Analytical Philosophy Forum 156: Dr.Ranalli on Moore's Epistemology

On the evening of March 28th, the Philosophy and Philosophy Forum of the 156th Philosophy and Philosophy Institute was held in Zhixin Building A1408. Professor Christopher Ranalli of the Free University of Amsterdam made a wonderful academic report on the topic of "Moorean Epistemology". Liang Fei, a teacher of the Department of Philosophy, presided over Wang Huaping, Ivan.V, Huang Qixiang, Wu Tongli, Rong Liwu and Guo Peng.

At the beginning of the lecture, Dr. Ranalli first introduced a proof that Moore had done to prove the existence of the outside world. He raised his hand first and said, "I know this is a hand." Then he raised his other hand and said, "I know this is a hand." Moore made this proof to show that no complicated philosophical arguments are needed. We only need common sense to refute some philosophical theories such as free will skepticism. Starting from Moore's argument for the existence of the outside world, Dr. Ranalli summed up the general framework of the Moore-style argument, including two premises and one conclusion. Premise 1 consists of daily propositions. The second premise is related to the premise, which is based on the premise, and is generally a denial of skepticism. The conclusion is a philosophical proposition introduced from the premise. According to the Moore-style argument, we find that from everyday examples, conclusions are always easily drawn without the need for complex philosophical arguments. Some philosophers therefore believe that the problem with the Moore argument is that the evidence of the premise cannot be evidence of the conclusion. Evidence cannot be passed from premise to conclusion. Other philosophers believe that the problem with the Moore argument lies in the ineffectiveness of dialectics. If Moore’s epistemology is correct, how should Moore’s argument explain this argument? In the lecture, Dr.Ranalli gradually progressed, summed up Moore's epistemological argument, pointed out the shortcomings of this argument, and introduced in detail two theories that responded to the Moore argument. During the questioning session, professors and students of the Institute of Philosophy and Social Sciences had a heated discussion on this topic, and the atmosphere of exchanges between the seats was very enthusiastic.

Speaker Profile: Ranallit, Ph.D., University of Edinburgh, the main research direction is epistemology, published in "Comprehensive" (twice), "Topology", "Philosophy", "International Satirical Journal" and "Cognitive Proceedings".