The limits of philosophy - skepticism and eclecticism -

[Vincent]

First my appologies for not being a philosopher myself. I have taken a few philosophy courses at a minor university, so my education is insufficient for addressing philosophy susinctly.

On the interernet there are many persons claiming to be skeptics, and they usually make other parallel claims as atheists, and supporters of Darwinian evolution.

Skepticism began in ancient Greece, I believe, with Pyrronius ascerting that since all philosophers disagree with each other, human knowledge is impossible, and all human knowledge must be doubted.

So, skepticism is anti-philosophical, and self contradictory since skeptics don't doubt, their knowledge, that all knowledge should be doubted....

There are milder modern versions suggested of skepticism, like scientific skepticism, which is actually empiricism, and not skepticism at all. I read an article on what is called pseudoskepticism which was very refreshing. Here is a blurb from wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoskepticism#Pseudoskepticism

He makes the case that the skeptic point of view is an agnostic point of view, which makes sense to me. And, the term pseudoskeptic unfortunately characterizes many of the sad dogs on the net, who plague religion forums everywhere.

Most philosophers are not so happy with skepticism, and I read on philosopher who had written that even skepticism which denies the possibilty of knowledge, is a better philosophy than eclecticism.

Eclecticism was introduced by Victor Cousins, and he stated eclecticism as 'all philosophies are true but incomplete'. I am not sure whether cousins proposed this before the incompleteness theorem was established or after, but I believe they should be thought of as having an affinity.

Well, I like eclecticism even though it makes philosophers seem a little foolish in their differences. And, I have had some very pleasant mystical experiences, where all things were true, for a time...

Here is an article from the Catholic Encyclopeadia:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05276a.htm

The article closes with a remark that eclecticism can not be used to form doctrine, and I could not be more delighted, because I am skeptical of dogma...

[Ed Moskowitz]

The Greek philosophers were not just intellectuals, they were embodiments of the truth; holy men without the religious robes; enlightened guides who wanted people to look beyond the words to the gnosis (knowing) that they were. They knew the ideas could only take you so far; they were pointers to the reality that could be known by becoming the knowing. Maybe you could call them Theosophists.

Skepticism (and this is just my idea) could be a warning to look beyond the ideas to what is behind.

Good discussion.