Revisiting Moore’s Anti-Skeptical Argument in “Proof of an External World”

Abstract This paper argues that we should reject G. E. Moore’s anti-skeptical argument as it is presented in “Proof of an External World.” However, the reason I offer different from traditional objections. A proper understanding “proof” requires paying attention to important distinction between two forms skepticism. call these Ontological Skepticism and Epistemic . The former skepticism about ontological status fundamental reality, while latter our empirical knowledge. Philosophers often assume response “external world skepticism” deals exclusively with former, not latter. But this a mistake. shall argue targets form Thus, conclusion claim premises are epistemic claims. If correct, then outstrips scope its proves too much.