Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

THE CONFLICTUAL CRAFT* * I would like to thank the University of Miami’s Ethics and Philosophy Summer Internship program for having financed (during the Northern Hemisphere’s summer of 2018) the research that ultimately led to this essay. I also would like to thank the anonymous referees of Manuscrito as well as Amanda Moreira, Berit Brogaard, Irene Olivero, Mark Rowlands, Markus Gabriel, Michael Forster and Michael Slote for valuable comments on previous versions of this article, and/or on the larger research in which this article is inserted: that of my PhD dissertation, Disputes: The Incommensurable Greatness of Micro-Wars (Moreira 2019), where I more carefully articulate the conflictual craft defended here in spelling out this craft’s power to articulate a new kind of metametaphysical system. Among other things, this system is characterized by an interpretation of Friedrich Nietzsche’s project of overcoming metaphysics vis-à-vis Rudolf Carnap’s as well as by a heterodox reading of Gilles Deleuze’s approach to metaphysics. Regarding these two matters, see also my own Moreira (2018) and Moreira (forthcoming), respectively. I am also especially grateful to Otávio Bueno, not only for the outstanding feedback he provided me, but also for having introduced me and guided my readings of Pyrrhonism and neo-Pyrrhonism. Ultimately, this article is my attempt to respond to Bueno’s Pyrrhonist challenges.

Abstract

Are contemporary philosophers to follow Pyrrho of Elis in adopting his skeptic craft or at least core aspects of it as a reaction to the fact that, since immemorial times, persons have been engaged in disputes in metaphysics? Over the last 2500 years or so, most Western philosophers have not done so in being more influenced by Aristotle’s dogmatic craft than by Pyrrho’s skeptic one. Over the last fifty years or so, a few Brazilian neo-Pyrrhonist philosophers, such as Oswald Porchat, Otávio Bueno and Plínio Junqueira Smith, have done the opposite in aiming to spell out the pertinence of Ancient Pyrrhonism to contemporary philosophy. On its part, this essay makes a case for the claim that one is to react to the stated fact by adopting a conflictual craft that promotes a synthesis of Pyrrho’s skeptic craft and the dogmatic craft. This synthesis: brings to light the core features of the skeptic and of the dogmatic craft; problematizes the dogmatic craft by means of the skeptic one and vice-versa so that the shortcomings of these crafts are avoided; and aims to keep certain positive aspects both of the skeptic craft and of the dogmatic one.

Keywords:
Skepticism; Dogmatism; Neo-Pyrrhonism; Conflict; Disputes

UNICAMP - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Centro de Lógica, Epistemologia e História da Ciência Rua Sérgio Buarque de Holanda, 251, 13083-859 Campinas-SP, Tel: (55 19) 3521 6523, Fax: (55 19) 3289 3269 - Campinas - SP - Brazil
E-mail: publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br