Sextus Empiricus

Agora

Sextus Empiricus

c. 160–210

A first way ina deliberate simplification – the portrait says more

For every argument there is an equally strong counter-argument, so the wise response is to suspend judgment and stay calm.

Placement

Hellenistic, Roman & Late Antique · Epistemology

Transmitted Pyrrhonian skepticism; his rediscovery shaped Montaigne and Descartes.

Key ideas

Modes of skepticism
Isosthenia

Open in the star map

Influence

Influenced by 1

Pyrrho of Elis

influenced by
Sextus called his scepticism Pyrrhonian because Pyrrho seemed to have devoted himself to it more fully than anyone before (Outlines of Pyrrhonism I.7). Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism I.7; SEP “Sextus Empiricus”; SEP “Pyrrho”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Pyrrho of Elis › c. 360–270 BCE

Influenced 4

Michel de Montaigne

influenced
In the ‘Apology for Raymond Sebond’ Montaigne took up Sextus’ Pyrrhonian modes against human reason, available in Henri Estienne’s Latin translation of 1562 (Essays II.12). M. de Montaigne, Essais II.12; Sextus Empiricus, Pyrrhoniarum hypotyposeon libri III, Latin tr. H. Estienne (1562); SEP “Michel de Montaigne”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Michel de Montaigne › 1533–1592
Pierre Gassendi

influenced
Gassendi’s early Paradoxical Exercises against the Aristotelians (1624) used the sceptical arguments of Sextus, which he later moderated into a constructive scepticism about appearances. P. Gassendi, Exercitationes paradoxicae adversus Aristoteleos (1624); R. H. Popkin, The History of Scepticism from Savonarola to Bayle (2003); SEP “Pierre Gassendi”
Evidence: AI draft
Pierre Gassendi › 1592–1655
René Descartes

influenced
Descartes’ doubt in the Meditations (1641) uses the sceptical arguments revived from Sextus; in the Second Replies he says he had seen many ancient sceptical writings. R. Descartes, Meditationes (1641), First Meditation and Second Replies; R. H. Popkin, The History of Scepticism from Savonarola to Bayle (2003); SEP “Ancient Skepticism”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
René Descartes › 1596–1650
Pierre Bayle

influenced
Bayle’s article ‘Pyrrho’ (Dictionary, 1697) renewed the sceptical arguments preserved by Sextus and argued that reason cannot defend Christian doctrine, which rests on faith alone. P. Bayle, Dictionnaire historique et critique (1697), “Pyrrhon”; R. H. Popkin, The History of Scepticism from Savonarola to Bayle (2003); SEP “Pierre Bayle”
Evidence: AI draft
Pierre Bayle › 1647–1706

Criticism

Criticizes 2

Chrysippus

criticised
Sextus Empiricus turned Chrysippus’ Stoic logic against itself, contesting the criterion of truth, proof and the indicative sign (Outlines of Pyrrhonism II; Against the Logicians). Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism II.14–192; Adversus mathematicos VII–VIII; SEP “Sextus Empiricus”
Evidence: AI draft
Chrysippus › c. 279–206 BCE
Carneades

criticised
Sextus set Pyrrhonism apart from Carneades’ New Academy, whose claim that nothing can be known and trust in the ‘persuasive’ he judged dogmatic. Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism I.220–235
Evidence: AI draft
Carneades › c. 214–129 BCE

Works

c. 200Outlines of Pyrrhonism
To every argument an equal argument is opposed.

Position

Sextus presents scepticism not as a doctrine but as an ability: to set opposing appearances and arguments against each other with equal force (isostheneia), so that one suspends judgement (epochē). Tranquillity then follows “as a shadow follows a body”. With the modes of Aenesidemus and Agrippa he shows that every claim to knowledge either rests on unproven assumptions, leads to an infinite regress or argues in a circle. The sceptic still lives by appearances, custom and the arts, but without dogmatic belief. The rediscovery of his works in the sixteenth century set off the sceptical crisis to which Montaigne, Descartes and Hume responded.

Life & context

Sextus Empiricus was a Greek physician and philosopher who probably lived in the late second century CE; his name suggests that he belonged to the Empiricist school of medicine. Little else is known about his life, not even where he taught. His writings are our most complete source for ancient Pyrrhonian scepticism.