Jump to content

Talk:Radical skepticism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sorry, but I can't figure out why a deletion was proposed. In any case, I object to a deletion. The issue of radical skepticism has intrigued philosophers for centuries and deserves to have a special heading. I included my own book as a resource because it has received glowing reviews from an eminent philosopher and an editor of a major publishing house. My book, unlike most material on the topic, is written in a simple style so lay people as well as philosophers can read it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Zr6374 (talkcontribs) 22:56, 25 October 2008

Merge discussion

[edit]

I'm suggesting that this be merged with pyrrhonism and suggest that discussion take place at talk:pyrrhonism. --TS 18:07, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've withdrawn this proposal. Pyrrhonism was a completely agnostic position, disavowing as dogmatic even the statement that all knowledge was impossible. --TS 12:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probably impossible or impossible?

[edit]

Radical scepticism is not proposing that knowledge is impossible but that the knowledge is PROBABLY impossible. Otherwise, the claiming would be paradoxal. Please correct such.