I'm certain that if I don't open up my computer I'll get a lot more done .

"Knowing" has nothing to do with being certain. Repeatable, measurable and peer reviewed reports and tests are the scale.
Otherwise you are just guessing with your limited knowledge.

There is a large swath of things we have a high enough degree of certainty about to legitimately use the semantic shortcut of saying we know it. And most things we have some degree of uncertainty about, still fit with past experience and the shared experience of others sufficiently that you can plan around them. This is sufficient.

The thing people need more than "radical skepticism" really is "epistemological humility" around things that are ethically or morally ambiguous and exist in complex and unpredictable causal chains. People get over-invested in their ideas and are unable to flex or adjust in response to outcomes.

I think much of what we know, although not necessarily everything, is perhaps only highly probable and never really absolutely certain.

Maths, physics and the Scientific Method go a long way to replicating what is certain

You can go right back to the whole "I think therefore I am" kind of malarky but in the end, it all works out in the wash. On the one hand, the world is real. On the other, it is an illusion but either way, it fucking hurts when a hammer falls on your foot. So real or not, wear your steel toe-caps

Well I am sure but not certain that this is a lot of philosophical waffle.

You're very sure your name is Peter, but not certain?
That's head-scratcher.

Well spoken, hitting at kind of the core issue about "reality" here. Which as you'll see from my name here, I consider a bit of a matter of perspective - tough to define.

I like the distinction between "being certain" vs. "feeling certain." I FEEL certain about lots of things but doubt I I can BE certain about any factual claim.

Definitely in these cases is where the Agnosticism comes in. Excellent share. Made me think a little.

What we call knowledge is belief backed with such data and/or consistency of observation that we are willing to act on it. Much of what we call knowledge today will be disproven in the future.

What we perceive through the medium of our senses is subjective, how could it be otherwise? Are we all brains in a vat experiencing a "Matrix" existence? Who knows? Perhaps we're just living in a shared definition of reality. Or, we should, at least, share this reality if we want to survive. Just as our ancestors agreed, for the most part, that the saber-toothed tiger was a threat to be avoided, so should we as a species recognize the threats we face, such as pandemics and climate change.

All knowledge, including what we know today as scientific facts, is provisional, subject to future revision. To assume otherwise is to fossilize our understanding of the universe--a process frequently practiced by religion.

What's the difference between a skeptic and a radical skeptic? Is that similar to excited and 'super' excited?

I only know one thing for sure, and that is that I only know one thing for sure. So far as the nature and foundation of reality, I am totally bewildered. The findings of science are superficial.

Great post!

I am certain I exist right now because I know it.

Fermat's Last Theorem is one of thinking things

“I think,
Therefore I am,”
Said the philosopher.
Bunk! He didn’t feel. He only
Half was.

I am certain that the Bible is not the word of an honest and perfect god. I have proved to myself that it is full of false prophecies, contradictions and impossible stories.

you say, "...or faith (which is usually faulty)." by some definitions "faith" simply means knowledge, skill or a substance.

pretty sure about change

he who says he knows does not yet know as he ought
what is it?

The laws of excluded middle, non contradiction and identity seem certain to me.

I absolutely know that i am here and that a real death awaits me....other than that...NOPE