brain in vat

682 Words3 Pages
Brain in a Vat: The Break Down I. Introduction: In this argument I will discuss the article, “Brains in Vats and the Evil Demon,” by Christopher Grau. This article is about different views of perceptual knowledge. These different views were taken from Rene Descartes, Johnathan Dancy, and Hilary Putnam. In this argument I will only be discussing a short paragraph on Putnam. I will attempt to argue that as “brains in vats” “no one can be told what the Matrix is” (4) by explaining and further supporting Putnam’s ideas on perceptual knowledge. I will first standardize the argument then give it the true premises and good form test. II. Standardization: 1. Either we are or are not brains in vats. 2. Suppose that we are brains in vats. 3. If we were brains in vats, then we have no causal connection. 4. If we have no causal connection, then we cannot refer to ourselves as brains in a vat. 5. If we cannot refer to ourselves as brains in a vat, then we can not refer to objects such as tables and dogs. 6. Therefore, we know nothing. 7. Suppose we are not brains in vats. 8. If we are not brains in vats, then we have a causal connection. 9. If we have a causal connection, then we can refer to ourselves and other objects such as tables and dogs. 10. Therefore we are not brains in vats. Putnam gives many examples as to how one cannot know if something is real, like the reference to tables or dogs. One does not really know what tables or dogs are because of the perceptions that computers would send. Furthermore, if we were brains in vats we could not possibly be able to know the physical make up of tables or dogs due to being fed information from a computer. If that is all the knowledge one has of tables and dogs then that is what is to be believed. So if we were brains inn vats and the only knowledge we had came from a system of computers all we

More about brain in vat

Open Document