the problems of philosophy-the second chapter

Russell continues to discuss the existence of matter. I thought he could deduce the contradiction from the perspective of suspision, and then affirm the existence of matter. But unfortunately, he neither denied nor affirmed, and even used instinctive belief to assume the existence of matter.

Russell pointed out the flaws of the two arguments. One of them is the method of systematic doubt from Descartes. Whatever he could bring himself to doubt, he would doubt, until he saw reason for not doubting it.  For example, he suspects that what he sees in front of his eyes is an illusion made by the devil. But he cannot doubt his own existence, because if does not exist anymore, where does the devil come from. Really, I cannot help and want to laugh when I see this, Is this a persecution delusion? But Descartes came to a serious conclusion, I think, therefore I am. Russell rigorously pointed out that this affirms the existence of human beings self, but is may not be used to prove the existence of objective objects. Compared to say I saw the table, it is better to say the tabel was seen by me.

Russell then logically denied another view. I saw a table and thought it existed objectively, because not only I saw it, but others also saw it. If I insit that what I see is not a table, but a chair or something, it would be very ridiculous. But Russel pointed out the loopholes in the logic, now in so far as the above considerations depend upon supposing that there are other people besides ourselves, they beg the very question at issue, which can be said in chinese ，丏辞. Then he said such a sentence, there is no logical impossibility in the supposition that the whole world of life is a dream, in which we ourselves create all the objects that come before us. it remind me of a moive, The Trumen show. Perhaps this is the greatness of philosophy, a person can live very well in his own world.

After the argument was fruitless, Russell put forward a reasonable and common sense hypothesis, there are really objects independent of us, whose arction on us causes our sensation.  For example, a cat exists when I see it, and does not exist when I cannot it. Then there is a period between the first time I saw it and the second time I saw it, where did it go? Its disappearance in this world is a very absurd thing.  Russell calls this instinctive beliefs. It seems as if the sense-datum itself were instinctively believed to be the independent object, whereas argument shows that the object cannot be identical with the sense-datum.

Finally， he said, all knowledge, we find, must be built up upon our instinctive beliefs, and if these are rejected, nothing is left.  In fact, as a Chinese, I have my own worldview, and I do not really with it. I think the world is born out of contradictions, and everything is essentially void. Once a house is built, it will collapse one day, and a new house will be built on top of the ruins. The house has existed and never existed, this is the void that I understand, and this is the nature of matter.