The mission of philosophy is to distinguish levels for instinctive beliefs. All knowledge is based on instinctive belief, and as long as the final form is harmonious, it can be considered acceptable. Although all truths have the possibility of being wrong, we can't start from this and doubt for the sake of doubt. Because doubt about one belief must be based on another belief, otherwise it will become a doubt without content. The possibility of the established system can be reduced by checking before default.

However, holistic knowledge about the universe is still unavailable.

Although we doubt the physical existence of the table, we don't doubt the existence of the sensory material, which allows us to guess that there is a physical object. -We don't doubt this psychological thing, as Descartes said: Cogito, ergo sum. He intends to systematically doubt it until there is no doubt!

Descartes found that the existence he was completely sure of was his own existence. Even if the devil is lying to him, he still exists. Russell also said: If you want to be a philosopher, you must exercise not to be afraid of absurdity.

let us continue:

One of the biggest reasons for feeling that there should be a physical object outside the material is that we require different people to face the same object: for example, a table.

The problem is that these others are also some "feeling materials" and cannot be used as evidence. We must find the basis purely from personal experience.

in a sense, as Hume said, it must be admitted that we can never prove the existence of those things outside ourselves. The world is composed of myself, my thoughts, feelings and feelings. -There is no logical error in this assumption.

The sensory materials in dreams also have "physical objects". For example, you look for a toilet in your dream because you have to pee urgently. The noise of the door caused a battle at sea in the dream. Assuming that life is a dream, it is not logically impossible, but there is no logical reason to believe that it is true.

-the key point is that it is inconvenient. Same as geocentric theory. Even if it is a dream, we should seriously explore in the dream, what is the cause of naval battle, such as the rustling of doors, as a material object, is the reason for the feeling material of naval battle in the dream.

it's much easier to rely on common sense. For example, the cat, in the room, it appears at random and doesn't know hunger-since the cat is just a sensory material.

out of common sense, we instinctively believe in the existence of "material objects".

-However, we infer that material objects and sensory materials are not the same thing. The difference between them is similar to the description of a blind object and the difference between the image itself. -However, the description of a blind object is really related to something like an elephant.

MORE EVER

All knowledge is based on instinctive belief, and as long as the final form is harmonious, it can be considered acceptable.

beliefs may be wrong. Should be suspected. But we must choose the best belief, and the reason for rejecting one belief must be that another exists and is better. But not because of doubt. Philosophers can do this, and maybe they can only do this. I doubt that I can know more: knowledge about the universe as a whole, knowledge about the nature of objects.

otherwise, there is nothing to cheat.