Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

On Pyrrhonism, Stances, and Believing What You Want

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of International Journal for the Study of Skepticism

The paper considers the relations between the Pyrrhonism of Sextus Empiricus and epistemological voluntarism, as applied both to epistemic stances and to individual beliefs. In the first part, the main question is whether ancient skepticism is congenial to the idea of alternative epistemic stances (and hence, potentially, to voluntarism about them). The answer proposed is that skepticism does not in fact recognize this possibility. However, this is not due to any essential features of skepticism itself; rather, it is because, like ancient Greek philosophy in general, the stance skepticism in fact unquestioningly assumes is that of realism. In the second part, the focus is more directly on voluntarism and its compatibility with skepticism. The difficulty with bringing these two together, it is argued, is that, while voluntarism gives one license to hold either of two opposing beliefs, skepticism is in the business of subverting beliefs; in this respect their orientations are in opposite directions. A closing suggestion is that if there is any place where ancient skepticism and voluntarism might meet, it is not in the Pyrrhonist tradition, but in the mitigated skepticism of the late Academy, which allowed the holding of (albeit tentative) beliefs.

Affiliations: 1: Johns Hopkins University, rbett1@jhu.edu

10.1163/22105700-04010004
/content/journals/10.1163/22105700-04010004
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/22105700-04010004
Loading

Data & Media loading...

1. Allen J. ( 2010). “ "Pyrrhonism and Medicine",” 232248in Bett (2010).
2. Bett R. ( 1989). “ "The Sophists and Relativism",” Phronesis Vol 34: 139169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156852889X00107
3. ——. ( 2002). Review of Brittain (2001), Bryn Mawr Classical Review , .
4. ——. ( 2005). “ "Le signe dans la tradition pyrrhonienne",” 2948in Kany-Turpin J. (ed.), Signe et prédiction dans l’antiquité . Saint-Étienne: Publications de L’Université de Saint-Étienne.
5. ——. (ed.). ( 2010). The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Skepticism . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. ——. ( 2013). “ "Language, Gods, and Virtue: A Discussion of Robert Mayhew, Prodicus the Sophist: Texts, Translations, and Commentary ",” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy Vol 44: 279311.
7. Brennan T. ( 1994). “ "Criterion and Appearance in Sextus Empiricus: The Scope of Skeptical Doubt, the Status of Skeptical Belief",” Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies Vol 39: 151169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-5370.1994.tb00458.x
8. Brittain C. ( 2001). Philo of Larissa: The Last of the Academic Skeptics . Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
9. ——. ( 2006). Cicero: On Academic Skepticism . Indianapolis: Hackett.
10. ——. (forthcoming). “Cicero as a Character in Cicero’s Philosophical Dialogues,” to appear in the Proceedings of the 2010 Symposium Hellenisticum.
11. Burnyeat M. ( 1982). “ "Idealism and Greek Philosophy: What Descartes Saw and Berkeley Missed",” Philosophical Review Vol 91: 340. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2184667
12. Burnyeat M. ,& Frede M. (eds.). ( 1997). The Original Skeptics: A Controversy . Indianapolis: Hackett.
13. Chakravartty A. ( 2004). “ "Stance Relativism: Empiricism versus Metaphysics",” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Vol 35: 173184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2003.12.002
14. ——. ( 2011a). “ "A Puzzle about Voluntarism about Rational Epistemic Stances",” Synthese Vol 178: 3748. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9516-x
15. ——. ( 2011b). “ "Scientific Realism",” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy , .
16. Fogelin R. ( 1994). Pyrrhonian Reflections on Knowledge and Justification . New York: Oxford University Press.
17. Frede M. ,( 1983). “ "The Method of the So-Called Methodical School of Medicine",” 123in Barnes J. ,, Brunschwig J. ,, Burnyeat M. ,, & Schofield M. (eds.), Science and Speculation: Studies in Hellenistic Theory and Practice . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. ——. ( 1985). Galen: Three Treatises on the Nature of Science, translated by R. Walzer and M. Frede with an Introduction by Michael Frede. Indianapolis: Hackett.
19. ——. ( 1997). “ "The Skeptic’s Beliefs",” 1–24 in Burnyeat & Frede (1997).
20. ——. ( 2011). “ "An Anti-Aristotelian Point of Method in Three Rationalist Doctors",” 115137in Morison B. ,& Ierodiakonou K. (eds.), Episteme, etc.: Essays, in Honour of Jonathan Barnes . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. Giovacchini J. ( 2008). “ "Le ‘dogmatisme négatif’ des médecins empiriques: Sextus et Galien à la recherche d’une médecine sceptique",” Cahiers Philosophiques Vol 115: 6380. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/caph.115.0063
22. Perin C. ( 2010). “ "Skepticism and Belief",” 145164in Bett (2010).
23. Pritchard D. ,( 2011). “ "Wittgensteinian Pyrrhonism",” 193202in Machuca D. (ed.), Pyrrhonism in Ancient, Modern, and Contemporary Philosophy . Dordrecht: Springer.
24. Schneewind J.B. ( 1996). “ "Voluntarism and the Foundations of Ethics",” Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association Vol 70: 2541. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3131037
25. Steinberg E. ( 1993). David Hume: An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding . 2 ndedition. Indianapolis: Hackett.
26. Van Fraassen B. ( 2002). The Empirical Stance . London & New Haven: Yale University Press.
http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/22105700-04010004
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/22105700-04010004
2015-04-22
2017-09-22

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    International Journal for the Study of Skepticism — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation