The Stoic Sage Does not Err: An Error?

Q3 Arts and Humanities Symposion Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.5840/symposion2022915
Scott F. Aikin
{"title":"The Stoic Sage Does not Err: An Error?","authors":"Scott F. Aikin","doi":"10.5840/symposion2022915","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Stoics held that the wise person does not err. This thesis was widely criticized in the ancient world and runs afoul of contemporary fallibilist views in epistemology. Was this view itself an error? On one line, the view can be modified to accommodate many of the critical lines against it. Some of these lines of modification are consistent with traditional Stoic value theory (for example, importing the notion of preferred indifferents into epistemic considerations). However, others require larger modifications to Stoic axiology (in particular, a revision of the equality of errors thesis). A version of the no errors thesis emerges as defensible against the criticisms of the view, but there is then the question as to whether it is an orthodox Stoicism.","PeriodicalId":37705,"journal":{"name":"Symposion","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Symposion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/symposion2022915","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The Stoics held that the wise person does not err. This thesis was widely criticized in the ancient world and runs afoul of contemporary fallibilist views in epistemology. Was this view itself an error? On one line, the view can be modified to accommodate many of the critical lines against it. Some of these lines of modification are consistent with traditional Stoic value theory (for example, importing the notion of preferred indifferents into epistemic considerations). However, others require larger modifications to Stoic axiology (in particular, a revision of the equality of errors thesis). A version of the no errors thesis emerges as defensible against the criticisms of the view, but there is then the question as to whether it is an orthodox Stoicism.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
斯多葛派圣人不会犯错:一个错误?
斯多葛学派认为智者不会犯错。这一论点在古代受到广泛批评,与当代认识论上的谬误论观点相冲突。这个视图本身是错误的吗?在一行中,视图可以被修改以适应与它相反的许多关键行。其中一些修改与传统斯多葛学派的价值理论是一致的(例如,将偏好冷漠的概念引入认识考虑中)。然而,其他人则需要对斯多葛主义价值论进行更大的修改(特别是对误差相等论题的修改)。无错误理论的一个版本出现了,作为对该观点的批评的辩护,但接下来的问题是,它是否是正统的斯多葛主义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Symposion
Symposion Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Symposion was published for the first time in 2003, as Symposion – Revistă de științe socio-umane (Symposion – A Journal of Humanities), with the purpose of providing a supportive space for academic communication, dialogue, and debate, both intra and interdisciplinary, for philosophical humanities and social and political sciences. Symposion: Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences shares essentially the same purpose. Its main aim is to promote and provide open access to peer-reviewed, high quality contributions (articles, discussion notes, review essays or book reviews) in philosophy, other humanities, and social and political sciences connected with philosophy.
期刊最新文献
The Buried Promise of Sections 74 and 75 of Chapter V of Division Two of Heidegger’s Being and Time (1927) in light of New Testament Christianity Turing Algorithms in Art Reading Nehamas’s Nietzsche Truth about Artifacts The Moral Status of AGI-enabled Robots
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1