8 of 8
8
In regards to Skepticism
Posted: 22 November 2017 03:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 106 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4213
Joined  2009-10-21
Titanomachina - 22 November 2017 02:36 PM

The accounts are in regards to how Pyrrho himself was. They are mostly historical. I don’t know if any modern day practicioners.

I just know that since reading it and having my mind bring it up any time I do something that contradicts it, I feel dead inside. Almost like a stillness. I’m not really sure how to regard it

Letting others control how you feel is not a good idea. It’s one thing to consider the advice of others, it’s another to let some self-reported results from someone 3,000 years ago determine how you relate to the world. I started a thread in this section about delegating authority to others. Either you are hopeless or lying on this thread, so if you are interested in my comments, respond to that question.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 November 2017 03:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 107 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1019
Joined  2015-12-29

I’m not lying. But when I read the wiki page about the philosophy it just seems like it makes sense. I don’t know how to counter it, even though I’m sure others had responses to it. Also there is some reason why it’s not more widespread.

But I just can’t seem to work out what’s wrong with the ten points and the five modes.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2017 07:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 108 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4213
Joined  2009-10-21

The argument from analogy, as explained by Richard Carrier. Refutes the primary assumptions of Pyrrhonism. http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2007/07/experimental-history.html

I’m going to talk about the latter today, giving more examples than I did at camp, because I’ve run into so many lately I just have to talk about them! In “experimental history” you basically recreate a historical circumstance and see what happens, and from that you can infer things about what happened in the past. This employs the same general principle that science also depends on: the argument from analogy. What works yesterday works the same today, what works on Earth works on Mars, what works in London works in Paris, what works today worked the same a thousand years ago. A physicist would not demand that Newton reproduce a demonstration of his laws of motion in Paris on the assumption that physics works differently in London, nor do we demand that Newton’s experiments be replicated every morning on the assumption that the laws of physics can change any day.

We accept this because we have abundant reasons to believe such deviations are highly improbable. Sometimes, it is true, analogies don’t hold. Yet because a violation of this rule is so rare, you need really good evidence to believe things were different or have changed before you can conclude that any given analogy doesn’t hold. The rate of fall of dropped objects is indeed lower on Mars than on Earth, and the elevation of the planet Mars is indeed different in London than it is in Paris. Yet we’ve accumulated plenty of evidence confirming that the circumstances in these cases are relevantly different. In fact, once we add those differing circumstances into our calculations, the corresponding differences in result vanish, and the analogy holds after all. Newton’s laws are actually the same on Mars as on Earth, and in fact this explains why objects fall faster here than there. And once we take into account the sphericity and rotation of the earth, the actual celestial declination of Mars turns out to be identical with respect to Paris or London. And so on.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 December 2017 03:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 109 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1019
Joined  2015-12-29

I believe that the Munchausen trilema addresses the remarks on evidence and proof

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 December 2017 05:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 110 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4213
Joined  2009-10-21
Titanomachina - 02 December 2017 03:16 PM

I believe that the Munchausen trilema addresses the remarks on evidence and proof

It addresses them, but it does not negate them. If it’s cold outside, that doesn’t mean you will freeze to death immediately. Proof is never 100%, but it’s not 0% either.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 December 2017 01:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 111 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1019
Joined  2015-12-29

How so? The trilema seems to skewer certain knowledge and without that why doesn’t that lead to pyrrhonism?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 December 2017 07:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 112 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4213
Joined  2009-10-21
Titanomachina - 03 December 2017 01:56 PM

How so? The trilema seems to skewer certain knowledge and without that why doesn’t that lead to pyrrhonism?

Pyrrhonism is certainty that nothing can be known. You answered your own question.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 December 2017 08:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 113 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1019
Joined  2015-12-29

Well it’s more like the statement that the only sensible thing to do is to suspend judgment and live without beliefs. The logic seems tight no matter how I try to spin it. Here’s one that should clarify as to what it is.

http://www.academia.edu/3483243/Is_the_examined_life_worth_living_A_pyrrhonian_alternative

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 December 2017 05:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 114 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4213
Joined  2009-10-21

First,  prove to me that you read that.

It talks of a pathological unbelief. It does not recommend the type of non believing you advocate.

Also don’t like the examples of the mathematician or the tennis player. It’s true that a good one will tell you that they can get into a “zone” of some sort where they aren’t examining their every move, and that allows them to proceed at a more rapid pace, but this skips over the fact that they preceded that with a lot of practice. There is also a coach or mentor in the picture who is watching and doing the examining for them. There is nothing in skepticism or philosophy that requires you to examine every detail in every moment.

[ Edited: 07 December 2017 11:26 AM by Lausten ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 December 2017 05:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 115 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1019
Joined  2015-12-29

He opens with saying how following this philosophy actually leads to greater engagement in activities but he doesn’t actually make the case for that. I looked at the athlete example and knew it was wrong. I play fighting games and the only time I get to do the “non thinking” bit is after many hours of practice and theory crafting.

His first bit was about his claims that certain activities by the skeptic are beliefs but the only counter he has to that is “it isn’t belief because I say so”.

I don’t think he makes a strong case and his last bit about morality kind of torpedoes the whole argument. If Nazi can be a pyrrronist by following orders without question then that calls in question the sanity behind it.

He seems to think that the mental tranquillity follows logically from the points made in Sextus Empiricus. Like Pyrrhonism is a logical outcome and to say or do otherwise is illogical. But I am not so sure.

Even when it comes to matters they claim are evident, that point can easily be harmed by asking how they know what is evident? Apparently what is evident is something that is known by all, but to know that you would have to ask everyone on earth and who would be or has been born. It would take one NO to completely destroy it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 December 2017 09:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 116 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1690
Joined  2016-12-24
Lausten - 07 December 2017 05:53 AM

There is nothing in skepticism or philosophy that requires you to examine every detail in every moment.

But in an active life on the edge it behooves one to pay attention to and examine the details of your moments as they they fly by, leading right into your next moments.  smile

Too many live in a disconnected daze, going though motions, rather than engaged with attentive living.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 December 2017 07:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 117 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1019
Joined  2015-12-29

The Pyrrhonists make it sound like theirs is the correct method according to logic. That we cannot have knowledge or beliefs rooted in flawed data

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 December 2017 11:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 118 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7846
Joined  2009-02-26
Titanomachina - 10 December 2017 07:15 PM

The Pyrrhonists make it sound like theirs is the correct method according to logic. That we cannot have knowledge or beliefs rooted in flawed data

What makes you think your brain contains only flawed data, that forces you to analyze every situation as if you had no prior experience of such situations?

Regardless of you mode of analysis of the external world, it will always be a “best guess”, because your brain is only capable of processing a small percentage of the trillions of bits of information flowing into it. We are able to function because of prior experiences.

If you see a red light at an intersection , do you debate with yourself what that could mean in context of traffic flow or traffic laws.  If there is no traffic and no cops around, do you still stop momentarily or decide it’s safe to cross regardless of that dumb red light? Would you consider that this red light was placed there for logical resons to begin with?


Logical analysis?  And where does logic come from? Is it inherent or does prior experience and knowledge play a part?

[ Edited: 11 December 2017 12:37 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
   
8 of 8
8