§3 Philosophical Obstacles

While Category 1 obstacles deal with how we think (psychology), Category 2 obstacles deal with what we think. These are deep-seated philosophical beliefs that can act as a barrier to critical inquiry before we even begin to look at evidence.

3.1 The Lens of the Worldview

A worldview is a philosophy of life—a set of fundamental beliefs and ideas that act as a filter for how we process information and interpret the world.

Think of your worldview as a camera lens. Depending on the tint or focus of that lens, some information is accepted clearly, while other information is distorted or blocked entirely. Our worldviews are often shaped by our political, religious, and cultural backgrounds, and they define our starting points for what we consider “true” or “real.”

3.2 Subjective and Social Relativism

Relativism is the view that truth is not objective, but rather created by the person or group holding the belief.

• Subjective Relativism: The view that truth depends solely on what an individual believes.

  • Example: “The Earth is flat because I believe it is.”

• Social Relativism: The view that truth is relative to societies or cultures.

  • Example: “The Earth is flat because my society believes it.”

Problems with Relativist Views:

1. The Infallibility Problem: These views imply that individuals or societies are infallible. If truth is just “what I believe,” then I can never be wrong. This seems untenable in a world where we regularly discover our mistakes.

2. Social Reform is Impossible: If social relativism is true, a social reformer (like Martin Luther King Jr. or Susan B. Anthony) could never be “right” if they disagreed with their society’s established truth.

3. Self-Defeating Logic: Consider the statement: “Truth is relative.” If that statement is true for everyone, it is a global claim. But by definition, relativism says there are no global claims. Therefore, the statement undermines its own foundation.

3.3 Philosophical Skepticism

Philosophical Skepticism is the view that we know much less than we think we know—or perhaps nothing at all.

• The Certainty Requirement: Some skeptics (often following a path of Cartesian Rationalism) argue that knowledge requires absolute certainty. If there is even a $0.0001\%$ possibility that you are dreaming or in a simulation, then you cannot “know” you are reading this.

• The Skeptical Conclusion: Since almost anything could be doubted in a hypothetical sense, we know very little or nothing at all.

The Critical Thinking Response:

Critical thinking rejects the idea that knowledge requires absolute, $100\%$ certainty.

1. Reasonable Doubt vs. Possible Doubt: We can claim to know things when they are beyond all reasonable doubt, even if they aren’t beyond every imaginable or possible doubt.

2. Skepticism as Self-Defeating: The claim “I know nothing” is itself a claim of knowledge. If you truly know nothing, you cannot know that you know nothing.

SUMMARY TABLE: Category 1 vs. Category 2