• ZzzoneiroCosm
    251
    As for example, when someone proposes an argument to us that we cannot refute, we say to him, "Before the founder of the sect to which you belong was born, the argument which you propose in accordance with it had not appeared as a valid argument, but was dormant in nature, so in the same way it is possible that its refutation also exists in nature, but has not yet appeared to us, so that it is not at all necessary for us to agree with an argument that now seems to be strong."

    Sextus Empiricus



    Does the prospect of a unknown future refutation make the strongest argument weak? Should it at the very least temper a dogmatic approach to knowledge- and certainty-pronouncements?
  • ZzzoneiroCosm
    251
    Addendum: It's wise to beware (moreover) of an uknown future refutation of the possibility of an unknown future refutation.

    Is it possible to refute the possibility of an unknown future refutation?
  • Gregory
    144
    Hegel says there are only partial moving truths within a part of the whole of reality
  • ZzzoneiroCosm
    251


    Can you point out where he says that? Thanks.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.