The criterion problem refers to a state in which we ask ourselves: What do we know? How can we determine true knowledge from false knowledge? What methods do we use to determine the veracity of knowledge? How do we know these methods are true or false? In a word, the criterion problem attempts to identify the root of knowledge. Let's say we have a set of beliefs and we want to differentiate between good and bad beliefs. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay The next step then is to determine what method we are going to use to determine whether beliefs are right or wrong. Before we go any further, we ask ourselves again: “What is a good method and what is a bad method?” » If you think this is the end of the line, then you are wrong because we can still ask what is a good method and what is a bad method to determine a good method. I think we can see where this is going. This can lead to a loop-like scenario where each question leads to another with seemingly no end. In the film Abre Los Ojos, Caesar, the main protagonist, is faced with a decision at the end. He must decide whether he wants to wake up or stay in the dream world. After watching the movie, it's really not easy to discern what's real and what's not. In this case, is Caesar dreaming or is he awake? If he dreams, does Caesar wake up in the real world or is the world he wakes in an extension of his dream? How can he determine whether he is waking up in the real world or in another dream? As you can see, this brings us back to the problem of the criterion. Chisholm describes three different responses to the problem, namely: skepticism, particularism and methodism. As for Caesar's situation, skepticism will not help him determine whether he is dreaming or not. This is because he will wonder how much he knows about his current situation. Is he dreaming or not? How can he say he's dreaming? He cannot answer the first question until he has answered the second. And he can't answer the second question until he answers the first. He therefore finds himself without an answer to both questions. Particularism posits that one has an answer to the first question and uses that as a basis for understanding the second question. By applying it to Caesar, he will claim to have the answer to the question: “Am I dreaming?” ". If he can determine whether he is dreaming, then he can understand how he knows he is dreaming. Perhaps Caesar could determine if he was dreaming. This is possible in two situations. The first situation is the bar scene where Caesar meets the guy from the TV. In the conversation that follows, he is told that he may be dreaming. He denies this, but the whole room goes silent when he says they be quiet and all eyes are on him as he runs away in disbelief. The second situation is the shooting scene. Antonio, his psychiatrist, steps between César and the police just as the shots ring out, but then gets up unharmed and everyone else disappears. Caesar himself now admits that he can actually dream. Methodism works the other way. The claim is that we have the answer to the second question and from there we find the answer to the first. Caesar begins by declaring that he has the answer to the second question: "How do I know that I am dreaming?" ". If he can detect if he is dreaming then he can answer the first question. From the film we can deduce that Caesar is not in control of himself. He is.