Ænésidème

Ænésidème (in Greek old Αἰνησίδημος/ Ainêsidemos ), one of largest the Philosopher S skeptics of the Antiquity, founder of the neo-pyrrhonism, lived between 80 av. J. - C. and 130 a. J. - C.

Biography

We have little information on its life. Ænésidème would have been born has Cnossos in Crete ( Ainêsidemos Cnosios according to Diogène Laërce, IX, 115-116) or, more probably, with Aeges ( O Ainêsidemos O ex Aigôn according to Photius, Myriobiblion , cod. 212,169 b19).

Being given the uncertainty of its birth dates and dead (between 80 av. J.C and 130 a.), we do not know with certainty if Ænésidème belonged to the former skeptics, or if it were new a pyrrhonien, contemporary of the rebirth of this school. According to Aristoclès (in Eusèbe de Césarée, evangelic Preparation , XIV, XVIII, 29), he was professor with Alexandria. He seems to have belonged to the Académie, then left it by criticizing its dogmatism. Nevertheless, of testimonys make of him a partisan of Héraclide, philosopher dogmatic.

He would be the founder of the neo-pyrrhonism (what would thus go against the thesis which wants that he would be to bring closer to the former skeptics) and the author of comments on Pyrrhon, of which we have an analysis and extracts via Photius. According to the latter, this work is dedicated to L. Tubéron, an academician contemporary and friendly of Cicéron, which would confirm the thesis affirming that Ænésidème belongs to the new skepticism (that about which Cicéron, curiously, however does not speak, or by allusions difficult to clear up). In this work, Ænésidème wanted to show that one can nothing know with certainty, and that one must abstain from any assertion. It would also expose the ten to it tropes principal skepticism which make it possible to arrive at the suspension of the judgment, and others concerning causality.

Tropes

Sextus Empiricus ( Against the mathematicians , VII, 345) allots these tropes (or modes, in Greek, τρóποι tropoi , τóποι topoi and λóγοι logoi ) to Ænésidème. However, it may be that they are older and that they were only put in order and systematized by him. Sextus Empiricus exposes them in detail in book I of the Esquisses pyrrhoniennes .

These tropes is also exposed by Diogène Laërce (IX, 79) in a different order. Their goal is to arrive at the suspension of the judgment (ἐποχή, epokhè ).

the first is done according to the variety of the animals, the second according to the difference between the human ones, the third according to the various constitutions of the bodies of the directions, the fourth according to the external circumstances, the fifth according to the positions, the distances and the places, the sixth according to the mixtures, the seventh according to the quantity and the constitution of the objects, the eighth according to the relative one, the ninth according to the continuous or rare character of the meetings, the tenth according to the lifestyles, the habits, the laws, the beliefs in the myths and the assumptions dogmatic.

Drafts pyrrhoniennes , delivers I, 36-37, P.Pellegrin.

translation

Explanations of the tropes

1. Diversité of the animals

“That there are things useful or harmful with our lives. But for each creature, which is harmful or useful differs. The Caille is fattened with the conium, which is mortal with the man. ”
2. Différences between the men
“That nature is a continuum crossing all the creatures. But Démophon, the Master of hotel of Alexandre Large the, was heated in the shade and grelottait of cold to the sun. Aristote teaches us that Andron d' Argos could cross the desert without drinking water. ”
3. Diversité of the directions
“That perception is total. But we see the yellow of an apple, breathe its perfume, taste its softness, feel its polish, feel its weight in our hand. ”
4. Circumstances
“That the life is uniform and the world always the same one. But the world of a sick man does not resemble that of a robust man. Our frame of mind is different according to whether we sleep or that we are waked up. The joy and sorrow change very for us. The young man advances in a world different from that of the old man. Courage knows roads which timidity cannot guess. The famished ones see an unknown world of the good nourished. Périclès had a slave who walked on the ridge of the roofs in his sleep without never falling. In which world do live the insane ones, the miserly ones, the malevolent ones? ”
5. Situations, distances, places
“That the objects in space are obvious as for their position and their distance. But the sun, this sufficiently large fire to heat the whole ground, appears small because of its distance. A circle seen of skew is an oval, of profile, a line. Jagged and gray mountains appear, seen by far, blue and soft. The moon with its rising is much larger than the moon with the zenith, however it did not change size. A fox in the undergrowth does not resemble at all a fox in a field. Who could decide the shape of a neck of dove? Any thing is perceived like a figure on a bottom, or at all. ”
6. Mélanges
“That the things have identities in themselves. But any thing varies according to the context. The Pourpre does not have the same color close to the red and to the green, in a part and in full sun. A stone is lighter in water than out of water. And the majority of the things are mixtures of which we could not recognize the components. ”
7. Quantités or compositions
“That the quantity and quality have properties which can be known. But the wine, drunk with moderation, strengthens, consumed with excess, weakens. The speed is relative to other speeds. Heat and the cold are known only by comparison. ”
8. Relation
“That the relations between the things can be stated. But the right-hand side and the left, before and the back, the top and bottom, depend on an infinity of variables, and the nature of the world is that all is always changing. The relation of a brother to a sister is not the same one as of a brother to a brother. What one day? So many hours? Such an amount of solar light? Time between two minuits? ”
9. Fréquence and scarcity
“That there are strange and rare things. But the earthquakes are frequent in certain parts of the world, the rain is rare in others. ”
10. Coutumes, laws, opinions
“That there is no reality beyond conventions, of the law, the religion and philosophy. But each whole of beliefs and attitudes sees the same innocent things with completely different eyes. A Perse can in all propriety marry his/her daughter, the Greeks consider that it is about worst of the crimes. Massagètes put all their joint wives. The Egyptian embaument their deaths in spices and the tar, the Romains burn their, the Greeks bury them. ”

Critical of the truth, the causality and the theory of the signs

The truth

Sextus Empiricus brings back the reasoning of Ænésidème to us on the truth ( Against the mathematicians , VIII).

What truth? If truth is something, it is sensitive or understandable, or one and the other at the same time, or neither one nor the other. However:

  • truth is not sensitive, because it is neither a kind nor a species.
  • truth is not either understandable, because it would not then have any relationship with the sensitive things.
  • It is not either both at the same time.

The conclusion is thus that the Vérité does not exist.

Causality

Sextus Empiricus brings back eight tropes relating to causality (I, 181-185) and allotted to Ænésidème:

It says that the first is the mode according to which the kind of the causal explanation, which is driven in the field of the obscure things, does not receive what is apparent a confirmation on which one is of agreement. Second is that according to which, often, whereas it is very easy that what one seeks is explained causalement in several ways, some explain it only in only one way. The third is that according to which with the ordered things they assign causes which do not express any order. The fourth is that according to which, when they seized the apparent things as they arrive perhaps, whereas the hidden things are carried out same manner as the apparent things, but perhaps not in the same way but in a manner which is clean for them. According to the fifth, all, so to speak, explain causalement according to their own assumptions concerning the elements, but not according to the common and allowed approaches. The sixth is that according to which they often accept what is discovered by their own principles, but reject what runs up against it and which however has same probability. The seventh is that according to which they often assign causes which contradict not only the apparent things, but also their own assumptions. The eighth is that according to which often, the things which seem to be apparent and those which are the object of research being also object of Aporie, they explain what is object of aporia from what is also object of aporia. But Ænésidème also says that it is not impossible that some missed their goal in the causal explanations also under the terms of certain mixed modes derived from those from which one comes to speak.

Drafts pyrrhoniennes , delivers I, 181-185, P.Pellegrin.

translation

The conclusion of Ænésidème is that one cannot know the causes and that one cannot explain the effects (i.e the Phénomène S) by causes. The effects would then become signs of the Réalité of the causes, as in the Stoïcisme and the epicureanism. But Ænésidème will try to refute this theory.

Signs

One thus cannot, according to Ænésidème, to directly know the causes. But the signs are also useless:

With the fourth book of its work, Ænésidème declares that there are no visible signs revealing the invisible things, and that those which believe in their existence are easily deceived of a vain illusion.

Myriobiblion , 170, B, 12, Photius

Sextus Empiricus brings back the reasoning of Ænésidème ( Against the mathematicians , VIII, 215):

  • if the phenomena appear same manner with all those which are similarly laid out,
  • and if the signs are phenomena
  • then it is necessary that the signs appear same manner with all those which are similarly laid out.

Thus, according to this reasoning, the signs could not be sensitive things, which would refute the epicureanism. Sextus does not carry the reasoning further, and we do not know if Ænésidème also refutes the idea that the signs are invisible things.

Morals

The morals of Ænésidème does not seem to differ from that of Pyrrhon and Timon of Phlionte. Indeed, the Ataraxie, according to Diogène Laërce (IX, 107), is for him the good which rises from the épokhè . It reproached the Académiciens for defining the well and the Mal and was opposed to stoical morals ; thus, according to him, there is no supreme good, because this good is neither the Bonheur, neither the Plaisir, nor the Sagesse (Photius, cod. 212). The ataraxie is a purely practical good, which does not have any relationship with the gasoline of the good and the evil, but it seems nevertheless to be a kind of happiness, as in the doctrines of Epicure.

Works allotted to Ænésidème

By Sextus Empiricus ( Against the professors , VIII, 215), Diogène Laërce (IX, 78,106 and 116) and Aristoclès (in Eusèbe de Césarée, evangelic Preparations , XIV, 18,11 and 16), we know that Ænésidème wrote the following books:

  • Speech pyrrhoniens , eight books (Πυρρώνειοι λ óγοι Purrhôneoi logoi )

  • Against the sapience (Κατὰ σοφίας Kata sophias )
  • On research (Περὶ ζητήσεως Perished zêtêseôs )
  • introductory Draft with the pyrrhonism (Ὑποτύπωσις εἰς τὰ Πυρρώνεια Hupotupôsis eis your Purrhôneia), perhaps the first book of the Πυρρώνειοι λ óγοι
  • Elements (Στοιχειώσεις Stoikheiôseis )
  • First introduction

Sources

Random links:101 | Fatigue-corrosion | Phaéthontidé | Marching public gardens | GCRV | Lorena Meritano Gelfenben | Comté_d'Archuleta,_le_Colorado