Trevor WIemann Midterm Post 3/3

Ok, so I kind of overestimated the amount of content I would have talking about Miranda Fricker and her theory of testimonial injustice. I have seem to run out of things to discuss, so I am going to switch gears and talk about a new topic for my last post. I am going to discuss Pyrrho and the concept of skepticism.

I have several issues with Pyrro’s way of living. I can understand having a certain amount of operational skepticism, filtering out ideas and concepts that are clearly false. However, Pyrro took skepticism very literally. Many people today are referred to as “skeptics”, but Pyrrho was a skeptic. The man believed that we can never know anything to be certain, so therefore we should just give up on questing for any sort of knowledge. He believed that the senses were absolutely not to be trusted. Think about that. A life where all the senses were assumed to be wrong. Pyrrho must of had all kinds of issues that came along with this distrust of the senses. It would be very hard to live a life where you were in constant denial of the very state you were in.

I can't be sad, emotions don't exist!

Are you really hot, or is it just your imagination playing a clever trick on you? Does the Sun really give off that light, and if it doesn’t what keeps you from staring at it all day long? This avid distrust of the senses leaves very little to no room to find happiness in any worldly pleasure. In fact, Pyrrho thought that he should not be any happier or sadder than his normal self for this very reason. If he does not trust his senses, he won’t be able to tell if the feelings that he is receiving as a result of them are real or not. Pyrrho was so wrapped up in the notion that no knowledge is good knowledge, believed the key to ultimate tranquility was a lack of caring. In my opinion, this is an awful way to look at life. How can anyone be content with just sitting on the sidelines their entire life? I don’t understand how Pyrrho could never take a side on an argument. In fact, I am a bit skeptical that it actually happened! Yes, it is known that on the outside he was always calm and neutral, but no one can ever know what was going on inside Pyrrho’s mind. I believe that on some level Pyrrho had attachments or affections for something. In an argument, there had to be a subject that would get him all fired up. What’s the point of living life without caring about anything? I think it would be too dull to stand. Now for a lot of people, taking a more neutral, laid-back outlook on life would not hurt one bit. However, Pyrrho took it to a whole new level. There is a painting depicting a ship being tossed around in a violent manner. Pyrrho is on board, relaxing without a care in the world (literally).*

 At times like this it would be great to be able to channel the ability to not care about literally anything going on in the world around you. However, in everyday life it had to make him a hard person to maintain any kind of friendship with. Something I would love to ask Pyrrho if I had the chance is how did he know that we couldn’t know anything? What if everything was completely true, what we smelled actually reflected the source of the scent, scientific theories that could be falsified were true, and the monstrous storm tearing the boat to shreds was really destroying the boat. How did he know that he wasn’t experiencing real happiness? These are all issues I have with skepticism. If you can’t know anything, how can you be so confident in the conclusion that the senses can’t be trusted and judgment should never be passed.

This reminds me of a joke I've heard before, "The only attitude I trust is skepticism."

 I know I could never live a life where there was absolutely no pursuit for happiness, or even a life where there was no room for sadness every once in a while.

* I knew about this painting from Morgan’s post when his group discussed Pyrrho, thanks buddy!

Final Word Count: 2,045