Urgent Philosophy Help!

[superstar101]

Hi guys, I am trying to reconstruct this argument using premises and a conclusion but I am having the greatest trouble doing it, and I was wondering if any Philosophy peeps could help me out.

"The problem is that this idea seems to lead immediately to skepticism- to the conclusion that we don't know anything. For it seems that virtually all the beliefs we have are based on evidence that isn't infallible. Consider, just briefly, the beliefs we have that depend on the testimony of our senses. We use vision, hearing, touch, and so fourth, to gather evidence about the way the world is. Do the resulting beliefs count as knowledge. THe problem is that the senses are sometimes misleading.

Right now, you believe you are looking at a printed page. You believe this because of the visual experience you now are having. Do you know that there is a printed page in front of you? According to the present suggeestion, for this to be true, it must be the case that you couldn't possibly be mistaken in believing what you do. But the fact of the matter seems to be that you could be mistaken. You might be hallucinating, or dreaming, or your senses might be malfunctioning in some other way."

So far the conclusion is that we don't know anything. I'm supposed to reconstruct a deductively valid argument but I am having trouble writing the premises in a logical form. like

Premise 1:
Premise 2:
------------
Conclusion

I spent the entire day trying yesterday, Any help would be great!! Thanks guys!

[goldenboyz]

If you understand philosophy, it means you don't understand it at all.

[NikkiCarton]

This is much like the "schrodinger's cat" theory. Observation is reality, but if we are not certain of our observations, what is reality? Im sorry I can't give you too much help, let me know what you come up with.