erences of a far more universal nature. (51). This theory is refuted much as the method of authority. Once one sees that a belief of theirs is determined by a social custom or circumstance extraneous to the facts, one must experience a real doubt, ceasing their belief (51). The method of science is presented last, being the method in which our beliefs are caused by something outside ourselves, and our thinking: some thing permanent. It is not individual, but must affect everyone in order to be permanent. This method assumes reality outside of our perception; everything is real, and governed by certain laws regardless of our opinions about them (52). No doubts arise from the practice of this method, the social impulse does not give cause to doubt it. We only cease to use science when we don not know how to apply it, and it has had the most wonderful triumphs in the way of settling opinion (52). For these four reasons, Pierce chooses to contrast the method of science with the others. He goes on to establish this method by saying it is the only one giving a distinction between right and wrong way; it is possible for bad and good reasoning to happen, which Pierce claims is the foundation of the practical side of logic (53). Skepticism: Nagels Approach to Cartesian EpistemologyNagels approach is Cartesian in nature; it assumes skepticism in that he states that ones own consciousness is the only thing one can be sure of. Everything one believes is based on their experiences and thoughts, feelings and sense impressions (8). Everything outside of ones own, personal thoughts can only access them by means of these inner experiences and thoughts (8). Nagel points out that we are aware of reality directly, but we can only comment on the external world in view of our relation to it. By appealing to your impressions in trying to prove their validity, you are, what Nagel calls, arguing in a circle (9), or making a cl...
