I have come to the conclusion that we should all be skeptics.

If I got hit by a car, people would generally agree that it would hurt.
However, it is not certain that it would and I would not know this.
We could perhaps say that "I think that I would be hurt".
But that too is not certain.

Now, here's the thing.
I have seen people say things along the line of:

"You can't know you'd be hurt but you have good reason to believe you would be".
"Cars travel at great speed and if you accept a fast car would hurt you, this is a logical reason of your belief"
"Another good reason why you do in fact believe it would hurt would be that I would have seen car crashes with my own eyes".

Now, these 'good reasons' for highlighting if something would happen / if we are thinking a particular way....are not certain!

An evil genius (heard of him?) could have made me mistakenly suggest fast cars hurt, whilst hiding my true beliefs from me. My brain could be in a vat and being fed untruths about logical reasoning, masking all true good reasons.

If I cannot be certain that I think the car would hurt, how can I avoid complete skepticism? Surely having 'good reason to think otherwise' is no real answer. All evidence which suggests it would hurt, could be false.

Thoughts?