Sextus Empiricus and it's Strengths
Sextus Empiricus' trilemma against justification is an argument presentedin response to Plato's claim that knowledge is justified true belief.According to the trilemma, there can be no such thing as knowledge, becausewe can have no real justification for our beliefs. This is the basis ofskepticism. There are many responses to that argument, including those ofthe foundationalist, coherentist, and infinitist. This paper will outlinethe general principles of Sextus Empiricus' Trilemma, as well as discussthe responses to that trilemma according to the foundationalist, thecoherentist, and the infinitist. In addition, this paper will attempt toshow that the foundationalist response has the most validity. Empiricus' trilemma begins with the assumption that we only haveknowledge if our beliefs are justified. If those beliefs are challenged,there are only three ways in which we can attempt a justification. First,we can attempt to justify our belief set by reference to some foundationalbelief or belief set, otherwise known as foundationalism. The problem hereis that the second belief or belief set is also not justified by anyfurther belief. Second, we can justify our beliefs mutually, otherwise
With a multi-level justification attempt, there is no real justificationfor any proposition in the line. Theproblem appears to occur in context with the very first assumption in thetrilemma, the idea that knowledge is justified belief. Finally, Empiricus explains why the last justification is impossible. Assuming that knowledge is truly justjustified belief, then the entire basis of knowledge is a relative concept. Without a truedefinition of justification, all arguments, including the trilemma, arejust as equally illogical. However,though it has problems, the most logical argument against the trilemma isthat of the foundationalist. While there are limitations to each type of response to SextusEmpiricus' trilemma against justification, each has its own strengths. Secondly, anycircular argument, where belief A is eventually supported by belief A, cannot be considered reasonable. There are obvious holes in this logic. In this way, one cannot justify either. However, taken as it stands,Sextus Empiricus' trilemma has provided the world with a problem thatessentially shows that knowledge can't exist as Plato's statement firstimplied. According to Empiricus, we can never truly have knowledge. Fictionnovels are often coherent, but they are by no means true. His justification for belief D is belief C.
Common topics in this essay:
According Empiricus,
Empiricus' Trilemma,
Sextus Empiricus',
Finally Empiricus,
justified belief,
belief belief,
empiricus' trilemma,
justify belief,
belief set,
proposition justified,
justification belief,
sextus empiricus' trilemma,
sextus empiricus',
belief justified,
self evident proposition,
belief justification,
belief example person,
belief justify beliefs,
belief belief set,
|
Acceptance Essays
