خلاصة:
The brain in a vat argument or fallacy is one of the arguments that has been exploited in defense of skepticism. The aforementioned argument was formulated following innovations that occurred with the emergence of computers and the electronics industry. This argument, which bears a strong resemblance to Descartes' evil demon argument or the dream argument, is considered one of the most important fallacies or arguments put forward in defense of skepticism. By explaining and examining it, many of these types of fallacies or criticisms can be answered. From the author's perspective, the aforementioned argument has many difficulties and problems—such as being self-refuting and unable to be comprehensive and absolute—which cause its foundation to collapse.
ملخص الجهاز:
From the skeptic's perspective, the knowing subject - who is either dreaming, has been deceived by a demon, or whose brain is floating somewhere under the control of factors outside the mind - is given correct or incorrect information and, consequently, believes and accepts that proposition - whether it be true or false.
(Ibid: 167-169) In any case, to solve the Gettier problem and also respond to the argument or doubt of the brain in a vat, instead of the three-part definition of propositional knowledge, he provided a definition based on four components, only two of which are identical to the common definition.
(Fisher & Everitt, 1995: 43-45; )See: Luper-Foy, 1987: 1-6 In this way, Nozick, by posing the problem or argument of the brain in a vat and finding a solution for it, he both answers the problem of skepticism and solves the Gettier problem in the discussion of the definition of knowledge from his own perspective.
Based on the contrapositive of the aforementioned principle, the new formulation of the argument of the brain in a vat is established as follows: If I do not know that my brain is in a vat or in a test tube [under the instillations / from an external agent from the mind ] is, in that case, I will have no knowledge of anything.
(Dancy, 689111) Then, using the contrapositive of the principle of entailment, the argument is formulated as follows: If I do not know that I am not a brain in a vat or asleep, then: A.
(
, 
, 
)
