1. What do we know? What is the extent of our knowledge?
Particularism
Have an Answer to 1 so can have an answer to 2
2. How do we know? What is the criterion for knowing?
Methodism
Have an answer to 1
3rd Option = Skepticism: no answers
No prospect for agreement
Can't have an Answer to 1, without an Answer to 2, and vice versa
Sextus Empiricus
Pyrrhonist
suspend judgment (practice epochē) and take no part in the
controversy regarding the possibility of certain knowledge.
reserves judgement about certain
knowledge and practise epoche
Academic skeptic says there is no such
thing as truth which is paradoxical
Sextus knows he cannot
advance towards tranquility if
he goes down this line
no knowledge as to many
different possibilities
Difference in perceptions and sensations
Honey: Sweet if healthy, bitter if jaundiced
we should suspend our judgement
Not discuss external objects
End result = tranquility
You do not know you will come upon tranquility, but you may
come upon it by chance if you lead your life in this way
Gives us a training manual/new training in skepticism
to give us an ability to oppose the dogmatist: dialectical
ability
Cicero
"Any sense experience that we think represents the
world correctly, exactly resembles one that does not"
No certainty, but probability is a way forward
Arguments of 4 parts
1. There is such a thing as a false
presentation
2. A false presentation cannot
be percieved
3. Where there is no difference between some
presentation it is impossible for one to be percieved
and the other not
4. There is no true presentation orginating from
sensation which there is not another
presentation that is the same as it (corresponds
to it) but cannot be percieved.
This is what Cicero is concerned with
Chisholm
Need to distinguish between truth
and falsehood
Criterion of truth should be "internal, objective and immediate"