 Now I know that the chapter starts out with the question is there any knowledge which is so certain that no reasonable person could doubt it Believe it or not. That's not his purpose It kind of looks like that's what he's doing. Turns out he doesn't even do that for the whole book Right. This is the first chapter in a book. I think it's 12 chapters total rustles the problems of philosophy I and you might think that he's has that opening question That's not even the question for the chapter and it's not the question for the whole book But you know, let's leave that a leave that aside. That's not what he's doing He's also not giving an account of reality or anything like that. He's really He's kind of sorta the whole purpose of the whole book is to try to give an account of knowledge that much rustles trying to do He's trying to give an account of knowledge but He's not Doing necessarily with Descartes doing in this first chapter This first chapter does pose an interesting problem You know and you know what Russell is doing in this first chapter at least you know The most of his work in this first chapter is he's dealing with the question What is the relationship between appearance and reality? That's the question. He's dealing with is what is the relationship between Appearance and reality now given his answer. That's gonna be some skeptical worries But we'll get to that just a second and in the meantime. Well, let's take a look at his answer Right. What is this relationship between appearance and reality? Well, he's not trying to say that Appearance just his reality We're gonna look at somebody who says that What what appearances is that just is what what reality is Russell's not saying that He's not even saying what that appearances resemble reality. He's not saying that There's some deep problems there. He points to he's he's not trying to say that You know reality What is Mirrored in our appearances. He's not doing anything like that In fact what he points points at a lot of the times is that there's a big difference between our appearances and reality Appearances change. I mean what he's pointing out is appearances change a whole lot more Than how we think the reality changes. We think the reality is more or less stable at least compared to the appearances They know reality excuse me appearances change or change a whole lot worse reality not so much Now what he's getting at here The evidence he's pointing to is like look think about the appearances that you have right the colors colors aren't appearance that you have from your eyes This is what your eyes do is they see colors But you know You've seen may or may not have noticed right we've got two different colors. They seem two different colors, you know sets With these videos what's because I you know, there was a time I hadn't you took like out an hour and a half or so between shots I had to go run an errand and So, you know like the background light has changed it looks more like the ambient light that I have in this room But the walls didn't change just the light just the appearances The depending what angle you look at things the angle between the angle the appearance will change or maybe The colors will change maybe the shape will change right there's all kinds of ways That the appearance will change just depending on a change within you, right? I mean close your eyes Do you see the computer screen anymore? No, you don't But it's still there It's works for sound Sounds can change that doesn't mean there's a change in the object since can change that doesn't mean there's a change in the objects so What what Russell's really trying to get at here is That you know like these really trying to poke at ways that appearances that they're caused by reality right But it's not the case, you know that that appeared that reality is given in the appearances Reality causes appearances, but causes are distinct from their effects