On a Saturday morning, a torrent of thoughts came up spontaneously throughout the path for a Spanish class. It happened on the street as I walked along the sidewalk and as I watched the movement of the city. In fact, this kind of phenomenon is common for me, especially since the question "What is philosophy?" has emerged on the horizon of my existential itinerary. Well, I would say that it is not common! I would say that it occurs continuously. Receiving the question, starting to comprehend it, cultivating it, and finally trying to give it an answer might be a seductive, exciting, and challenging endeavor whose dividends might be accounted for in terms of satisfaction with the conquests coming from the gradual advancements. On the other hand, dealing with this endeavor is certainly full of challenges, questions, and concerns, particularly when we allow freely and genuinely the manifestation of thought. Thus, philosophizing might be a practice for the entire life. However, it is important to notice that the question is somewhat disconcerting, as we have already said in the "A Story of a Booklet 'Whose Pages Are Already Yellowed'", and, in this sense, it has everything to do with a singular thought way, that is, we are talking about philosophical thought.
A few days ago, I was reading the Outlines of Scepticism by doctor and philosopher Sextus Empiricus. One more rereading as I revisit this text quite often and from time to time. There are certain books that are part of our lives in a special way. It is impressive how each rereading can evince new nuances and layers of original subtitles – which had been ignored since then – when we are disposable to mature and deepen our knowledge in relation to a certain line of thought. Ignored not for neglecting or lacking attention, but simply because we are guided and nourished by the maturing of previous readings when we revisit the text; that is, we are guided by the maturing of our own reflections. But not only that! In my case, I am used to reading other thinkers. As it was said in other posts, I am intended to continue reading and studying other philosophies, as, according to my point of view, it is important to keep reading constantly. The Western tradition has produced many things, and it is never too late to amplify our philosophical horizons. And, particularly this year of 2024, I have dedicated part of my free time to read The World as Will and Representation by Arthur Schopenhauer – if the reader has been following our blog, you will notice in previous posts that this philosopher was already present here when I had the opportunity to appreciate his position regarding the translation. Reading this book was on my reading list for a long time. When it comes to philosophical studies, studying a new line of thought and trying to comprehend a new thinker is a favorable habit for our own philosophical maturation. And Schopenhauer’s book has a specific section focused on the critical approach of the Kantian philosophy, which made me feel happy as a reader of the texts from skeptic "school."
Digression aside, let us get back to Sextus Empiricus’ text. In the first part of the Outlines, Sextus Empiricus shows the most general aspects of Skepticism. In this case, we can notice that the doctor and philosopher bear in mind the Pyrronian Skepticism, whose founder was Phyrro of Elis. As Phyrro spread orally his teachings, he did not leave anything written; then Sextus Empiricus’ works were pivotal so that Phyrro’s thought could be known after having been left as a legacy to the posterity. That is, Sextus Empiricus’ texts rescue and show his views on Phyrronian Skepticism. Thus, in the first part, by means of an accessible text whose exposition is simple, but not least articulated, we find, as we previously mentioned, the general philosophical aspects. Differently from the other dogmatic schools, Skepticism would not pretentiously offer a philosophical system. For antient skeptics, the pretention regarding the philosophical endeavor was much more modest; that is, this pretention would not be intended to show to the world a hermetically systematized report on the nature of things, on the contrary! According to them, we could formulate a report much simpler, that is, something as a description of the apparent things. And differently from the dogmatic systems that articulated their respective philosophies, skeptics saw in each one of these systems different conflicting theorical conceptions among each other, and, in this sense, with multiple dissonant theories on the same question, it seemed unreasonable to place a full stop and consider as finished the development of the philosophical endeavor. However, from the fact that Sextus Empiricus has not offered a philosophical system it does not follows that his thought was incoherent or unrigorous. On the contrary! It is noticeable in Sextus Empiricus’ exposition how his thought is articulated and meticulous. Phyrro was of that kind of philosopher that was more worried about the practical side of his ideas; that is, he favored the ordinary and pragmatic aspects of his teachings. And it was those aspects Sextus Empiricus tried to rescue.
In this sense, the notion of philosophical knowledge becomes problematic if we are not able to report the nature of things. That is, it is not that skeptics did not care or did not give importance to the development of this kind of knowledge. Let us not get things mixed up! The possibility of philosophical knowledge development is a complex and intricate endeavor, that is, it is something full of challenges. It is necessary to be rigorous, and it is also necessary to take the philosophical investigations to the last consequences. In those circumstances, the best thing to be done would be to suspend the judgment to avoid the rashness and the formulation of theories that could become problematic later, and even more problematic if they were thoughtlessly followed by their adepts. So, had skeptical attitude everything to do with a sort of denunciation towards dogmatism? And what was the content of this denunciation? Dogmatism could generate disastrous effects on thought when, allegedly, their respective philosophies consider the development of philosophical endeavor as finished, impeding the possibility of new investigations, questions, the free exercise of the doubts, as well as the raising of new debates. In other words, when their respective philosophies considered as acquired the last stage of the reflexive itinerary.
On the other hand, besides the suspension of judgment and everything that philosophy could think about, debate, and reflect later, skeptics also considered equally important the investigation. And that to such an extent that it should incessantly occur. In this sense, skeptical thought is characterized by, among other things, the maintenance of the investigation when it analyzes the other philosophies. Thus, we have two important elements: On the one hand, the suspension of judgment allows the raising of the free-thinking activity, always on the move, free from dogmas; on the other hand, the investigation nourishes the thought with new philosophical elements that can be critically assessed. That is a quite simple landscape that we can find in the first part of the Outlines. I would like to explore these two aspects a little further.
I heard a bird singing as I walked along the sidewalk for a Spanish class that Saturday morning. I'm not very good at distinguishing birds' songs or even knowing who's who. There are several species, and each one expresses themselves in their own unique way, in addition to possessing particular characteristics. Even if our senses can notice the sounds, it is easy to make a mistake. But certain songs are unmistakable, as that one from "bem-te-vi", for example – “Bem-te-vi” is a bird who is present here in Brazil. However, though we are in the city, in the urban environment, with fewer trees and the prevalence of houses, buildings, concrete, and asphalt, the manifestation of these ways of life live with us, yet in a restricted way – unfortunately. I looked at the tree, and I immediately noticed the bird flying towards the power pole wire. Afterwards, they flew away for another place, following their way. On the other hand, for the ones with hearing disabilities, things might be different. When I faced this scene, Aenesidemus’ first mode, that is, the mode of animals, came to mind.
As I previously said, skeptics suspend judgment against the theoretical formulations that intend to reveal the nature of things. For doing so, they appeal to a series of modes, the modes of suspension, to be successful in their strategies. These modes are employed during the argumentation to produce the suspension of judgment. But this is not enough. What is under consideration here is the denunciation against the disastrous effects produced by dogmatism for the thinking activity. In the first part of Outlines, Sextus Empiricus shows Aenesidemus’ 10 modes (from older skeptics) and Agrippa’s 5 modes, besides the other 2 (from the more recent skeptics), with the aim to highlight how the dogmatic pretention regarding the development of the philosophical knowledge is much more problematic than we can imagine. That is a long exposition where Sextus Empiricus shows why we have good reasons to put under suspicion dogmatic claims. On the other hand, Sextus Empiricus prudently articulates his exposition, as he considers the subject opened and not completely exhausted, once the possibility of existence of other different modes should not be disregarded – as they could be even more suspensive.
When that bird flew away, I got myself imagining how difficult life could be for such an animal who lives in the city. I thought: If the life is so hard in the wild – and here I remember a passage from The World as Will and Representation in which Schopenhauer understands that the wild life is permeated by a constant and uninterrupted fight for life –, imagine how it could be even more hard in the city where the natural resources, food, and water are much more scarce, in sum, the artificially arranged environment to accommodate, in a great extent, the life of human beings! The civilization created for humans does not seem to have considered that our planet was not made solely and exclusively for our species! That is, we, as one more species among the others, live on this planet as the other living beings and ways of life – with their different characteristics and specific constitutions.
Thus, it seems to me that human beings have not any privileges to the detriment of other species. I have the impression that we are not more intelligent or more naturally well-resourced regarding the other species or ways of life. So, what is intelligence? There are so many things that can be done by animals that we humans cannot do without appealing to a technological resource. Birds can fly. A dog can hear certain sound frequency ranges that humans cannot, not to mention their much more accurate sense of smell. Cats can climb the walls, trees, and even the roofs, among other unimaginable things. An ant can carry N times the weight of the own body. The instincts are much more accurate, fast, and reliable than the reason in many circumstances! I have the impression that we have certain characteristics and that we are different from the most different points of view regarding the other species and ways of life. But this would not be a plausible reason for us to claim that we have more rights to the detriment of other species and ways of life. How does a bird might feel living in the city? The answer to the question seems to be obvious, or the question itself might be foolish, but sometimes I wonder if we are thinking about these things when we are hurriedly walking along the streets of the city. In fact, do we even realize what there would be in the city beyond the asphalt and concrete? The planet was not made for us, human beings; we only inhabit within, as the other species and ways of life.
Here it is important to notice how philosophical readings can have their influence under our worldview, and in this case, in our relationship with other animals. If we were solely selfish beings, I have the impression that other species, or even nature as a whole, should exist solely and exclusively to serve our own interests. However, if we investigate more this question, we could put another element in the scale so that inclination could be tended to the equilibrium. In many of our ordinary interactions, or even in our interactions with other animals, we act considering the well-being of others. For example, when we are in the queue of the supermarket with the shopping cart and another one arrives, with just a few items, and asks if it would be possible for her to get our place in the queue to have their items registered in front of us. We will obviously not be selfish. Or even in the case a street cat jumps the wall of our houses and starts living in the backyard with us. We will obviously take care of that small animal, feed them, and give them water. In both examples, we show how altruism can promote selfless actions. In the first case, it produced a kind action. In the second case, it produced a welcome action.
Still in the first part of the Outlines, Sextus Empiricus talks about investigation, one of Skepticism’s characteristics. I have already had the opportunity to talk about this concept in other posts here in our blog. On that occasion, I developed a reflection applied to the translation area. However, the concept of investigation has a wide sense, and its interpretation might be multifaceted. In Sextus Empiricus’ text, the investigation is targeted for the apprehension of the other philosophies as a reflection object. And, in this case, I have the impression that investigation goes hand in hand with curiosity. It is necessary to maintain a nearly insatiable curiosity regarding everything to make investigation possible. Thus, investigating, that is, following the traces, seems like a nourishment. We feed the thought with the philosophical elements from other schools, that is, we throw an apprehensive glance in the sense of having at our disposition other philosophies as our reflection object: Raising questions, analyzing the exposition of an idea, comparing the philosophical thought of the respective authors, perceiving the development line of a doctrine and certain affinities among certain thought schools, formulating objections, etc. All of that is a source of joy, as our intellectual abilities are put on the move. Finally, there are so many different questions raised during the study of a philosophy. And we always maintain in our horizon the suspension of judgment.
When I heard that bird singing, a curiosity regarding so many different aspects of that small animal was immediately born. From the perception of the singing, I asked: "What is their name?"; "How big are they?"; "What are their colors?"; "Where might they be?". It is important to notice how the reading of a philosophical text can have its influence in the way we are able to pose a question mark in front of the things that are shown to us. Here, I am referring to a single specific phenomenon. As skeptics propose themselves to dive into constant and interrupted investigation, I could say that, if we consider the great variety of phenomena that reach the senses, the philosophy, people themselves, and other living beings and ways of life, that is, the world as a whole becomes a huge question mark. The feeling of weirdness, in the front of things, or even in the front of the freshness of novelties, is a constant experience. That is the starting point for the possibility of new discoveries. And we will always be equipped with the entire critical apparatus to problematize the approach.
Thus, everything that was said in this text has no intention to reveal the nature of these ideas. I only made a report about my personal experience, which is singular and circumstantially determined, after the contact with Sextus Empiricus’ texts has become a habit in my life. I also made a report on how these ideas might have a distinct influence in my worldview and, consequently, in my relationships with other animals and other human beings and ways of life. However, the entire report is a report made by a person of a certain age, in the year of 2024, in the middle of the spring – we are in the southern hemisphere – in specific circumstances. Besides, I have no intention to convince other people with my own point of view, as each person has their own points of view and their own considerations regarding the most different aspects of the things. Trying to convince the interlocutor might also be considered a dogmatic way to impose a point of view. And this attitude seems to be incongruent with the aim of skeptic "school."
On the other hand, it might be senseless to disregard many of the philosophical aspects outlined here. On the one hand, in the Outlines of Scepticism, Sextus Empiricus shows to his readers his meticulous work regarding the treatment of the Skeptical Pyrronian thought against dogmatism. Some specialized commentators say that, among the ancient texts, those from Sextus Empiricus figure among the texts that contain more arguments per page than any other texts. If we compare Sextus Empiricus’ texts with Plato’s texts, for example, we can notice a great difference in the most different ways: In Plato we have a dialogical exposition of his doctrine; in Sextus Empiricus we have an exposition much more argumentative throughout the treatment of dogmatic questions. That is, Pyrronian Skepticism as it was bequeathed to the history of philosophy by Sextus Empiricus might be considered as one of the works that had the care to articulate an infinity of arguments for: 1) promoting the suspension of judgment; and 2) denunciating the disastrous effects of dogmatism. On the other hand, Sextus Empiricus always had the care of making crystal clear to the reader that Pyrrhonism shows certain differences regarding other philosophical schools. For example, there were the ones who asked if Skepticism could be considered a school. And Sextus Empiricus replied that an answer would depend on the person’s understanding of the term "school": In the dogmatic sense, it could not be considered a school; however, in the skeptic sense, that would make sense to talk about a "school."
However, regardless of anything else, I have the impression that the best thing to do in front of all these questions – very fruitful, philosophically rich, and thought-provoking – is to suspend judgment, as there might be a long maturing path of my own ideas ahead. In this moment, a point of view or even the interpretation of Sextus Empiricus’ philosophical text might seem plausible and appropriate. However, in other circumstances, and at a more mature age, maybe a new view can gain more importance for my reflections, not to mention the other elements that gain other contours. There are so many things to be discovered and debated around philosophy. The development of the philosophical endeavor is something of such complexity that, in the actual state of things, sometimes I think that we are only curious infants that have just started touching things. On the one hand, we have the philosophical production articulating their theories; on the other hand, we have Skepticism articulating its critical apparatus. Both in a rich and peaceful tension of conviviality.
Bibliographical references:
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS Outlines of
Scepticism. Edited by Julia Annas and Jonathan Barnes. Cambridge texts in
the history of philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
About the painting:
Henriette Ronner-Knip (1821-1909)
Cache-cache
Oil over panel
Private collection
Picture in the public domain
Brazilian Portuguese Translations, Brazilian Portuguese Translator #brazilianportuguesetranslations #brazilianportuguesetranslator