Bertrand Russell

Bertrand Russell claims in his writing that there is not a single part of knowledge or reality that cannot be doubted. Our aim in philosophy is to clearly answer questions, which are as yet unanswered, or not stated as truth, in a critical manner, after having taken all possible matters into account, without any ambiguity.

In 'Problems in Philosophy' Chapter One, 'Appearance and Reality' (Pg.4 and 5), he uses an example of observing the objects that surround him, a table being one of them, and acknowledging that no-one else in the room would sense the table, or perceive it, exactly as he does from the angle at which he is viewing it. From this, he is reminded of one of the distinctions that causes trouble in philosophy; the distinction between appearance and reality. An artist would see it from an even different perspective to that of an ordinary person, in terms of perspective, light, shade, colouring, and so on.

Analysis

Russell's method of approaching his subject embraces the Cartesian technique of radical doubt. Rene Descartes (1596–1650) first employed it in his Meditations on First Philosophy. Upon discovering his philosophical confusion about ordinary things, Descartes decided to believe in nothing that he did not discern as clearly and distinctly true. Descartes imagined the possibility of a mischievous demon, who disordered reality in order to deceive humans; anything was possible if he could not prove that it wasn't the case. Russell acknowledges his debt to Descartes in his second chapter when he makes explicit use of Cartesian philosophy to support the idea that "subjective things are the most certain." Russell's first chapter uses radical doubt to separate reality from illusory appearance, a distinction not motivated by a demon, but by the suggestion that reality is simply ordered in a way that is not immediately present to our senses.

Russell takes issue with the authority of common sense by showing that the appearances of the table are numerous and contradictory and cannot be said to suffice as a description of one reality. Confusion about the table's color, texture, and shape, are sufficient to prompt doubt as to whether or not the table exists at all. Belief in the table remains dubious until Russell creates a distinction between the table and sense-data representing the table. Engaging Russell's language allows us to separate our experience of the table, which becomes confusing, from an idea of a real table removed from our perception.

At the end of chapter 1, Russell writes, "Philosophy, if it cannot answer so many questions as we could wish, has at least the power of asking questions which increase the interest of the world, and show the strangeness and wonder lying just below the surface even in the commonest things of daily life." This philosophic capacity to ask questions finds thematic expression throughout the work. Here, the sudden way that reflective questioning can contradict our ordinary view of the world makes clear the necessity of Russell's project. He identifies a need for a theory of knowledge that will reconcile what appears to be from what really is. Russell also appeals to an urge to practice knowledge responsibly, that in order to make statements or hold beliefs about knowledge, we must be able to substantiate that our knowledge is faithful to reality.

Russell's sense-data terminology endures as a helpful reference throughout the work and also as a touchstone of modern philosophy. His table is the illustrative case of sense-data, famous from this popular work, and used as a staple of contemporary philosophical discussion. Among the philosophers who have responded to it in their own works, Hilary Putnam notably identifies Russell's table in his most recent work The Threefold Cord. Putnam discusses the notion of sense-data as a mistaken conceptualization of reality, which Russell developed as a result of the limitations of his scientific age. The mistake does not necessarily rest on an issue of perspective, because the table still might be one color, just affected by a force of nature not identified, not taken into account; if it were, then the table's color would be constant, and still independent of the observer

Finally, a major issue in Problems of Philosophy's appareance and reality ssssss lies in the fact that, to Russell, all knowledge is built on knowledge by the things we know through direct, personal experience. Russell accepts a fundamentally Cartesian point of view, which means he accepts that the proper foundation for philosophical inquiry is individual consciousness and perspective.The theories of epistemology described in Problems of Philosophy's appearance and reality  fit squarely within the British empiricist tradition, in that they claim that the data gained from personal, immediate experience is the starting point of all human knowledge. In Russell’s system, data gained from personal, immediate experience are termed “knowledge by acquaintance.”