<Table> <Tr> <Td> </Td> <Td> This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations . Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations . (October 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) </Td> </Tr> </Table> <Tr> <Td> </Td> <Td> This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations . Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations . (October 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) </Td> </Tr> <P> In philosophy, the brain in a vat (alternately known as brain in a jar) is a scenario used in a variety of thought experiments intended to draw out certain features of human conceptions of knowledge, reality, truth, mind, consciousness and meaning . It is an updated version of René Descartes' Evil Demon thought experiment originated by Gilbert Harman . Common to many science fiction stories, it outlines a scenario in which a mad scientist, machine, or other entity might remove a person's brain from the body, suspend it in a vat of life - sustaining liquid, and connect its neurons by wires to a supercomputer which would provide it with electrical impulses identical to those the brain normally receives . According to such stories, the computer would then be simulating reality (including appropriate responses to the brain's own output) and the "disembodied" brain would continue to have perfectly normal conscious experiences, such as those of a person with an embodied brain, without these being related to objects or events in the real world . </P> <P> The simplest use of brain - in - a-vat scenarios is as an argument for philosophical skepticism and solipsism . A simple version of this runs as follows: Since the brain in a vat gives and receives exactly the same impulses as it would if it were in a skull, and since these are its only way of interacting with its environment, then it is not possible to tell, from the perspective of that brain, whether it is in a skull or a vat . Yet in the first case most of the person's beliefs may be true (if they believe, say, that they are walking down the street, or eating ice - cream); in the latter case their beliefs are false . Since the argument says one cannot know whether one is a brain in a vat, then one cannot know whether most of one's beliefs might be completely false . Since, in principle, it is impossible to rule out oneself being a brain in a vat, there cannot be good grounds for believing any of the things one believes; a skeptical argument would contend that one certainly cannot know them, raising issues with the definition of knowledge . </P>

Who came up with the brain in a vat theory