James is the Best

Satisfactory Essays
Henry of Ghent attempts to persuade us that skepticism is impossible and that we can have knowledge. He states that some propositions are shown to always be true due to how humans act and as thus they defeat skepticism. The Skeptics disagree with Henry’s argument since they believe that we have no way of verifying truth. Thus the Skeptics state that we can act through beliefs alone. Henry’s argument is ultimately defeated on this point since it does not give a definitive way of truth verification, and thus allows for Skeptics to argue that they act solely on belief.
According to Henry of Ghent skepticism is incorrect. Henry believes that all of his predecessors have failed in proving this since they attack the skeptics through hypothetical means, which the skeptics are false(Henry 2002,101-102). He states that the only way to disprove skepticism is this through propositions which cannot be proven false. Henry gives three examples. The first states that anyone distinguishes between someone who has knowledge of something and one who does not. The second states that everyone follows their faith, even if it means torture. The third states that you only do an action if you understand what follows from it. Henry feels that these three propositions are true and that the Skeptics themselves follow these rules. Thus skepticism is incorrect and we can have knowledge.
Skeptics disagree with Henry since they believe we can act with only belief. According to Plato knowledge is a justified true belief(Nozick 1981,170). Skeptics believe that is impossible to verify truth, thus we can have no knowledge since do not have truth(Henry 2002,101-102). They do believe that we can have beliefs, as seen by the fact that they believe we cannot have ...

... middle of paper ...

...e was an agreement. But if it was only a second than it cannot be considered knowledge as knowledge is always a true and can be maintained as such. Therefore the agreement is not knowledge as it is not able to remain true, even if such an agreement had been made. Due to this Henry’s argument is incorrect.
Henry’s argument is unable to provide a proper way for truth verification thus it is a weak argument. The Skeptics require us to show them that they have to accept something as they will never claim so do to their own beliefs on their own and there claims cannot be defeated without such a thing. As such the lack of it makes Henry’s argument ineffective and forgettable.

Henry of Ghent. Can a Human Being Know Anything?. Cambridge: Cambridge , 2002.

Nozick, Robert. Philosophical explanations. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1981.
Get Access