumably knows like "We as people have bodies and experiences and exist in space" and "The earth has existed for many years before we were born," Moore here argues based on "this is a hand" (while holding up his hand) to supposedly prove that external objects exist.

Check out the Overthink podcast and Conversations with Coleman. Attend our live show in NYC on April 15.

There's some set-up in the "External World" essay before he makes this argument, because of course the skeptic and idealist would be fine with you claiming that you have a perception of a hand, just not with the argument that this thing, the hand, is an object with mind-independent reality, and that we can know that (in fact, it's totally obvious). He first distinguishes between things "presented in space," which could include, for instance, my pain (which is presented as being in my foot, for instance); from things "met with in space," which include exclude such private experiences but which imply that the thing would be there to be potentially met with even if no one is actually meeting with it (perceiving it or thinking about it or in any way mentally interacting with it). With this analysis, Moore thinks he's conceptually shown that things "met with in space," which include all physical objects (as well as shadows and other things), are thus external to our minds: They are objective and would exist even if perceiving creatures did not exist at all.

With that move, the philosophical work has been done. All he then has to show in his famous hand proof is that one thing met with in space exists (actually he points out both of his hands, so he's proved "things" instead of just a single "thing"), and that proves that the idealists are wrong.

But what about the skeptics? Moore uses the premise that these hands exist along with his conceptual analysis of what hands really are (physical objects, i.e. met with in space) to prove his general conclusion, but why would the skeptic accept that Moore has warrant to state the premise that his hands exist? As we'll consider in our upcoming episode on Wittgenstein's On Certainty, Wittgenstein was very struck my this: On the one hand, it's pretty inconceivable that you could think that you're looking at your own hand and be making a mistake about it. Wittgenstein can imagine some particular situations where that's the case (like you've taken drugs or are an amputee), but in ordinary situations, you can't make a mistake, and so it's actually weird to say you "know" that that's your hand, because knowledge implies some potential doubt and some method of proof, where the hand just seems too immediate to allow for either of these.

On the other hand (to continue this unfortunate verbal convention given that we're talking about the existence of hands), Moore is clearly just not taking the skeptic seriously that maybe all of our perceptions could be mistaken (because we're a brain in a vat, dreaming, in the Matrix, etc.). While Wittgenstein is then going to distinguish between the two different contexts ("language games") of ordinary interaction (where you can't be mistaken about the hand), and philosophical epistemology (where such doubts can at least be usefully entertained), Moore just says that investigation has to stop somewhere, and there are just some types of claims that we can know with certainty without being able to give reasons for why we know them. An argument uses premises to prove a conclusion. If we always demanded "well, sure, those premises lead to that conclusion, but you have to prove your premises!" then arguments would go on forever. You'd come up with a further argument to prove a premise, but then your premises in that argument would need to be similarly proved, ad infinitum. So we have a choice of just saying that we know absolutely nothing (and what would motivate this? Some claims about epistemology that would themselves be unproven and hence unknown!) or that there are some things that we just know without proof. We'll talk more about the status of these "Moorean sentences" in part two of this discussion.

Read the essays online: "Proof of an External World" and "Certainty."

Image by Solomon Grundy. Audio editing by Tyler Hislop.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Filed Under: Podcast Episodes Tagged With: epistemology, G.E. Moore, metaphysical realism, philosophy podcast

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

PEL Live Show 2023

Brothers K Live Show

Citizenship has its Benefits

Become a PEL Citizen
Become a PEL Citizen, and get access to all paywalled episodes, early and ad-free, including exclusive Part 2's for episodes starting September 2020; our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email and chat more causally; a community of fellow learners, and more.

Rate and Review

Nightcap

Listen to Nightcap
On Nightcap, listen to the guys respond to listener email and chat more casually about their lives, the making of the show, current events and politics, and anything else that happens to come up.

Subscribe to Email Updates

Select list(s):

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Support PEL

Buy stuff through Amazon and send a few shekels our way at no extra cost to you.

Tweets by PartiallyExLife

Recent Comments

  • Mark Linsenmayer on Ep. 302: Erasmus Praises Foolishness (Part Two)
  • Mark Linsenmayer on Ep. 308: Moore’s Proof of Mind-Independent Reality (Part Two for Supporters)
  • Mark Linsenmayer on Ep. 201: Marcus Aurelius’s Stoicism with Ryan Holiday (Citizen Edition)
  • MartinK on Ep. 201: Marcus Aurelius’s Stoicism with Ryan Holiday (Citizen Edition)
  • Wayne Barr on Ep. 308: Moore’s Proof of Mind-Independent Reality (Part Two for Supporters)

About The Partially Examined Life

The Partially Examined Life is a philosophy podcast by some guys who were at one point set on doing philosophy for a living but then thought better of it. Each episode, we pick a text and chat about it with some balance between insight and flippancy. You don’t have to know any philosophy, or even to have read the text we’re talking about to (mostly) follow and (hopefully) enjoy the discussion

Become a PEL Citizen!

As a PEL Citizen, you’ll have access to a private social community of philosophers, thinkers, and other partial examiners where you can join or initiate discussion groups dedicated to particular readings, participate in lively forums, arrange online meet-ups for impromptu seminars, and more. PEL Citizens also have free access to podcast transcripts, guided readings, episode guides, PEL music, and other citizen-exclusive material. Click here to join.

Blog Post Categories

  • (sub)Text
  • Aftershow
  • Announcements
  • Audiobook
  • Book Excerpts
  • Citizen Content
  • Citizen Document
  • Citizen News
  • Close Reading
  • Combat and Classics
  • Constellary Tales
  • Exclude from Newsletter
  • Featured Ad-Free
  • Featured Article
  • General Announcements
  • Interview
  • Letter to the Editor
  • Misc. Philosophical Musings
  • Nakedly Examined Music Podcast
  • Nakedly Self-Examined Music
  • NEM Bonus
  • Not School Recording
  • Not School Report
  • Other (i.e. Lesser) Podcasts
  • PEL Music
  • PEL Nightcap
  • PEL's Notes
  • Personal Philosophies
  • Phi Fic Podcast
  • Philosophy vs. Improv
  • Podcast Episode (Citizen)
  • Podcast Episodes
  • Pretty Much Pop
  • Reviewage
  • Song Self-Exam
  • Supporter Exclusive
  • Things to Watch
  • Vintage Episode (Citizen)
  • Web Detritus

Follow:

Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | Apple Podcasts

Copyright © 2009 - 2023 · The Partially Examined Life, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy · Terms of Use · Copyright Policy

Copyright © 2023 · Magazine Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in