Really interesting re. the insulation of ordinary from philosophical beliefs. I think Burnyeat is correct, skepticism - and philosphical thinking in general - is impractical for the most part. Yet... it still changes our practical nature at an almost unconscious level. Since learning about Academic Scepticism, I'm less dismissive of opposing views and less likely to jump to conclusions, I also seem to give people the benefit of the doubt a lot more than I used to. Skepticism is, without doubt, the "dry" Hellenistic philosphy, yet it's the most useful, and perhaps urgent, to navigate our supposedly "post-truth" socio-political landscape.
Yes the Pyrrhonists. I wondering if they completely opposed Aristotle’s concept of flourishing, as I understand it to be a process of taking on appropriate qualities. But as I think you stated they,the Pyrrhonists, never defined those type of things. Thank you.
Hello Massimo, can you help me understand some of this?
As far as I can see, skepticism gained traction post Aristotle, and was a challenge to the experimental way his school thought of experiments as finite way for gain knowledge. But non the less skepticism did support for way to gain knowledge, and it was through experience, as stated in Aenesidemus’ mode 9.
You keep educating me, professor Pigliucci. I probably shouldn't admit it, but I'd never even heard of Sextus before this. Keep teaching this old dog new stuff--thanks!
Really interesting re. the insulation of ordinary from philosophical beliefs. I think Burnyeat is correct, skepticism - and philosphical thinking in general - is impractical for the most part. Yet... it still changes our practical nature at an almost unconscious level. Since learning about Academic Scepticism, I'm less dismissive of opposing views and less likely to jump to conclusions, I also seem to give people the benefit of the doubt a lot more than I used to. Skepticism is, without doubt, the "dry" Hellenistic philosphy, yet it's the most useful, and perhaps urgent, to navigate our supposedly "post-truth" socio-political landscape.
Yes the Pyrrhonists. I wondering if they completely opposed Aristotle’s concept of flourishing, as I understand it to be a process of taking on appropriate qualities. But as I think you stated they,the Pyrrhonists, never defined those type of things. Thank you.
Hello Massimo, can you help me understand some of this?
As far as I can see, skepticism gained traction post Aristotle, and was a challenge to the experimental way his school thought of experiments as finite way for gain knowledge. But non the less skepticism did support for way to gain knowledge, and it was through experience, as stated in Aenesidemus’ mode 9.
So is that a sensible observation?
Read the book twice last month and got some interesting insights. But inspiration would not be my description.
You keep educating me, professor Pigliucci. I probably shouldn't admit it, but I'd never even heard of Sextus before this. Keep teaching this old dog new stuff--thanks!