Thanks to a careful reading of a key passage in Sextus Empiricus’s Outlines of Pyrrhonism (PH II 134-170), this paper offers a sort of running commentary that makes clear some crucial aspects of the Pyrrhonian attack against any kind of subsistence or ὑπόστασις of the ἀπόδειξις. This notion (fundamental for the dogmatic approach to epistemological topics) will be examined in its main logical guidelines as well as in some of its historical declinations, especially from the point of view of ancient (...) Stoicism and its doctrine about the so-called non-demonstrable arguments. (shrink)

Enlightenment confidence in reason and in our individual powers of reasoning have been subjected to growing criticism. One criticism is that Enlightenment universalism about reason has provided a cover story for cultural if not economic or political imperialism. I identify and criticize three central assumptions about reason common from the Enlightenment to the present day: That reason and tradition are distinct, if not conflicting intellectual resources; that reason is inherently a power of individuals; and that rejecting individualism in epistemology entails (...) historicist relativism. The contemporary debates between defenders of universalist views of reason and their multi-culturalist critics reproduce on an inter-cultural level the contests between Christian religious sects that originally compelled the development in Europe of Enlightenment views of reason. Both sets of debates recapitulate at a practical level the theoretical issues posed by dogmatism and question-begging , problems crystallized in Sextus Empiricus' Dilemma of the Criterion. I contend that rectifying the three erroneous Enlightenment assumptions about reason shows that Sextus' Dilemma can be resolved by a constructive account of self- and mutual criticism. This account provides a constructive response to the contemporary debates between the Enlightenment and its multi-culturalist critics. Surprisingly, the basic views required for a tenable, enlightened account of reason were developed by Hegel, whose views have been widely misunderstood because they have been forced into the very dichotomies against which Hegel argued convincingly. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Against the Ethicists (Adversus Mathematicos XI) by Sextus EmpiricusJohn Christian LaursenSextus Empiricus. Against the Ethicists (Adversus Mathematicos XI). Translation, Commentary, and Introduction by Richard Bett. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. Pp. xxxiv + 302. NP.Sesto Empirico. Contro gli etici. Introduction, Editing, Translation, and Commentary by Emidio Spinelli. Naples: Bibliopolis, 1995. Pp. 450. NP.Joining the rising tide of scholarly literature that says that skeptics can indeed live their (...) skepticism, and that it is not necessarily a bad life, are these two fine translations of Book XI of Sextus Empiricus’s Against the Mathematicians (known as MXI), the most important for ethics and politics. Considering that the length of Sextus’s text is only 39 pages (in the English version), the length of these two volumes alone indicates that a great deal of philosophical and philological scholarship will be found in them. Both authors do an excellent job of tracking down Sextus’s sources and his targets.Spinelli accepts the traditional position (Janacek’s) that MXI was written after Sextus’s Outlines of Pyrrhonism, although he is aware of the minority position that it was the other way around. Bett makes a convincing case for the minority position, including a substantial appendix comparing passages from the two works which suggest that Outlines polishes MXI. This has the merit of explaining Sextus’s apparent “negative dogmatism” in MXI as part of early skepticism and a phase on the way to the more refined and more thoroughly undogmatic skepticism of the Outlines. However, Bett himself mentions counterevidence to his thesis, so it cannot be considered decisively established. Spinelli explains the apparent dogmatism on the assumption that Outlines came first: the usual skeptical reservations set forth in that book should be understood as implied (165–66, 169). Other explanations are that apparent affirmations are ad hominem polemic “inside” Stoic theory (240ff.) or merely relative and with no ontological status (291).Bett divides the text into part A (1–167) and part B (168–end), arguing for compilation of the two parts of the book from different sources with different purposes. Spinelli writes that the often-denigrated 168–end “has a precise function in the internal compositional strategy” of the book (339).English speakers have had to rely too long on the Loeb translation by” B. Bury. Bett questions many of his renderings. For example, Bury translated kakon and kakia as “evil,” with connotations of intentionality, and at MXI 121 even supplied a footnote to Genesis! Bett prefers the less-loaded “bad” and “vice.” Spinelli usually translates kakon with “mali” but uses the loaded “malvagità” for kakia at MXI 121, where Bett would have suggested “vizio.” Bury translated alogon and alogois with “irrational” which Bett corrects to “non-rational” at MXI 143, 148, and 161 to capture the point that what is in question is neither rational nor irrational, but rather “sensory happenings” which have [End Page 313] nothing to do with reasoning (161). Spinelli renders alogon as “irrazionale” at MXI 143 and alogois as “sottrati al ragionamento” at MXI 148 and 161.Spinelli’s is a much more useful and substantial volume than the previous Italian translation. The only thing that might keep Bett’s volume from replacing the Loeb edition is that it does not supply the Greek text on facing pages. Spinelli does.The exhaustive and careful analyses of Spinelli and Bett allow them to disagree in important ways with parts of the substantial recent work on ancient skepticism by Hankinson, McPherran, Annas, Nussbaum, Striker, and Decleva Caizzi (cited as Caizzi by Bett), not to mention the older work of Janacek and the debates from the early 1980s (now dated) among Frede, Burnyeat, and Barnes. Although they do not find Sextus’s work to be flawless by any means, it is clear that we are long past the point at which his work could be dismissed as silly or merely derivative.On the test case of the treatment of Sextus’s example of the tyrant (MXI 166), both Spinelli and Bett point in the right direction. Spinelli sees that “the Pyrrhonist can live easily” (330) and that MXI 165–67 provides “a new key to understanding the ‘moral skepticism... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 41.1 (2003) 125-126 [Access article in PDF] Sextus Empiricus. Against the Grammarians (Adversos Mathematicos I). Introduction, Commentary, and Translation by D. L. Blank. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998. Pp. lvi + 436. Cloth, $105.00. Sesto Empirico. Contro gli astrologi. Introduction, Commentary, and Translation by Emidio Spinelli. Naples: Bibliopolis, 2000. Pp. 230. Paper, L. 70.000. No historian of philosophy should be retailing the (...) old canards that the Hellenistic philosopher Sextus Empiricus was silly, wholly confused, or merely a compiler and not a philosopher in his own right. These translations and commentaries, along with the recent work of Richard Bett, James Hankinson, and others, should bury those notions forever.Against the Grammarians is the first and Against the Astrologers is the fifth volume of Sextus's six-volume Against the Teachers of the technai or professional arts and sciences (grammar, rhetoric, geometry, arithmetic, astrology, and music). Sextus is not against all forms of the study of these matters; in fact, one of the skeptic's "rules for living" is that he will engage in an art (techne) to make a living (Outlines of Pyrrhonism, I.24). But he is against the claims of each of them to special technical expertise. He prefers the unpretentious experience of everyday life—living by the phenomena; non-expert, practical forms of grammar, astronomy, music—to fancy theories about the nature of things.Against the Grammarians is Sextus's critique of the interpreters of poetry and prose—today's English professors and historians. Philosophers will be amused by his deconstruction of various sorts of lit crit arrogance and rashness that are still with us. Regrettably, some of us are not immune from the same critiques.Against the Astrologers is Sextus's critique of the Chaldean soothsayers. He is not against the observation of celestial phenomena for agricultural or navigational purposes. His critiques of the astrologers for lack of empirical evidence and promotion of superstition make him sound like a proto-scientist.One originality of Sextus's work was his combination of a dogmatic Epicurean critique of the grammatologists and astrologers with a skeptical aporetic critique. Precisely because he does not hesitate to make use of the arguments of others, some interpreters have decided that Sextus was unoriginal and derivative. But Blank and Spinelli both show that he recombines these arguments in ways that no one else had done. That is one of the ways of being original in philosophy. The upshot is that he is our earliest source of quite a number of critiques of grammarians and astrologers.The use of dogmatic arguments raises the problem of whether Sextus engages in so-called "negative dogmatism" in these volumes. Right at the beginning of Against the Astrologers, Sextus accuses them of violating "right reason." What right does a skeptic have to invoke such a standard? Some have felt that at this stage Sextus was a dogmatic skeptic, invoking one set of truths to tear down another. But that is not necessary. Blank and Spinelli explain this well with a combination of points. One, we can see the dogmatic and Epicurean attacks as clearing the ground for the following skeptical equipollence of arguments. Two, we can follow Jonathan Barnes in assuming that each claim that something has been demolished assumes the counterargument that it has been proven, so that the implied upshot is equipollence. Three, "right reason" can be the sort of unpretentious practical reasoning and living in accord with the appearances that the skeptics often claimed to live by.Spinelli and Blank provide many useful improvements over the previous English translations of these texts by Bury and the Italian translations by Russo. Blank rightly relies on Spinelli's 1995 translation and commentary on Sextus's Against the Ethicists and Spinelli rightly relies on Blank for a number of points. Spinelli supplies the Greek on facing pages of the translation; Blank does not. Spinelli also supplies five Greek zodiac charts and a beautiful print of a fifteenth-century zodiac.Neither Blank nor Spinelli unduly lionizes Sextus. They admit that... (shrink)

Questo articolo argomenta in favore della tesi di una collaborazione tra sensi e ragione nella gnoseologia di Empedocle. Il primo difensore di questa tesi, Sesto Empirico, distingueva nel pensiero empedocleo due forme di ragione, una umana e l’altra divina. Viene sostenuta qui l’identificazione della ragione divina menzionata da Sesto con il dio protagonista del fr. 134DK, a cui il suo citatore, Ammonio, attribuisce il nome di Apollo. L’analisi proposta cerca di mostrare in particolare 1) che il dio (...) menzionato nel fr. 134 e il sole della comologia empedoclea conosciuto grazie alla testimonianza di Aezio ; 2) che la costituzione fisica di questo dio solare, immagine luminosa proiettata sulla volta dell’etere, ne fa una figura velata della conoscenza, come relazione necessaria di esperienze sensibili e di contenuti intellettivi. La tradizione pitagorica che identificava il sole con Apollo troverebbe un prolungamento nella divinizzazione empedoclea della ragione. (shrink)

Sextus’s arguments against ethical theories are shorter and more general than those he brings against the other two parts of ancient philosophy, logic and physics. Until recently this part of his work, in Outlines of Pyrrhonism III and Adversus Mathematicos XI has been comparatively neglected. Now, as well as the splendidly scholarly book by Emidio Spinelli, Sesto Empirico: Contro Gli Etici we have Richard Bett’s translation with commentary in the Clarendon Later Ancient Philosophers series. Both books make Sextus’s (...) sometimes elusive work far more available and usable to the modern reader. (shrink)

The tragic story of the forty-year-long struggle of one of hte greatest artists of Western civilization to construct the tomb of Pope Julius II.

Guy Stock; III*—Empirico-Realism and Contingent Truths, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 77, Issue 1, 1 June 1977, Pages 23–42, https://doi.org/1.

Tradução para o português do verbete sobre Sexto Empírico, de Charlotte Stough, retirado de Jonathan Dancy e Ernest Sosa (org.) A Companion to Epistemology (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997), pp. 475-477.

Mi objetivo en este trabajo es ofrecer los lineamientos generales de una forma revisada de conceptualismo, en el marco del debate entre conceptualistas y no-conceptualistas respecto del tipo de contenido de la experiencia perceptiva, que mantenga las tesis centrales del conceptualismo tradicional pero sea capaz de, a diferencia de este, ofrecer respuestas satisfactorias al problema de la fineza de grano de la experiencia perceptiva. Para ello, presento un marco teórico general, el Conceptualismo Empírico, desarrollo a partir de él una posición (...) conceptualista sustantiva, el Conceptualismo Empírico Categorial, y muestro como éste puede utilizarse para responder el problema de la fineza de grano. (shrink)

Artigo de caráter introdutório publicado na Revista CULT, número 121, caracterizando superficialmente a obra de Sexto Empírico.

This paper consists in the presentation of the first version of the Greek/Portuguese translation of Sextus Empiricus’ _Outlines of Pyrrhonism _1.220-235, passage where Sextus traces a comparison between the Pyrrhonism and the Academic philosophy.

En los Esbozos Pirrónicos, Sexto Empírico adelanta un argumento similar al sueño de Descartes, que parece comprometer a Sexto con una especie de relativismo protagórico. En este artículo examino este argumento en el contexto de otros pasajes de Sexto y propongo una interpretación que muestra que el escepticismo que uno puede trazar desde este argumento es tan radical como el de Descartes, pero nunca podrá considerarse como un argumento relativista. Muestro que Sexto comete un error crucial al describir la posición (...) de Protágoras y la suya, un error que podría llevarle a uno a concluir falsamente que Sexto es un relativista protagórico. (shrink)

SEXTO EMPÍRICO. Contra os Retóricos. Introdução, Tradução e notas de Rodrigo Brito e Rafael Huguenin. Marília: UNESP, 2013.

Resumen: Ofreceré un análisis de la célebre crítica de la fenomenología de Merleau-Ponty en términos de una presunta oscilación entre “positivismo” y “escatología”. Como intentaré demostrar, atribuir al fenomenólogo francés una reducción “positivista” de la epistemología equivaldría a pasar por alto su insistencia en que nos apartemos de la autocomprensión que las ciencias empíricas ofrecen de sus propios resultados; esto es, a pasar por alto sus objeciones fenomenológicas a los marcos ontológicos ingenuos del “pensamiento objetivo”. En cuanto al cargo de (...) “escatología”, al parecer en virtud de sus deudas con el pensamiento marxista, intentaré probar que, no se puede sostener una vez que se toma en consideración el carácter matizado de su aceptación de ciertos aspectos del materialismo histórico.: I will attempt to analyze Foucault’s famous critique of Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology in terms of an alleged oscillation between “positivism” and “eschatology”. As I will try to prove, attributing to Merleau-Ponty a “positivistic” reduction of epistemology would amount to overlooking his insistence on moving away from the self-interpretations that empirical sciences offer of their own results; that is to say, overlooking his phenomenological objections against the naïve ontological frames of “objective thinking”. As for the charge of “eschatology”, presumably applied to the phenomenologist by virtue of his debts to Marxist thought, I will try to show that -either understood in a strictly epistemological sense or in connection with an alleged Merleau-Pontyan adhesion to a philosophy of history- it proves untenable once we take into consideration the nuanced character of his acceptance of certain aspects of historical materialism. (shrink)

O objetivo deste artigo é examinar como Montaigne retoma, na sua crítica das filosofias morais e, especialmente, da existência de leis naturais, a proposta por Sexto Empírico acerca do mesmo tema ao final das Hipotiposes Pirronianas. Pretendo mostrar que, para além das consideráveis similaridades, o modo como Montaigne relaciona razão, natureza e costume, confere um perfil próprio à sua reconstrução do pirronismo, particularmente visível na sua compreensão da oposição entre critério de verdade e critério de ação. Igualmente, sustento que essa (...) distinção, proveniente do pirronismo, ocupará um lugar central na sua reflexão moral. The aim of this paper is to investigate how Montaigne adopts, in his own discussion of moral philosophies (and, in particular, of the proponents of natural laws), Sextus Empiricus' criticism on the same topic, as exposed in his Outlines of Pyrrhonism. I want to show that, besides the deep similarities we can find between them, Montaigne's peculiarities show themselves throughout his way of dealing with relations between reason, costume and nature, as well as in his interpretation of the opposition between a criterion of truth and a practical criterion. I maintain also that this Pyrrhonism notion occupies a prominent place in his moral reflections. (shrink)

O objetivo deste artigo é apresentar o idealismo transcendental (e o realismo empírico) como uma semântica transcendental, que permite resolver problemas cognitivos da ciência e decidir sobre problemas filosóficos, por meio de novos argumentos e documentos textuais da filosofia kantiana. Para tal fim, mostraremos que a pergunta fundamental que aparece em todo o percurso da obra kantiana é a da possibilidade das proposições sintéticas. Essa pergunta demanda o desenvolvimento de uma resposta que essencialmente diz respeito não apenas a sua necessidade (...) e possibilidade lógica, mas também a sua exequibilidade, e que mostrará suas peculiaridades em cada caso. Especificamente na primeira crítica, as condições ou ingredientes do juízo permitem distinguir entre fenômenos como objetos de conhecimento e coisas em si mesmas. Assim, o idealismo transcendental é definido, no sentido restrito, na crítica da razão pura, basicamente, pelo modo de interpretar o papel da sensibilidade em relação com as categorias e a constituição dos objetos de conhecimento. Esta posição filosófica permite a Kant propor um campo de sentido onde formular e resolver problemas cognitivos válidos e, portanto, resolver os problemas que a própria razão se impõe, bem como fazer uma refutação ao idealismo (material), tanto problemático quanto dogmático. Assim, provaremos que o problema da cognoscibilidade dos objetos se resolve em Kant em termos decididamente semânticos. (shrink)

ArgumentThis paper aims at contributing to the ongoing efforts to get a firmer grasp of the systematic significance of the entanglement of idealism and empiricism in Helmholtz's work. Contrary to existing analyses, however, the focal point of the present exposition is Helmholtz's attempt to articulate a psychological account of objectification. Helmholtz's motive, as well as his solution to the problem of the object are outlined, and interpreted against the background of his scientific practice on the one hand, and that of (...) empiricist and (transcendental) idealist analyses of experience on the other. The specifically psychological angle taken, not only prompts us to consider figures who have hitherto been treated as having only minor import for Helmholtz interpretation (most importantly J.S. Mill and J.G. Fichte), it furthermore sheds new light on some central tenets of the latter's psychological stance that have hitherto remained underappreciated. For one thing, this analysis reveals an explicit voluntarist tendency in Helmholtz's psychological theory. In conclusion, it is argued that the systematic significance of Helmholtz's empirico-transcendentalism with respect to questions of the mind is best understood as an attempt to found his empirical theory of perception in a second order, normative account of epistemic subjectivity. (shrink)

Forums, I extensively analysed Tartaglia’s corpus: science of weights, geometry, arithmetic, mathematics and physics–trajectories of the projectiles, fortifications, included its intelligibility science in the military architecture. The latter is exposed in Book VI of the Quesiti et invention diverse (hereafter Quesiti). In Quesiti there is La Gionta del sesto libro—a kind of appendix to the Book VI containing drawings of the geometric shape of the Italian fortifications. It is based on Euclidean geometry and other figures where a scale is (...) displayed. The interest—included intellectual history and cultural foundations of science—is: what is the role–played by La Gionta del sesto libro in the Quesiti? Is it independent booklet/speeches? If yes, when Tartaglia did write it? In this paper, I present an historical–philological–foundational hypothesis on the Tartaglia’s fortifications corpus, as exposed in the Book VI and La Gionta del sesto libro; with respect to dates of editions of Quesiti (1546, 1554). This goal is important to make historically clear both the editorial role–played by Curzio Troiano Navò (fl. 16th) in the Tartaglia’s corpus before—after Tartaglia’s death (1557) and the particular interest and development of subject of fortifications by Tartaglia between 1537–1546 and 1554. (shrink)

ResumenLa investigación social cualitativa ha prescindido de la utilización de referentes empíricos accesibles y compartidos a partir de los cuales acordar la producción y el análisis del habla. A partir de este criticable déficit, lo que hace este trabajo es analizar el problema del habla utilizada como material empírico para observación desde el punto de vista de la labor científica. Con esta finalidad se argumenta la importancia de la comunicabilidad de las observaciones producidas y de su análisis a partir de (...) los problemas que plantea la función deíctica del habla observada en la investigación. La conclusión del trabajo plantea la necesidad acordar e introducir un referente objetual en la situación de observación experimental con el fin de garantizar la comunicabilidad de las acciones investigadoras, así como la recepción y circulación del habla observada entre las distintas comunidades de hablantes y sistemas discursivos.Palabras clave: discurso social; validez; investigación cualitativa; función deíctica; comunicación. (shrink)