无限怀疑论与五种模式

Q2 Arts and Humanities

Logos and Episteme Pub Date : 2019-04-05 DOI:10.5840/LOGOS-EPISTEME20191015

Allysson Vasconcelos Lima Rocha

{"title":"无限怀疑论与五种模式","authors":"Allysson Vasconcelos Lima Rocha","doi":"10.5840/LOGOS-EPISTEME20191015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": There is a difference between the tasks of interpreting Sextus Empiricus and contesting his arguments. Usually, one does the latter relying on some version of the former. Though this seems obvious, it is easy to make mistakes in this endeavor. From this point, I draw two basic recommendations which we should follow, lest we take Sextus to hold implausible positions regarding his Five Modes. However, these recommendations lead us to interpret Sextus’ Pyrrhonism as a limited skepticism. In the final section, as I suggest a counter-example to this commitment, I reconsider the notion of infinite (apeiron ) in the Five Modes to better explain interpretation and criticism of Sextus’ arguments.","PeriodicalId":37720,"journal":{"name":"Logos and Episteme","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Boundless Skepticism and the Five Modes\",\"authors\":\"Allysson Vasconcelos Lima Rocha\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/LOGOS-EPISTEME20191015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\": There is a difference between the tasks of interpreting Sextus Empiricus and contesting his arguments. Usually, one does the latter relying on some version of the former. Though this seems obvious, it is easy to make mistakes in this endeavor. From this point, I draw two basic recommendations which we should follow, lest we take Sextus to hold implausible positions regarding his Five Modes. However, these recommendations lead us to interpret Sextus’ Pyrrhonism as a limited skepticism. In the final section, as I suggest a counter-example to this commitment, I reconsider the notion of infinite (apeiron ) in the Five Modes to better explain interpretation and criticism of Sextus’ arguments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37720,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Logos and Episteme\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Logos and Episteme\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/LOGOS-EPISTEME20191015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Logos and Episteme","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/LOGOS-EPISTEME20191015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

在解释塞克斯图斯·恩皮尼克斯的观点和反驳他的观点之间是有区别的。通常，后者依赖于前者的某些版本。虽然这似乎是显而易见的，但在这种努力中很容易犯错误。从这一点上，我提出了两个我们应该遵循的基本建议，以免我们对塞克斯图斯的五种模式持有不合理的立场。然而，这些建议导致我们将塞克斯图斯的皮龙主义解释为一种有限的怀疑主义。在最后一部分，我提出了一个反例来反驳这一承诺，我重新考虑了五种模式中无限(apeiron)的概念，以更好地解释对塞克斯图斯论点的解释和批评。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Boundless Skepticism and the Five Modes

: There is a difference between the tasks of interpreting Sextus Empiricus and contesting his arguments. Usually, one does the latter relying on some version of the former. Though this seems obvious, it is easy to make mistakes in this endeavor. From this point, I draw two basic recommendations which we should follow, lest we take Sextus to hold implausible positions regarding his Five Modes. However, these recommendations lead us to interpret Sextus’ Pyrrhonism as a limited skepticism. In the final section, as I suggest a counter-example to this commitment, I reconsider the notion of infinite (apeiron ) in the Five Modes to better explain interpretation and criticism of Sextus’ arguments.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Logos and Episteme Arts and Humanities-Philosophy

CiteScore

0.40

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

20 weeks

期刊介绍： the journal publishes articles, reviews or discussion notes focused as well on problems concerning the general theory of knowledge, as on problems specific to the philosophy, methodology and ethics of science, philosophical logic, metaphilosophy, moral epistemology, epistemology of art, epistemology of religion, social or political epistemology, epistemology of communication. Studies in the history of science and of the philosophy of knowledge, or studies in the sociology of knowledge, cognitive psychology, and cognitive science are also welcome.