English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-09-04 15:38:29 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

If I defined the tenet, and someone almost did, I'd be answering my own Q. I want to know what you out there know. Try doing a net search and a little reading up on *skepticism would help you. I'm not asking to be spoon fed and you shouldn't be in the philosophy category, if you do!

2007-09-04 17:37:33 · update #1

Skepticism is a philosophy-- a very negative philosophy -- and it is as old as the hills. There are extreme forms(Pyrrhonism and milder forms(solipsism)

2007-09-04 18:05:56 · update #2

BA is picked based on these Q's: Did the person's answer address the philosophical Q's asked. Is the A coherent? And Is it clearly expressed--not buried in the text. I also ask myself ,besides these Q's , did the person try to turn the Q around to fit some purpose beyond simply answering the Q?

2007-09-11 06:00:27 · update #3

10 answers

A philosophical skeptic is a person who doubts anything which can be doubted.

The notion had its full bloom with Descartes and led him to his one fundamental truth: "Cogito Ergo Sum" "I think therefore I am"

He decided that the only thing he could know with absolute certainty was that he was a thinking being and therefore must exist. The existence of the objective external world was cast into doubt.

And the debate rages on between realists, idealists, etc.

Personally, I side with the realists.

2007-09-07 04:57:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

A Skeptic disbelieves in others' beliefs that is all. He is not at the heart of the matter or truth. Therefore, to say, I go with this skeptic or that skeptic will not solve the problem for Truth.

Truth must be discovered. No body simply believes in something without a logic. Skeptics too believe in some kind of logic or antilogic that appeals their brain. So does the believer or faithful. The belief appeals his brain and alliances with their emotions.

Truth is what should be sought after; neither faith nor skepticism would solve me the problem. Both are just logical points and not the truth itself. Truth, just the naked truth we want.

2007-09-09 23:46:13 · answer #2 · answered by Harihara S 4 · 0 0

A skeptic is one who has to see the things in which he believes, questioning all else. I only believe a very small part of what I see, and virtually nothing of what I hear, so I guess i would qualify as a skeptic, but I have seen and believe a great many things.
[edit: skeptic comes from the Greek word skopos, to see, extended to skeptikos, thoughtful or inquiring, the questions he asked marked Socrates as a skeptic. A skeptic says we know things by their appearance, i.e. what we see. A statement of this is, "Seeing is believing." The Stoics, Chrysippus and Epictetus among them, were skeptics as well as Pyrrho of Elis and the philosophers of the Age of Reason. Being an hermeneutic phenomenologist makes me a skeptic much more strongly than an empiricist or existentialist (many of whom are nihilists, negating what they see). Radical solipsism from the Cartesian Meditations of Edmund Husserl is the basis of this philosophy, developed in the writings of Martin Heidegger who taught my teacher. Immediate knowledge of the world we experience is achieved by means of the phenomenal epoché (One holds the object up much as a jeweler holds a diamond under the loupe, "seeing" is more refined) in which we come to understand the Ding an Sich apart from the load of interpretations we attach to it. By questions I arrive at the meanings of the things I see. This is an answer to Immanuel Kant's Prolegomena zu jeden Philosophie die als Wissenschaft werden gegen in which Kant talked about Philosophy as a presuppositionless science.]
[I radically disagree with you, skepticism is anything but negative. What can be more positive than the things that are there for everyone to see?]
[and I don't need any net search to supply this information. Much of what is on the net is erroneous populist garbage. Deny the Greek and show your own ignorance. School marms are poor philosophy teachers, it's not an elementary classroom subject.]
[Knowledge is intensely inter-subjective. René desCartes by separation of the conscious subject from the objects of experience defined rather than casting doubt on objectivity. Noesis from the Noemata, knowledge from the things known. Cogito ego (or ergo) Sum. Thinking defines my being. The world presents me with things to think about, it is not my consciousness which defines the world but my experience of the world shapes my consciousness. Heidegger expressed this as identity and difference.]

2007-09-04 16:02:50 · answer #3 · answered by Fr. Al 6 · 0 1

A skeptic (in the classical sense) believes dogmatic truths about the world can not be established.

For example, a skeptic will doubt the senses really provide information about the outside world, or that reason can arrive at conclusions concerning the world we live in.

Personally, I have skeptical tendencies, and I believe their position is basically right. But for practical reasons, skepticism is very difficult to hold in earnest in one's day to day life. I can choose to believe memory is wrong and that doors don't exist, but sooner or later, I'll trust in my memory telling me of the outside world and open the door.

2007-09-04 15:47:59 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

There is no philosophy of 'Skeptic'. But there are skeptical philosophies, like Empiricism or Existentialism.

"Seeing is believing" is the main belief that makes one a skeptic.

I am an Empiricist, an Existentialist and an Engineer, so me and Skepticism go way back.

2007-09-04 16:25:06 · answer #5 · answered by Phoenix Quill 7 · 1 1

None yet critique powerful on my critiques. Have seen some smart opposing critiques from different Y/A R&S contributors that are outstanding. seen in general nonsense Y/A R&S contributors who "don't get it"and quote dogma attempting to "baffle with BS". and additionally seen relatively idiotic and offensive solutions who deny straight forward good judgment (which incorporate straight forward good judgment in my solutions).

2016-10-17 23:51:47 · answer #6 · answered by marolf 4 · 0 0

First of all, in order to answer your question, you need to give more info. There are so many philosophies in our world, name the one you are referring to. I need to know in order to determine if I am a skeptic.

2007-09-04 15:45:34 · answer #7 · answered by margo 2 · 0 2

yo like a skeptic is all about like not carin about nothing. yo, people be all like "yo whys der sumfin rader dan nothin" and the skeptic will be allz like "yo it don' matter, we neva gon know" and then he goes an sips on his champagne and gets with the honeys.

2007-09-04 15:46:07 · answer #8 · answered by nickname 2 · 0 2

1. You can't know anything.

2. No, and I know it.

2007-09-04 15:47:14 · answer #9 · answered by Theron Q. Ramacharaka Panchadasi 4 · 0 1

in general- you only believe that you you can only know one thing......

that you don't really know anything else

2007-09-04 16:18:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers