The Cleveland Freethinkers Message Board The Cleveland Freethinkers Discussion Forum General Discussions › I am a Pyrrhonian skeptic; ask me anything.

I am a Pyrrhonian skeptic; ask me anything.

Mark R. O.
MROrel
Cleveland, OH
Post #: 106
Nick:


Do you exist, simply to exist?


M. Orel
Ray V
user 7799412
Stow, OH
Post #: 846
In other words, I hold no beliefs that are not tautologous in meaning.

Are you sure?
Nick R.
MJongo
Barberton, OH
Post #: 17

Do you exist, simply to exist?
If there is a reason I exist, I do not know it.


In other words, I hold no beliefs that are not tautologous in meaning.

Are you sure?
At this moment, yes.
Ray V
user 7799412
Stow, OH
Post #: 847
In other words, I hold no beliefs that are not tautologous in meaning.

Are you sure?
At this moment, yes.

Well then since you are sure that you are a Pyrrhonian skeptic, you are not according Wikipedia:

Ancient Pyrrhonism
Whereas academic skepticism, with Carneades as its most famous adherent, claims that "Nothing can be known, not even this", Pyrrhonian skeptics withhold any assent with regard to non-evident propositions and remain in a state of perpetual inquiry.

Nick R.
MJongo
Barberton, OH
Post #: 18

Well then since you are sure that you are a Pyrrhonian skeptic, you are not according Wikipedia:

Ancient Pyrrhonism
Whereas academic skepticism, with Carneades as its most famous adherent, claims that "Nothing can be known, not even this", Pyrrhonian skeptics withhold any assent with regard to non-evident propositions and remain in a state of perpetual inquiry.

I've bolded the key phrase there smile
Ray V
user 7799412
Stow, OH
Post #: 848
When you assert that your creed is: "Nothing can be known, not even this" you encounter the logical paradox of a self-referential proposition. So why don't you simplify your positions to: "I'm not sure of anything." On that note, I'm not sure what is meant by non-evident proposition.

Nick R.
MJongo
Barberton, OH
Post #: 19
When you assert that your creed is: "Nothing can be known, not even this" you encounter the logical paradox of a self-referential proposition. So why don't you simplify your positions to: "I'm not sure of anything." On that note, I'm not sure what is meant by non-evident proposition.

I am not asserting that; that is academic skepticism, which the article presents in comparison with Pyrrhonian skepticism. Note the word "whereas".

As for what is meant by a non-evident proposition, it is any proposition that is logically possible to be true, but also logically possible to be false; it is contingent. If a proposition cannot possibly be false, then it is a tautology. Likewise, a proposition that cannot possibly be true is a contradiction.
Ray V
user 7799412
Stow, OH
Post #: 849
So you only accept valid A priori propositions. That's fine but you still have to make thousands of decisions every day that don't meet this standard. Each day we all must move through a world of probabilities.
Nick R.
MJongo
Barberton, OH
Post #: 20
So you only accept valid A priori propositions. That's fine but you still have to make thousands of decisions every day that don't meet this standard. Each day we all must move through a world of probabilities.
Which is why I am also a pragmatist. In the face of uncertainty, I act as if constant laws of the universe exist, just in case they do. Note that does not mean I believe they do.
A former member
Post #: 221
So then what new information are you giving us by telling us you are a Phrrhonian skeptic? It sounds like for all practical purposes you judge the reliability of information by the same bar that the rest of us do. Maybe I'm one, too, since our senses and brains are very fallible and that's the only way to get information. However, since I run a Skeptic's group, I run into a lot of people who either a) assume that we are using "skeptic" to mean something like what you are describing, one who doubts everything even when there is very good reason to believe and thus thinks we go around never accepting anything and b) are this way and seem to have no ability to choose a reasonable bar for judging evidence and sticking to it and justify it through philosophical skepticism. (We had a member who quit over this related to her skepticism of global warming.)

If you fall into neither a nor b, then I guess your Pyrrhonian skepticism makes no difference to me and it just an interesting topic of discussion. I welcome learning about philosophy and I think we can all benefit from it so thank you!
Powered by mvnForum

Our Sponsors

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy