The of skepticism, the external world is contrary

The philosophical attitude of skepticism calls into question the validity of our basic sense-based beliefs. John Pollock and Michael Huemer both go so far as to argue that we are unable to justify belief in an external world. Both arguments will give us a better understanding of how our rudimentary sense organs can possibly deceive us. The idea of skepticism can provide us insights into alternatives of understanding the external world. In this essay, I will examine the key arguments illustrated by both Pollock and Hummer in detail, but also analyze our understanding of how our view of the external world is not what we see fit. I will also defend the concept of skepticism and the arguments that support it. 
True Skeptics are not really doubters. The word “skepticism” comes from the Greek word skeptics meaning inquirers, which therefore means that curious minds have been postulating and contemplating since the time of the Ancient Greeks. Skeptics use reason to explicate their thoughts and ideas to advance their arguments at hand (Unger, 198). This ideal is important to realize because true skeptics are inextricably different than the mere denier, who openly rejects all evidence and arguments opposite their own point of view. In terms of skepticism, skeptics set a particular standard for reasoning in which to approach in various positions in argument. The skeptical attitudes displayed by skeptics have been the impetus for creative and evolutionary ideas presented in arguments defending those positions. 
In a defense of skepticism, the external world is contrary to our perceptions. Most of what we believe or see in the world comes from our experiences. Some philosophers, like Huemer, theorize that our beliefs and ideas come from experience.  We frequently believe hat the origins of our experiences are material objects. The existence of such objects is the external world itself. One of the essential attributes of the external world is that it lives independently of any event or beliefs whatsoever (Huemer, 195). That is, for example, if a bird was present in the external world, then it would exist whether it was being perceived or not. But if the bird exists only if someone understood that it existed, then it is not present in the external world. Humans make a normal connection between something being in “reality” and “in the head”. Fantasies and hallucinations, are usually thought of in the head. Saying it exists, does not deny the experience as realistic, or that the causes of the experience are valid. For it being inside of your head, rejects the phenomena that it exists separately of the experience. When an individual stops having a particular fantasy, the fantasy does not necessary continue to exist within another person. Typically, material objects differ from things within our heads (Huemer, 200). They exist outside of the head like the external world.