Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Pyrrhonisme'

Les philosophes pyrrhoniens de l'Antiquité n'ont pas fait, au sens strict du mot, école : philosophes sans maîtres et sans doctrines, Timon, Enésidème et Sextus Empiricus apparaissent bien plutôt comme des philosophes isolés qui ont, chacun à leur manière, cherché à s'approprier la sagesse du maître paradoxal que fut Pyrrhon, et dont les positions évoluèrent au gré des débats marquant la période hellénistique et impériale. Faut-il pour autant abandonner l'idée d'une « tradition pyrrhonienne » ? Cette étude se propose de reconstituer cette tradition autour de trois thèmes – l'ontologie, le langage, l'action – sur lesquelles chaque pyrrhonien joue des variations subtiles. Une telle reconstitution est impossible sans défaire les réseaux de transmissions des textes qui constituent le corpus du pyrrhonisme, ainsi que les termes qui servirent à désigner cette tradition. Il apparaît alors que le concept de « scepticisme » n'est ni le plus légitime historiquement, ni le plus adéquat philosophiquement. Ce premier pas permet de fonder l'idée d'une tradition pyrrhonienne à partir de laquelle sont étudiées les différentes étapes du pyrrhonisme, du premier disciple de Pyrrhon, Timon, au scepticisme pyrrhonien de Sextus Empiricus, en passant par la figure centrale de la renaissance du pyrrhonisme, Enésidème, dont les positions relativistes sont étudiées à partir du texte de Photius et de la « théorie » des dix tropes. Malgré les évolutions importantes dans l'histoire du pyrrhonisme ancien, il est possible d'y déceler une intention éthique unique, qui place notre bonheur dans une vie sans croyance
Pyrrhonian philosophers of Antiquity did not belong to a school : Timo, Aenesidemus, and Sextus Empiricus were philosophers without masters or doctrine, and looked rather like isolated philosophers, claiming to be a follower of the wise Pyrrho as a paradoxical master and to adapt Pyrrho’s way of thinking to the different dialectic situations they met. Yet, should we abandon the idea of a « pyrrhonian tradition » ? This thesis aims at restoring this tradition by defining some shared views on three particular themes – ontology, language, action – on which each philosopher varied with great subtlety. But such a reconstruction would be impossible without revisiting the words and the concepts which made a name for this tradition. It seems that « skepticism » is not the best designation neither from an historic nor a philosophic point of view. This analysis allows us to call on a « pyrrhonian tradition », whose different stages are studied, from Timo, Pyrrho's first follower, to the pyrrhonian skepticism of Sextus Empiricus, including a detailed analysis of the relativism of Aenesidemus, on the basis of Photius' summary and the ten tropes strategy. Despite the evolutions of the history of ancient pyrrhonism, it is still possible to discover an exceptional ethic claim, according to which happiness is to live without beliefs

Notre recherche porte sur la question du scepticisme diderotien et se divise en trois moments. Le premier consiste à présenter deux formes distinctes du scepticisme dans le corpus diderotien et le second à édifier chez Diderot un ethos et une figure idéale du philosophe sceptique. C’est à ce moment que nous tenterons de défendre notre thèse exégétique centrale ; soit l’unification de la pensée de Diderot par la mise en lumière de sa posture sceptique et par le repositionnement du matérialisme qu’on lui attribue traditionnellement. Nous chercherons finalement à présenter la transformation de la métaphysique traditionnelle en esthétique métaphysique pour mener à bien les objectifs du projet philosophique développé au deuxième moment. Notre recherche a pour visée générale l’établissement d’une attitude et d’une méthode propres à redonner goût à la vérité en réponse au problème de la « mort de la philosophie ».

A quelles conditions le pyrrhonisme peut-il contribuer de nos jours à un renouvellement du philosopher ? Suivant cette problématique, la thèse questionne l'intention et la portée de l'orientation inaugurée par le grec Pyrrhon d'Elis. Analysant deux versions majeures et opposées (J. P. Dumont/M. Conche), elle compare leurs positions et présente un examen des logiques respectives. Il apparaît que la cohérence interne de ces interprétations divergentes est sans défaut. En revanche, le conflit mis à jour entre ces deux options à propos du non dogmatisme inquiète. Par ailleurs, il ressort que l'attitude d'indifférence, appartenant en propre au pyrrhonien, a servi de caution à l'occident, évitant ainsi de penser l'épreuve de la condition humaine. Seule l'approche de M. Conche permet d'échapper tant au piège de l'aporie sceptique qu'à la reconduction de cette fuite. Aussi, ce travail privilégie-t-il la réappropriation, sur fond tragique, de cet auteur. Celle-ci promeut, pour notre époque, un accueil sans illusion ni limite de l'<< apparence >>. Relevant d'un nihilisme qui n'est qu'ontologique, le penseur contemporain de lui-même et de son temps peut alors affirmer d'autant plus fort ce qui reste: les valeurs et la vie.

There have been recent explosions of interest in two fields: Madhyamaka-Pyrrhonism parallels and Pyrrhonism itself, which seems to have been misunderstood and therefore neglected by the West for the same reasons and in the same ways that Madhyamaka traditionally has often been by the West and the East. Among these recent studies are several demonstrating that grounding in Madhyamaka, for example, reveals and illuminates the import and insights of Pyrrhonean arguments. Furthermore it has been suggested that of all European schools of philosophy Pyrrhonism is the one closest to Buddhism, and especially to Madhyamaka. Indeed Pyrrho is recorded to have studied with philosophers in Taxila, one of the first places where Madhyamaka later flourished, and the place where the founder of Madhyamaka, Nāgārjuna, may have received hitherto concealed texts which became the foundation for his school. In this dissertation I explore just how similar these two philosophical projects were. I systematically treat all the arguments in the Pyrrhonist redactor Sextus Empiricus’ Outlines of Pyrrhonism and Against Dogmatists and compare them to the most similar arguments available in the Madhyamaka treatises and related texts. On this basis, I ask whether the Pyrrhonists and the Buddhists would satisfy each other’s self-identifying criteria, or what characteristics would disqualify either or both in the other’s eyes. I also ask what questions arise from the linguistic and historical evidence for interactions between the Pyrrhonist school and the Madhyamaka school, and how sure we can be of the answers. Did Pyrrho learn Buddhism in Taxila? Was Nāgārjuna a Pyrrhonist? Finally I bring the insights of the living commentarial tradition of Madhyamaka to bear on current scholarly controversies in the field of Sextan Pyrrhonism, and apply the subtleties of interpretation of the latter which have developed in recent scholarship to Madhyamaka and its various difficulties of interpretation, to scrutinize each school under the illumination of the other. With this hopefully illuminated view, I address for example whether Sextus was consistent, whether living Pyrrhonism implies apraxia, whether Pyrrhonism is philosophy at all, and whether Madhyamaka is actually nihilism.

This thesis has as its focus five argumentative modes that lie at the heart of Sextus Empiricus’ Outlines of Pyrrhonism. They are the modes of disagreement, hypothesis, infinite regression, reciprocity and relativity. They are analysed, individually, in the first five chapters of the thesis (one mode per chapter) and, collectively, in the sixth. The first four chapters deal, respectively, with the modes of disagreement, hypothesis, infinite regression and reciprocity. They distinguish between two versions of these modes: “dogmatic versions”, on the basis of which a dogmatic philosopher, who holds some theoretical beliefs, might reach a sceptical conclusion; and “sceptical versions”, on the basis of which a sceptical philosopher, who lacks all theoretical beliefs, might do so. It is argued that scholars such as Jonathan Barnes have offered reconstructions of these modes which are dogmatic in the sense just described, and alternative sceptical versions of the modes are presented. A stand-alone fifth chapter offers an analysis of a stand-alone mode - the mode of relativity. It argues that there are in fact three different modes of relativity at play in the Outlines, that only one of them is non-trivial, and that the non-trivial version is incompatible with the mode of disagreement. The sixth and final chapter offers an analysis of how the modes (excluding relativity) are meant to work in combination with one another. Four different combinations are presented and it is argued that all of them are underscored by a variety of theoretical assumptions, which a sceptic, who lacks all theoretical beliefs, cannot make. The ultimate conclusion of the thesis is that, though the sceptic can deploy the various modes individually (by means of exercising his particular sceptical ability), he is not able to systematise them into a net by means of which he might trap his dogmatic opponent. Unless specified otherwise, translations are based on Annas, J., and Barnes, J., Sextus Empiricus: Outlines of Scepticism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).

Doctor of Philosophy
This dissertation argues that if we are to respect the common sense perspective then Pyrrhonian scepticism can be neither avoided nor defeated. While Pyrrhonian scepticism can be diagnosed it cannot be cured, at least, so long as we take a non-revisionary attitude towards common sense. The fundamental reason for this is that Pyrrhonian scepticism derives from the application of norms of inquiry that constitute part of the content of common sense in unusual but not fanciful or impossible situations. Implicit in this dissertation is a distinction between Cartesian and Pyrrhonian scepticisms, and for present purposes these two scepticisms can be distinguished on two criteria. First, unlike Cartesian scepticism, Pyrrhonian scepticism is not global in its doubts. It is not global because it does not attempt to question our entitlement to entire domains of commitment, for instance commitments to anything beyond the content of our perceptions, all at once. Nor does Pyrrhonism attempt to deny the possibility of knowledge. Rather, Pyrrhonian scepticism questions our entitlement to one commitment at a time and is hence iterative rather than global. This leads to the second far more interesting criterion in that unlike its Cartesian cousin Pyrrhonian scepticism claims not to be revisionary of the common sense perspective. In fact Pyrrhonian scepticism represents itself as the common sense perspective under special conditions. On this reading Pyrrhonian scepticism is a form of common sense scepticism. The claim that Pyrrhonian scepticism is commonsensical calls for a clarification of in what exactly the common sense perspective consists, and its relationship to scepticism. Of particular interest in this regard is a position that has been called Common Sense Naturalism (CSN). CSN consists, in part, in three important claims. First, that we are constrained, both logically and psychologically, to take ourselves to have an entitlement to common sense. Second, that because we are thus constrained, we have an entitlement to those commitments that constitute the content of common sense. Third, that the content of common sense is inherently anti-sceptical. These three claims jointly warrant Page 5 Page 6 the conclusion that appeals to commitments to which we are commonsensically entitled can feature prominently in refutations of scepticism. I argue that CSN is incorrect in that even if we have an entitlement to our common sense commitments we have an equally valid entitlement to Pyrrhonian scepticism, as Pyrrhonian scepticism can be derived from the common sense perspective itself. I also argue that CSN is correct but misleading in suggesting that we are constrained, both logically and psychologically, to take ourselves to have an entitlement to the content of common sense. CSN is correct in that we are always forced to take ourselves to be entitled to some commonsensical commitments but overlooks the fact that the content of these commitments varies, becoming at times amenable to Pyrrhonian scepticism. In fact what we take to be commonsensical is sensitive to our mood at the time. This can be used to explain that feature of the phenomenology of scepticism according to which Pyrrhonian scepticism is a recurrent but not a constant problem. Presenting these arguments requires both that the nature of CSN be clarified (chapter 1), that the relationship between common sense and Pyrrhonian scepticism be established (Chapter 2). Finally, we must also provide an account of the content of common sense be given (Chapter 3) which provides warrant for continued inquisitive activities even after the emergence of Pyrrhonian scepticism from within common sense.

The aim of this dissertation is to provide a critique of the idea that skepticism was the driving force in the development of early modern thought. Historian of philosophy Richard Popkin introduced this thesis in the 1950s and elaborated on it over the next five decades, and recent scholarship shows that it has become an increasingly accepted interpretation. I begin with a study of the relevant historical antecedents—the ancient skeptical traditions of which early modern thinkers were aware—Pyrrhonism and Academicism. Then I discuss the influence of skepticism on three pre-Cartesians: Francisco Sanches, Michel de Montaigne, and Pierre Charron. Basing my arguments on an informed understanding of both ancient Greek skepticism and some of the writings of these philosophers, I contend that it is inaccurate to predominantly characterize Sanches, Montaigne, and Charron as skeptics. To support his thesis about the singular influence of skepticism on early modern thought, Popkin says that René Descartes’ metaphysical philosophy was formed as a response to a skeptical threat and that Descartes ultimately conceded to the force of skepticism. He also argues that David Hume was a Pyrrhonist par excellence. I disagree with Popkin’s claims. I argue that Descartes was not as deeply affected by skepticism as Popkin suggests and that it is inaccurate to characterize Hume as a Pyrrhonist. By offering this critique, I hope to make clear to the readers two things: first, that Popkin’s thesis, though it is both enticing and generally accepted by many scholars, is questionable with regard to its plausibility; second, that the arguments I present in this dissertation reveal that further research into the role of skepticism in early modern philosophy is in order.

Orientador: Marcus Vinicius da Cunha
Banca: Luiz Henrique de Araújo Dutra
Banca: Paula Ramos de Oliveira
Banca: Vera Teresa Valdemarin
Banca: Ana Raquel Lucato Cianflone
Resumo: O presente trabalho analisa as concepções filosóficas de John Dewey, tomando como principal referência o livro The quest for certainty: a study of the relation of knowledge and action, publicado em 1929, no qual o autor propõe utilizar o método das ciências experimentais no campo das ciências humanas, em especial para o exame dos juízos morais. Nesse livro, Dewey defende o rompimento da dicotomia entre teoria e prática e atribui caráter probabilístico aos conhecimentos advindos da investigação científica, tomando como exemplo a mecânica quântica. Os referenciais metodológicos empregados na análise do discurso deweyano advêm da nova retórica, teoria proposta por Chaïm Perelman e Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca em Tratado da argumentação. O objetivo do trabalho é mostrar a proximidade entre Dewey e o ceticismo, tomando por base as concepções de Pirro de Élis sistematizadas por Enesidemo e Sexto Empírico, bem como desenvolvimentos recentes dessa filosofia. A intenção mais ampla do trabalho é contribuir para a discussão de teses que divergem em relação ao tema focalizado nesta pesquisa: de um lado, as que responsabilizam o ceticismo deweyano pelos males da educação contemporânea, e, de outro, as que atribuem a Dewey a origem de importantes progressos na pedagogia.
Abstract: The present study analyses the philosophical conceptions of John Dewey presented in the book The quest for certainty: a study of the relation of knowledge and action, published in 1929, in which the author proposes to use the method of experimental sciences in human sciences, specially to the examination of moral judgments. In this book, Dewey defends the disruption of the dichotomy between practical and theory and attributes a probabilistic character to the scientific inquiry knowledge, citing as an example the quantun mechanics. The methodology adopted to analyze deweyan discourse is the new rhetoric, based upon Treatise of argumentation by Chaïm Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. The objective of the this work is to show to the proximity between Dewey and the skepticism, having as a basis the conceptions of Pyrrho from Élis systematized by Aenesidemus and Sextus Empiricus, as well as recent developments of this philosophy. The work also intends to contribute for the discussion of theses which diverge on the theme of this work: on the one hand, the ones that blame Dewey's skepticism for the harmfulness of contemporary education; and, on the other, those which attribute the origin of important progress in pedagogy to Dewey.
Doutor

Há um consenso nos meios crítico e acadêmico de que Joaquim Maria Machado de Assis é o maior ficcionista brasileiro. Além da qualidade inegável, sua ficção é notável por sua dimensão, atingindo uma dezena de romances e mais de duzentos contos. Com esta união singular entre extensão e qualidade, a obra machadiana acumulou a maior fortuna crítica no Brasil e uma das maiores da literatura universal. Ainda assim, sua fortuna é a que mais cresce no Brasil. Diante de tamanha dedicação dos estudiosos, em que seria relevante a apresentação de mais uma dissertação sobre o Bruxo do Cosme Velho? Acreditando que, apesar do tamanho da investigação que já se fez sobre Machado, alguns dos aspectos cruciais da vida e da obra do escritor ainda não foram devidamente elucidados, este trabalho nasce com a intenção de contribuir para a diminuição dessa lacuna. Um desses aspectos é o conteúdo filosófico da ficção machadiana. Durante muitas décadas, a ideia de que Machado de Assis se alinhara filosoficamente ao pessimismo foi hegemônica. Entretanto, muitas características da ficção machadiana, tais como o humour e a ironia, podem ser sinais de outra orientação filosófica: o ceticismo. A identificação entre Machado e ceticismo não é, entretanto, algo novo, mas durante a maior parte do tempo, a crítica identificou o ceticismo de Machado com a acepção popular do termo: descrença no campo metafísico e desengano no campo político-social. Este modo de ver o ceticismo acaba por aproximar o termo, e reaproximar Machado de Assis, ao pessimismo. Por outro lado, há algumas décadas, alguns estudiosos brasileiros começaram a verificar que a filosofia da ficção machadiana estaria de fato associada ao ceticismo, mas a outro tipo de ceticismo, o ceticismo pirrônico ou filosófico, iniciado com Pirro de Elis, filósofo grego que viveu entre 360 e 270 a.C., e estabelecido pelos escritos de Sexto Empírico, filósofo e médico do século 2. Fazendo jus à origem grega do termo skepticós, aquele que investiga, o ceticismo pirrônico prima não pela descrença, mas pela busca contínua da verdade. Esta busca se mantém indeterminada em virtude da limitação dos sentidos e do pensamento humanos. Não podemos alcançar a verdade das coisas, mas apenas descrever como elas aparentam. Esta impossibilidade não conduz o pirrônico ao pessimismo, o conduz, ao contrário, à tranquilidade, pois ele aceita a sua limitação, não fica se debatendo contra ela. Na ficção machadiana, o conselheiro Aires é o personagem cético por excelência, a começar pelo tão famoso tédio à controvérsia. Entretanto, apesar da semelhança entre a ficção de Machado de Assis e a filosofia cética, há um problema a ser enfrentado: como o escritor poderia ter criado um personagem tão próximo do pirronismo se Machado nunca chegou a ler uma página de Sexto Empírico?
Joaquim Maria Machado de Assis is the most important Brazilian fictionist, according to the critics and the academy. Together with its undeniable quality, his fiction is notable for its dimension, reaching ten novels and over two hundred short stories. Because of its unique union between quality and size, Machados work has garnered the biggest critical fortune among Brazilian writers and one of the greatest in literature all over the world. Still, his fortune is the fastest growing in Brazil. Faced with such dedication of the scholars, it would be relevant to present a new paper on the Warlock of Cosme Velho? Believing that some of the crucial aspects of his life and work have not been elucidated, despite of the size of the research that has been done on Machado, this work comes with the intention to contribute reducing this gap. One of these aspects is the philosophical content of Machado's fiction. For many decades, the idea that Machado de Assis is philosophically aligned with pessimism was hegemonic. However, many features of Machado's fiction, such as humour and irony, may be signs of other philosophical orientation: skepticism. However, the identification between Machado and skepticism is not something new. But during most of the time, the critics identified the skepticism of Machado with the popular sense of that word: disbelief concerning metaphysical dimension and disappointment concerning politics and social environment. This view of skepticism, however, approximates the term to pessimism; and reconnects Machado de Assis to it. Decades ago, some Brazilian scholars began to see that the philosophy of Machado's fiction was actually associated with skepticism, but another kind of skepticism, the Pyrrhonian or philosophical skepticism, which began with Pyrrho of Elis, a Greek philosopher who lived between 360 and 270 BC, and was established by the writings of Sextus Empiricus, philosopher and physician of the second century. True to the Greek origin of the term skepticos, the one who inquires, the Pyrrhonian skepticism is distinguished not by disbelief, but by its continual search for the truth. This search remains undetermined due to the limitation of human senses and thought. We cannot reach the truth of things, but only describe how they look. This failure does not lead the Pyrrhonian to pessimism, leads him instead to the tranquility, because he accepts his limitations and is not struggling against them. In Machado's fiction, counselor Aires is the skeptical character par excellence, starting with his famous aversion to controversy. However, despite the similarity between the fiction of Machado de Assis and skeptical philosophy, there is a problem to be faced: Machado had never read a single page from Sextus Empiricus. So, how could the writer created a so closed to the Pyrrhonism character?

A tese defende a ideia de que uma compreensão adequada da suspensão cética de juízo (epokhé) pressupõe o estudo dos textos de Sexto Empírico que, direta ou indiretamente, abordam o problema da concepção pirrônica da linguagem ou discurso (lógos), e também daqueles que fornecem elementos para a compreensão da posição sextiana acerca da linguagem cotidiana das pessoas comuns. Os primeiros capítulos lidam com a conhecida distinção entre as assim chamadas interpretações rústica e urbana da filosofia pirrônica. A seguir, o texto discute o problema do lógos quando considerado a partir de uma perspectiva pirrônica, onde uma nova argumentação em favor da interpretação rústica é desenvolvida, baseada na ideia de um percurso cético. No quarto capítulo, é examinada a noção de phainómenon e sua relação com o lógos cético, através da formulação de uma interpretação mais geral do ceticismo antigo e do seu discurso fenomênico. O quinto e último capítulo procede então a uma avaliação da força filosófica tanto da filosofia pirrônica como da neopirrônica
The dissertation defends the idea that an adequate understanding of the sceptical suspension of judgement (epoché) presupposes the study of the Sextus Empiricus texts which, either directly or indirectly, address the problem of the pyrrhonian conception of language or discourse (lógos), and also the study of those texts that provide elements for the understanding of the Sextian position about the everyday language of common people. The first chapters deal with the well-known distinction between the so-called rustic and urbane interpretations of the pyrrhonian philosophy. In the sequence, the dissertation discusses the problem of the lógos, as viewed from a pyrrhonian perspective, also by developing a new argument in favor of the rustic interpretation, based upon the idea of a sceptic path. Subsequently, the notion of phainómenon and its relation to the sceptic lógos are analyzed through a general approach to ancient scepticism. The fith and last chapter proceeds to an avaluation of the philosophical strength of both the pyrrhonian and neopyrrhonian philosophies

Ancient Greek philosophical schools are said to share a common structure in their ethical theories which is characterized by a eudaimonistic teleology based in an understanding of human nature. At first glance, the skepticism of Sextus Empiricus as described in the Outlines of Pyrrhonism seems to fit into this model insofar as he describes the end of the skeptic as ataraxia, a common account of the expression of human happiness. I argue that this is a misunderstanding of Sextus’s philosophy for several reasons. “The end of skepticism” cannot be eudaimonistic or teleological in the way that other ancient ethical theories are typically understood; moreover, ataraxia is not an end derived from a theory about human nature. For these reasons, the skeptical way of life is radically different than the ethical theories proposed by other schools. I argue that this difference is a result of the character of the skeptical enterprise which involves the implicit rejection of norms in both the epistemological and the ethical spheres.

Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:31:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2010-02-08Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T18:42:13Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 costalopes_v_dr_arafcl.pdf: 362341 bytes, checksum: ae0f2fc12d277eed0383947607fbc4c0 (MD5)
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
O presente trabalho analisa as concepções filosóficas de John Dewey, tomando como principal referência o livro The quest for certainty: a study of the relation of knowledge and action, publicado em 1929, no qual o autor propõe utilizar o método das ciências experimentais no campo das ciências humanas, em especial para o exame dos juízos morais. Nesse livro, Dewey defende o rompimento da dicotomia entre teoria e prática e atribui caráter probabilístico aos conhecimentos advindos da investigação científica, tomando como exemplo a mecânica quântica. Os referenciais metodológicos empregados na análise do discurso deweyano advêm da nova retórica, teoria proposta por Chaïm Perelman e Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca em Tratado da argumentação. O objetivo do trabalho é mostrar a proximidade entre Dewey e o ceticismo, tomando por base as concepções de Pirro de Élis sistematizadas por Enesidemo e Sexto Empírico, bem como desenvolvimentos recentes dessa filosofia. A intenção mais ampla do trabalho é contribuir para a discussão de teses que divergem em relação ao tema focalizado nesta pesquisa: de um lado, as que responsabilizam o ceticismo deweyano pelos males da educação contemporânea, e, de outro, as que atribuem a Dewey a origem de importantes progressos na pedagogia.
The present study analyses the philosophical conceptions of John Dewey presented in the book The quest for certainty: a study of the relation of knowledge and action, published in 1929, in which the author proposes to use the method of experimental sciences in human sciences, specially to the examination of moral judgments. In this book, Dewey defends the disruption of the dichotomy between practical and theory and attributes a probabilistic character to the scientific inquiry knowledge, citing as an example the quantun mechanics. The methodology adopted to analyze deweyan discourse is the new rhetoric, based upon Treatise of argumentation by Chaïm Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. The objective of the this work is to show to the proximity between Dewey and the skepticism, having as a basis the conceptions of Pyrrho from Élis systematized by Aenesidemus and Sextus Empiricus, as well as recent developments of this philosophy. The work also intends to contribute for the discussion of theses which diverge on the theme of this work: on the one hand, the ones that blame Dewey’s skepticism for the harmfulness of contemporary education; and, on the other, those which attribute the origin of important progress in pedagogy to Dewey.

In this dissertation, I examine the influence of Pyrrhonist skepticism over Shakespeare’s sonnets. Unlike academic skepticism, which begins from a position of doubt, Pyrrhonist skepticism encourages an embrace of multiple perspectives that, according to Sextus Empiricus, leads first to a suspension of judgment and ultimately to a state of tranquility. The Pyrrhonian inflection of Shakespeare’s sonnets accounts for the pleasure and uncertainty they cultivate in readers. By offering readers multiple perspectives on a given issue, such as love or infidelity, Shakespeare’s sonnets demonstrate the instability of information, suggesting that such instability can be a source for pleasure. One essential tool for the uncertainty in the sonnets, I argue, is the figurative language they draw from a variety of fields and discourses. When these metaphors contradict one another, creating fragmented images in the minds of readers, they generate a unique aesthetic experience, which creates meaning that transcends the significance of any of the individual metaphors. In the first two chapters, I identify important contexts for Shakespeare’s sensitivity to the pliability of figurative language: Reformation-era religious tracts and pamphleteers’ debates about the value and function of the theater. In Chapter 3, I examine Shakespeare’s response to the Petrarchan tradition, arguing that he diverges from the sonneteers, who often use figurative language in an attempt to access and communicate stable truths. Shakespeare creates epistemological instability in sonnets both to the young man and to the dark lady, and, as I argue in Chapter 4, this similarity offers readers an opportunity to think beyond traditional divisions between the two sonnet subsequences.

This paper investigates Herman Melville’s quest for spiritual stability and certainty in his novel Moby-Dick. The analysis establishes a philosophical tradition of doubt towards the Bible, outlining the philosophies of Thomas Hobbes, Benedict de Spinoza, David Hume, Thomas Paine and John Henry Newman. This historical survey of spiritual uncertainty establishes the issue of uncertainty that Melville writes about in the nineteenth century. Having assessed the issue of doubt, I then analyze Melville’s use of metaphorical charts, which his characters use to resolve this issue. Finally, I present Melville’s philosophical findings as he expresses them through the metaphor of whaling. Here, I also scrutinize Melville’s depiction of nature, as well as his presentation of the dichotomy between contemplative and active questing, as represented by the characters Ishmael and Ahab.

Nous nous proposons, dans le cadre de cette étude, de démontrer que les Essais de Montaigne contiennent bel et bien, en dépit d’une forme éclatée et d’un propos non systématique, ce qu’il convient d’appeler une morale. Non seulement cette morale ne s’oppose-t-elle pas au scepticisme des Essais, mais elle lui est même d’une certaine façon coextensive : la morale de Montaigne est une morale de l’essai, lequel constitue l’expression la plus achevée de son scepticisme. Ce dernier, pour être bien compris, doit préalablement être mis en parallèle avec la « voie » (ἀγωγή) que propose Sextus Empiricus dans ses Hypotyposes pyrrhoniennes, dont l’influence sur Montaigne pourrait être bien plus importante que ne le laissent croire plusieurs travaux récents.
We will argue, in the following study, that Montaigne’s Essays, despite their fragmented writing and unsystematic form, indeed contain what deserves to be called an ethics. This ethics, far from contradicting his scepticism, identifies with it in a certain way: Montaigne’s ethics is an ethics of the essay, which is the definitive expression of his scepticisim. The latter, to be correctly understood, needs to be compared with Sextus Empiricus’ « way » (ἀγωγή), whose influence on Montaigne may be more important than it has been argued in recent years.

The following inquiry pursues two interlinked aims. The first is to understand Wittgenstein’s idea of non-foundational certainty in the context of a reading of On Certainty that emphasizes its Pyrrhonian elements. The second is to read Wittgenstein’s remarks on idealism/radical skepticism in On Certainty in parallel with the discussion of rule-following in Philosophical Investigations in order to demonstrate an underlying similarity of philosophical concerns and methods. I argue that for the later Wittgenstein, what is held certain in a given context of inquiry or action is a locally transcendental condition of the inquiry or action in question. In On Certainty, Wittgenstein’s analysis of the difference between knowledge and certainty forms the basis of his critique of both Moore’s “Proof” and radical skepticism. This critique takes the shape of rejection of a presupposition shared by both parties, and utilizes what I identify as a Pyrrhonian-style argument against opposed dogmatic views. Wittgenstein’s method in this text involves describing epistemic language-games. I demonstrate that this is consistent with the rejection of epistemological theorizing, arguing that a Wittgensteinian “picture” is not a theory, but an impressionistic description that accomplishes two things: (i) throwing into relief problems with dogmatic theories and their presuppositions, and (ii) describing the provenance of linguistic and epistemic practices in terms of norms grounded in convention. Convention, in turn, is not arbitrary, but grounded in the biological and social natures of human beings—in what Wittgenstein calls forms of life. Thus there is a kind of naturalism in the work of the later Wittgenstein. It is a naturalism that comes neatly dovetailed with Pyrrhonism—a combination of strategies traceable to Hume’s work in the Treatise. I read Hume as someone who develops the Pyrrhonian method to include philosophy done “in a careless manner,” and argue that Wittgenstein adopts a similar method in his later works. Finally, I explain the deference to convention in the work of both Hume and Wittgenstein by reference to a passage in Sextus’ Outlines, on which I provide a gloss in the final chapter of this work.