
Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
The point is to simultaneously, first, demonstrate the dependence of a person on his senses and everyday experience, and, secondly, to question the truth of his knowledge about the world around him.
The essence of the experiment is that if you imagine the brain of a person in whom all the impulses from the senses were replaced by artificial signals from a computer, which are fake, but indistinguishable from the real ones, then from the point of view of the brain there should be no ways to determine whether his sensations are real, or he is “in a flask”, that is, in virtual reality. Such a brain will consider the artificial world to be real and will not notice the substitution.
Now let's imagine that we are such “brains in flasks”, and our task is to detect this.
Due to the fact that any way to check the reality of the world around us will somehow involve our senses, such a check can always be intercepted, and its results can be distorted by simulation in order to convince us of the truth of the “picture”that is being pushed to us.
As a result, we get a paradox in which we can only be content with what we have and consider what we see to be real, but without the right to assert its truth. This attitude is characteristic of philosophical skepticism and solipsism, which can be studied separately.
The solution to the “brain in a flask” paradox lies in the very design of the experiment, its internal inconsistency or even impossibility. Judge for yourself.
These concepts do not fit together and cannot all be true at the same time. That is, either they are all false, or only one of them is plausible, and it is impossible to say with sincerity which one, because of their fundamental unprovability.
Based on these two considerations, we can conclude that the idea of a “brain in a flask”, a “matrix” or a “world of ideas” is nothing more than an interesting puzzle that has no relation to reality.