Final answer:
Philosophical fallibilism acknowledges our capacity for error in knowledge acquisition, while skepticism holds that certain knowledge is unattainable. Strong forms of skepticism question all knowledge, whereas others focus on particular areas such as morality or religion. Addressing skepticism often involves rejecting the requirement of certainty for justified belief.
Step-by-step explanation:
The notion that we do not know everything about this world and that we can be wrong is a foundational aspect of fallibilism. This philosophical perspective acknowledges the inherent uncertainty and potential for error in human knowledge. On the other hand, skepticism, especially philosophical skepticism, posits that certain or absolute knowledge is impossible. Skepticism comes in two main forms: global skepticism, which challenges the possibility of all knowledge, and local skepticism, which questions knowledge in specific domains, such as morality or the existence of God.
Daoism also incorporates a skeptical view, emphasizing the importance of recognizing the limitations of human knowledge. Philosophers who respond to skepticism often argue that certainty is not a prerequisite for justified belief, proposing that we can have knowledge even without absolute certainty. This counters global skeptics' claims that we need to completely rule out skeptical hypotheses like the 'brain in a vat' scenario. Applied epistemology extends these discussions to the social realm, exploring how knowledge is shared, formed, and sometimes unjustly discounted within societies.