皮浪派基于对立的悬置判断如何可能?
How Is It Possible That the Pyrrhonists’ Suspension of Judgment Based on Opposition?
DOI: 10.12677/acpp.2025.147388, PDF,   
作者: 黄菲菲:东北师范大学历史文化学院,吉林 长春
关键词: 怀疑论皮浪派悬置判断Skepticism Pyrrhonism Suspension of Judgment
摘要: 皮浪派是古希腊晚期的重要怀疑主义学派,他们为求心灵宁静而悬置判断。他们通过对立–等效–悬置判断这一过程实现心灵的宁静。对立是指呈现和判断之间的对立,判断与判断的对立可以直接导致悬置判断,而呈现之间的对立、呈现与判断的对立则都要通过由呈现上升为判断而间接地导致悬置判断。等效是一种心理上的感受,指对立的命题在可信性或不可信性上具有等样的效力。在对立–等效过程中,怀疑论者的无标准确保了该过程能够实现;在等效–悬置判断过程中,等效心理迫使怀疑论者悬置判断,悬置判断是一种被动的行为。
Abstract: Pyrrhonism is an important skeptical school in late ancient Greece. It seeks tranquility of the mind through suspension of judgment. Pyrrhonists achieve mental tranquility through the process of opposition—equipollence—suspension of judgment. Opposition refers to the contradiction between the things which appear and are thought of. Direct opposition between things which are thought of can lead to suspension of judgment, while opposition between things which appear and between things which appear and are thought of can indirectly lead to suspension of judgment through the elevation of things which appear to things which are thought of. Equipollence is a psychological sensation, indicating that opposing propositions have equal weight in terms of convincing or unconvincing. During the process of opposition—equipollence, the skeptic’s absence of criteria ensures the realization of this process. In the process of equipollence—suspension of judgment, the feeling of equivalence compels skeptics to suspend judgment. Suspending judgment is a passive behavior.
文章引用:黄菲菲. 皮浪派基于对立的悬置判断如何可能?[J]. 哲学进展, 2025, 14(7): 402-408. https://doi.org/10.12677/acpp.2025.147388

参考文献

[1] Empiricus, S. (1933) Outlines of Pyrrhonism. Harvard University Press and William Heinemann Ltd.
[2] Sienkiewicz, S. (2019) Five Modes of Skepticism: Sextus Empiricus and the Agrippan Modes. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[3] Junqueira Smith, P. (2022) Sextus Empiricus’ Neo-Pyrrhonism: Skepticism as a Rationally Ordered Experience. Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[4] Morison, B. (2019) The Sceptic’s Modes of Argumentation. In: Bénatouïl, T. and Ierodiakonou, K., Eds., Dialectic after Plato and Aristotle, Cambridge University Press, 283-319.
[5] Thorsrud, H. (2009) Ancient Skepticism. University of California Press.
[6] Perin, C. (2010) The Demands of Reason: An Essay on Pyrrhonian Skepticism. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[7] Machuca, E. (2022) Pyrrhonism Past and Present: Inquiry, Disagreement, Self-Knowledge, and Rationality. Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[8] Bett, R. (2019) How to Be a Pyrrhonist: The Practice and Significance of Pyrrhonian Skepticism. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[9] 王聚. 无限主义与人类知识[M]. 上海: 上海三联书店, 2022.