Radical scepticism provides the perfect argument for rejecting action to mitigate global warming — if we have no reason to believe in the existence of the external world, then trashing it can't be a problem, can it?
Consequently his epistemology avoids the pitfalls of nineteenth century Traditionalism which, carried to its logical conclusion, by undermining the possibility of any rational discourse about reality - and God as its ultimate cause - leads either to
radical scepticism or fideism.
Once the critical mass has moved from absolute certainty vs.
radical scepticism to the possibility of knowing objective truth with high degree of probability through subjective trial and error methodology we will once again begin to experience a «Golden Age» of learning.
I also reject
the radical scepticism of many atheists.
Not exact matches
How lengthy would this essay have become, if it would have listed the theses, negative and positive, with which the writer is in profound agreement, such, for example, as the role which Radhakrishnan assigns to religious experience, and his criticism of
scepticism,
radical materialism, environmentalism, and behaviourism!