On the subject of knowledge and reality, we are confronted with many philosophers and their opinions on how we acquire knowledge. In my essay I will focus on the question between skeptics and dogmatists. I will first explain what dogmatism is about perceptual justification and knowledge, then I will show how the dogmatist answers the problem of skepticism and why the answer to skepticism is not plausible. What is dogmatism about perceptual justification and knowledge? I'll start by breaking this sentence down and defining its main words. “Dogmatism,” according to Dr. David Seaman, is the ideology of “unfounded positivity in matters of opinion and the arrogant assertion of opinions as truths.” In other words, dogmatism is a blind trust that comes from reasoning. A dogmatist is more likely to support the philosophy of a relativist. Relativists believe in a criterion of judgment that varies according to individuals and the environment in which they find themselves. We will then define “perceptual justification”. Perceptual justification, one of James Pryor's main interests, is justification grounded in conscious perceptual experiences. Many philosophers, such as Alvin Goldman, object to this type of justification, arguing that perceptual experiences are not always reliable for knowing something. Alternatively, it focuses on the mechanisms responsible for a person's perceptual experiences. The reasoning involved in perceptual justification can be broken down into propositional justification and doxastic justification, which includes propositional justification. Propositional justification can be defined when a subject "S" has propositional justification for believing that a proposition "P" if and only if he has good reason to believe that this proposition...... middle of the 'article...... I ate the justification of the first meeting. This justification is what leads dogmatists to perceptual knowledge. Skeptics question this perceptual knowledge that dogmatists claim to gain by questioning their beliefs. We note how James Pryor attempts to respond to these skeptics through his use of the modest anti-skeptical project. Even if the goal of this project was to come to know things without having to contradict the evidence given in terms of perception, the project failed because it only brought satisfaction to the dogmatist. Dogmatists have also argued about the grounds of independent justification with respect to skepticism, but what they have failed to realize is that independent justification is essential to achieving belief in other aspects of the premises . Now the dogmatic response against skepticism is not plausible because it cannot prove the skeptic's theory incorrect..