The same skeptical approach [Pyrrhonian skepticism]
could be used on its inventor, with the same effective results. “The new
machine of war” appeared to have a peculiar recoil mechanism which had the odd
effect of engulfing the target and the gunner in a common catastrophe. P.77
The history of Skeptism from Erasmus to Spinoza. by Richard H. Popkin
(Jim quoted this to me over the phone.)
————————-
Pyrrhonism
Pyrrhonism is a system of scepticism, the founder of which was Pyrrho, a Greek philosopher, about whom very little is known except that he died in 270 B. C. The best known of Pyrrho’s disciples was Timon of Philius, known as the sillographer. Pyrrho’s scepticism was so complete and comprehensive that the word Pyrrhonism is sometimes used as a synonym for scepticism, The scepticism of Pyrrho’s school covered three points.
(1) All the dogmatists, that is to say, all the philosophers who
believed that truth and
certitude can be attained, were mere sophists; they were self-deceived and deceivers of others.
(2)
Certitude is impossible of attainment, not only because of the possibility that our
faculties deceive us, but also because, in themselves, things are neither one thing nor the other, neither
good nor evil, beautiful nor ugly, large nor small. Or, rather, things are both good and evil, beautiful and ugly, large and small, so that there is no reason why we should
affirm that they are one thing rather than the other. This conviction was expressed in the famous saying, ouden mallon,
nothing is more one thing than another; the paper is not more white
than black, the piece of sugar is not more sweet than bitter, and so
forth.
(3) The reality of things being inaccessible to the humanmind, and
certitude being impossible of attainment, the wise
mandoubts about everything; that is, he recognizes the futility of inquiry into reality and
abstains from judging. This abstention is called epoche. It is the foundation of happiness. Because he alone can attain happiness who cultivates imperturbability, ataraxia; and then only is the
mindproof against disquietude when we realize that every attempt to attain the truth is doomed to failure.
From this account of the principles of Pyrrhonism, it is evident that Pyrrho’s aim was ethical. Like all the philosophers of the period in which he lived, he concerned himself principally with the problem of happiness. The Stoics sought to found happiness on the realization of the reign of law in human nature as well as in nature. The Epicureans grounded happiness on the conviction that transitory feeling is the one important phenomenon in human life. The Eclectics placed the intellectual basis of happiness in the conviction that all systems of philosophy are equally true. The Pyrrhonist, as well as the other sceptics of that period, believed that there is no possibility of attaining happiness unless one first realizes that all systems of philosophy are equally false and that the real truth of things cannot be attained. Pyrrhonism is, therefore, an abdication of all the supposed rights of the mind, and cannot be dealt with by the ordinary rules of logic or by the customary canons of philosophical criticism.
Publication information
Written by William Turner. Transcribed by Douglas J. Potter.
———-
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12587a.htm
————
Pyrrhonism, or Pyrrhonian skepticism, was a school of skepticism founded by Aenesidemus in the first century BC and recorded by Sextus Empiricus in the late 2nd century or early 3rd century AD. It was named after Pyrrho, a philosopher who lived from c. 360 to c. 270 BC, although the relationship between the philosophy of the school and of the historical figure is murky. Pyrrhonism became influential during the past few centuries when the modern scientific worldview was born.
Whereas ‘academic’ skepticism, with as its most famous adherent Carneades, 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. According to them, even the statement that nothing can be known is dogmatic.
For example, Pyrrhonians might assert that a lack of proof cannot constitute disproof, and that a lack of belief is vastly different from a state of active disbelief. Rather than disbelieving psychic powers, for instance, based on the lack of evidence of such things, Pyrrhonians recognize that we cannot be certain that new evidence won’t turn up in the future, and so they intentionally remain tentative and continue their inquiry. Pyrrhonians also question accepted knowledge, and view dogmatism as a disease of the mind.
A brief period in western history is referred to by philosophers as the Pyrrhonic Crisis, during the birth of modernity. In Feudal society absolute truth was provided by divine authority. However, as this fell from legitimacy, there was a brief lag before the enlightenment produced the nation-state and science as the new sources of absolute truth. During this period relativist views similar to those held in Pyrrhonism were popular among thinkers of the time.
Pyrrhonian skepticism is similar to the form of skepticism called Zeteticism promoted by Marcello Truzzi.
See also
* Aenesidemus
* Agrippa the Sceptic
* Arcesilaus
* Pyrrho
* Quietism
* Sextus Empiricus
* Timon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhonism
—-
Sextus Empiricus (fl. during the 2nd and possibly the 3rd centuries AD), was a physician and philosopher, and has been variously reported to have lived in Alexandria, Rome, or Athens. His philosophical work is the most complete surviving account of ancient Greek and Roman skepticism.
In his medical work, tradition maintains that he belonged to the "empiric" school (see Asclepiades),
as reflected by his name. However, at least twice in his writings,
Sextus seems to place himself closer to the "methodic" school, as his
philosophical views imply.
Philosophy
Sextus Empiricus advises[1]
that we should suspend judgment about virtually all beliefs, that is,
we should neither affirm any belief as true nor deny any belief as
false. This view is known as Pyrrhonian skepticism, as distinguished from Academic skepticism, as practised by Carneades,
which, according to Sextus, denies knowledge altogether. Sextus did not
deny the possibility of knowledge. He criticizes the Academic skeptic’s
claim that nothing is knowable as being an affirmative belief. Instead,
Sextus advocates simply giving up belief: that is, suspending judgment
about whether or not anything is knowable.[2] Only by suspending judgment can we attain a state of ataraxia
(roughly, ‘peace of mind’). Sextus did not think such a general
suspension of judgment to be impractical, since we may live without any
beliefs, acting by habit.
Sextus allowed that we might affirm claims about our experience
(e.g., reports about our feelings or sensations). That is, for some
claim X that I feel or perceive, it could be true to say "it seems to
me now that X." However, he pointed out that this does not imply any
objective knowledge of external reality. For while I might know that
the honey I eat tastes sweet to me, this is merely a subjective
judgment, and as such may not tell me anything true about the honey
itself.
Interpretations of Sextus’s philosophy along the above lines have been advocated by scholars such as Myles Burnyeat,[3] Jonathan Barnes,[4] and Benson Mates.[5]
Michael Frede, however, defends a different interpretation,[6]
according to which Sextus does allow beliefs, so long as they are not
derived by reason, philosophy or speculation; a skeptic may, for
example, accept common opinions in the skeptic’s society. However, the
content of such beliefs is purely conventional or subjective. Thus, on
this interpretation, the skeptic may well entertain the belief that God
does or does not exist or that virtue is good. But he may not believe
that such claims are true by nature.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sextus_Empiricus
—————-
Ataraxia (Ἀταραξία) is a Greek term used by Pyrrho and Epicurus for freedom from worry or any other preoccupation, and for Epicurus to achieve Hêdonê, the great pleasure.
For the Stoics,
ataraxia was synonymous with the only true happiness possible for a
person. It signifies the detached and balanced state of mind that shows
that a person has transcended the material world and is now harvesting
all the comforts of philosophy.
—–
Epicurus (Greek Έπίκουρος) (341 BC, Samos – 270 BC, Athens) was an ancient Greek philosopher and the founder of Epicureanism, a popular school of thought in Hellenistic Philosophy
that spanned about 600 years. Of his over 300 written works only a few
fragments and letters survive; much of what we know about Epicureanism
comes from later followers or commentators.
For Epicurus, the purpose of philosophy was to attain the happy,
tranquil life, characterized by the absence of pain and fear, and by
living a self-sufficient life surrounded by friends. He taught that
pleasure and pain are the measures of what is good and bad, that death
is the end of the body and the soul and should therefore not be feared,
that the gods do not reward or punish humans, that the universe is
infinite and eternal, and that events in the world are ultimately based
on the motions and interactions of atoms moving in empty space.
Epicurus was often vilified as favoring the uninhibited pursuit of pleasure (hedonism); however, he invariably counseled restraint and temperance with respect to physical desires.
Legacy
Elements of Epicurean philosophy have resonated and resurfaced in
various diverse thinkers and movements throughout Western intellectual
history.
His emphasis minimizing harm and maximizing happiness in his formulation of the Ethic of Reciprocity was later picked up by the democratic thinkers of the French Revolution, and others, like John Locke,
who wrote that people had a right to "life, liberty, and property." To
Locke, one’s own body was part of their property, and thus one’s right
to property would theoretically guarantee safety for their persons, as
well as their possessions.
This triad, as well as the egalitarianism of Epicurus, was carried forward into the American freedom movement and Declaration of Independence, by the American founding father, Thomas Jefferson,
as "all men are created equal" and endowed with certain "inalienable
rights such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Epicurus
was therefore a key influence on the foundation of the American legal system.
Karl Marx’s doctoral thesis was on "The Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature." [1]
Epicurus was also a significant source of inspiration and interest for Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche cites his affinities to Epicurus in a number of his works, including Beyond Good and Evil, and his private letters to Peter Gast.
Nietzsche was attracted to, among other things, Epicurus’ ability to
maintain a cheerful philosophical outlook in the face of painful
physical ailments. Nietzsche also suffered from a number of sicknesses
during his lifetime. However, he thought that Epicurus’ conception of
happiness as freedom from anxiety was too passive and negative.
Sam Harris,
in his bestselling work, The End of Faith: (Religion, Terror, and the
Future of Reason), elaborates on Epicurus’ concept that the fear and
worship of [the] God[s] is not a valid activity based on reason, and
also creates an ethical standard by judging actions not only on the
basis of the Ethic of Reciprocity,
but whether these actions increase the happiness of others. He also
speculates on a possible scientific basis for a state of "mental peace"
found through the practice of various spiritual disciplines, and the
value of the attainment of this state to mankind.[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus
————-
Michel Eyquem de Montaigne-Delecroix (IPA pronunciation: [miʃɛl ekɛm də mɔ̃tɛɲ]) (February 28, 1533–September 13, 1592) was one of the most influential writers of the French Renaissance. Montaigne is known for popularizing the essay
as a literary genre. He became famous for his effortless ability to
merge serious intellectual speculation with casual anecdotes and
autobiography — and his massive volume Essais (translated
literally as "Attempts") contains, to this day, some of the most widely
influential essays ever written. Montaigne had a direct influence on
writers the world over, from William Shakespeare to Ralph Waldo Emerson, from Friedrich Nietzsche to Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
In his own time, Montaigne was admired more as a statesman than as
an author. His tendency in his essays to diverge into anecdotes and
personal ruminations was seen as a detriment rather than an innovation,
and his stated motto that "I am myself the matter of my book" was
viewed by contemporary writers as self-indulgent. In time, however,
Montaigne would be recognized as expressing, perhaps better than any
other author of his time, the doubts and thoughts of his age.
Remarkably modern even to readers today, Montaigne’s attempt to examine
the world through the lens of the only thing he can depend on
implicitly — his own judgment — makes him more accessible than any
other author of the Renaissance. Much of modern literary non-fiction
owes its genesis to Montaigne, and writers of all kinds continue to
read Montaigne for his masterful balance of intellectual knowledge and
personal story-telling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_de_Montaigne
Aluminium rear light casings 
