Was Pyrrho /our guy?

>>19499049
who?

Oh yes. Most certainly.

>>19499049
>We can be certain of nothing, not even of the most trivial assertions.
Are you sure? That seems like a big assertion.

>>19499427
You can't be certain of anything. But you can't be certain that you can be certain of nothing. Kinda strikes me as turbo agnosticism

>>19500617
>You can't be certain of anything.
Nonsense. His contemporary Aristotle came up with a system specifically designed for certainty. It's called a syllogism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism

A syllogism is a method of deduction whereby a conclusion is reached solely through the stated premises, requiring no outside support or evidence to corroborate.

1. A = B
2. B = C

With these two premises, we can be 100% certain that A = C. There is no way to avoid it. It is a natural and unavoidable conclusion of our premises. We can easily see where this breaks down using syllogism:

1. Nothing can be asserted.
2. Premise 1 is an assertion.

Therefore...?

Pyrrho was an empiricist, as in he was starting with the base that our senses were the path to real truth. This is in opposition to the concurrent thought at the time of rationalism - that logic and reason as opposed to sensory information was the way to truth. Things like this are why Aristotle is considered a founding father of Western philosophy, and Pyrrho is known for taking Socrates' "all I know is that I know nothing" a little too far.

You know the part everyone misses? Epicurus was an advocate of self-control. Tending your garden. Learning by consequences. Seeking tranquility, not passion.
For that, he has been smeared and lied about throughout history.