— by Ahmad Thakur
Skepticism argues that knowledge does not exist because we could all be brains in a vat dreaming a reality around us. Because from the point of view of the brain, it is not aware that it is in a simulated world. Skeptics argue, that since we can’t know that we are brains in a vat, therefore, we can’t know anything else either. And since we can’t know anything, discussions about what the nature of true knowledge is are moot.
This is a valid argument, but there exists a counterargument to this. Even if we are living in a simulation and can’t possibly have knowledge about the true nature of reality, there might be certain rules that the simulation itself is working on. And maybe, we can know these rules or laws even though they might be limited in explaining the true reality of everything. More importantly, we can know of our existence, because we are aware of our existence.
In the thought experiment The Allegory of the Cave, Plato sets up a somewhat similar situation. The prisoners inside have no knowledge of the outside world and their entire knowledge about everything is just the shadows on the wall. Even so, they do have knowledge of the existence of the shadows at least, and maybe also know of the timings of certain shadows. They could use that knowledge in their daily lives somehow to influence the world around them. Which is to say, having limited or flawed knowledge is better than having no knowledge.