Phronesis 37 (3):283-313 (1992)
|Abstract||Pyrrhonian sceptics claim, notoriously, to assent to the appearances without making claims about how things are. To see whether this is coherent we need to consider the philosophical history of ‘appearance’(phainesthai)-talk, and the closely related concept of an impression (phantasia). This history suggests that the sceptics resemble Plato in lacking the ‘non-epistemic’ or ‘non-doxastic’ conception of appearance developed by Aristotle and the Stoics. What is distinctive about the Pyrrhonian sceptic is simply that the degree of doxastic commitment involved in his assent to an impression is asymptotally low.|
|Keywords||scepticism appearance impression phantasia|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
John W. Yolton (2000). Realism and Appearances: An Essay in Ontology. Cambridge University Press.
Irving Thalberg (1965). Looks, Impressions and Incorrigibility. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 25 (March):365-374.
Jeffrey Barnouw (2002). Propositional Perception: Phantasia, Predication, and Sign in Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics. University Press of America.
Arne Naess (1966). Psychological and Social Aspects of Pyrrhonian Scepticism. Inquiry 9 (1-4):301 – 321.
Rachel Barney (1992). Appearances and Impressions. Phronesis 37 (3):283-313.
Alexander Jackson (2011). Appearances, Rationality, and Justified Belief. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 82 (3):564-593.
David Robb (2007). Power Essentialism. Philosophical Topics 35 (1-2):343-58.
Ned O'Gorman (forthcoming). Aristotle's Phantasia in the Rhetoric : Lexis, Appearance, and the Epideictic Function of Discourse. Philosophy and Rhetoric 38 (1):16-40.
Uriah Kriegel (2004). Trope Theory and the Metaphysics of Appearances. American Philosophical Quarterly 41 (1):5-20.
Added to index2010-05-13
Total downloads34 ( #40,539 of 722,813 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,813 )
How can I increase my downloads?