It is a less aggressive form of skepticism which may occur in that sometimes "[s]uspension of judgment evidently just happens to the sceptic". Aporetic Pyrrhonism, in contrast, describes a "more argumentative form of scepticism, one that works more actively towards its goal". Aporetic skepticism may also be described as a state of perplexity. They are actively "engaged in refutation".
|
|
He is the founder of the Aporetic Thought (France, 1990), a contemporary philosophy from which comes also the Aporetic Music (composition trend). He is dean Organist of the Archipriest Church of Saint George in Pordenone city (Italy). He serves as vice president of the International Association "Vincenzo Colombo" of Pordenone (Italy), and Committee member of the Italian Federation of Composers. Patron is one of the founders and past president of the International Society of Art and Research (USA).
|
|
Zetetic Pyrrhonism, differing from the two, is "engaged in seeking". While an ephectic merely suspends judgment on a matter however arriving at that point, an aporetic skeptic engages in refutation, a form of argument before either reaching an ephectic state, an aporia (impasse), continued seeking or refutation.
|
|
Definitions of the term aporia have varied throughout history. The Oxford English Dictionary includes two forms of the word: the adjective "aporetic", which it defines as "to be at a loss", "impassable", and "inclined to doubt, or to raise objections"; and the noun form "aporia", which it defines as the "state of the aporetic" and "a perplexity or difficulty". The dictionary entry also includes two early textual uses, which both refer to the term's rhetorical (rather than philosophical) usage. In George Puttenham's The Arte of English Poesie (1589), aporia is "the Doubtful, [so] called...because often we will seem to caste perils, and make doubts of things when by a plaine manner of speech we might affirm or deny [them]".
|
|
Most Socratic inquiries consist of a series of elenchi and typically end in puzzlement known as aporia. FredeMichael Frede, "Plato's Arguments and the Dialogue Form", Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Supplementary Volume 1992, Oxford 1992, 201–19. points out Vlastos' conclusion in step #4 above makes nonsense of the aporetic nature of the early dialogues. Having shown a proposed thesis is false is insufficient to conclude some other competing thesis must be true.
|
|
Pyrrho was a Greek philosopher of Classical antiquity credited with forming the first comprehensive school of skeptical thought, now described as Pyrrhonism. The school of thought can be further divided into ephectic Pyrrhonism, aporetic Pyrrhonism or zetetic Pyrrhonism. Prior to Pyrrho, others had given the same rationale for which he is famed. Ephectic Pyrrhonism can describe either a state, attitude, or practice, with the state sometimes experienced after "balanc[ing] perceptions and thoughts against one another".
|
|
Plato's early dialogues are often called his 'aporetic' (Greek: ἀπορητικός) dialogues because they typically end in aporia. In such a dialogue, Socrates questions his interlocutor about the nature or definition of a concept, for example virtue or courage. Socrates then, through elenctic testing, shows his interlocutor that his answer is unsatisfactory. After a number of such failed attempts, the interlocutor admits he is in aporia about the examined concept, concluding that he does not know what it is.
|
|
In opposition to Henri Bergson's and Martin Heidegger's views, which delineate with different shades a pure form of temporality, more original than its representations and spatializations, Marramao declares that the link time-space is inseparable and, also connecting to contemporary Physics, he asserts that the structure of Time possesses an aporetic and impure profile, compared to which the dimension of space is the formal reference necessary to think its paradoxes (Minima temporalia, 1990, new edition in 2005; Kairos: Towards an Ontology of Due Time, 1992, new edition in 2005).
|
|
In contemporary literary and philosophical works concerned with gender, the term "phallogocentrism" is commonplace largely as a result of the writings of Jacques Derrida, the founder of the philosophy of deconstruction, which is considered by many academics to constitute an essential part of the discourse of postmodernism. Deconstruction is a philosophy of "indeterminateness" and its opposing philosophy, "determinateness". According to deconstruction, indeterminate knowledge is "aporetic", i.e., based on contradictory facts or ideas ("aporias") that make it impossible to determine matters of truth with any degree of certitude; determinate knowledge, on the other hand, is "apodictic", i.e.
|
|
It is an approach that may be deployed in philosophy, in literary analysis, and even in the analysis of scientific writings. Deconstruction generally tries to demonstrate that any text is not a discrete whole but contains several irreconcilable and contradictory meanings; that any text therefore has more than one interpretation; that the text itself links these interpretations inextricably; that the incompatibility of these interpretations is irreducible; and thus that an interpretative reading cannot go beyond a certain point. Derrida refers to this point as an "aporia" in the text; thus, deconstructive reading is termed "aporetic." He insists that meaning is made possible by the relations of a word to other words within the network of structures that language is.
|
|
Paweł Jędrzejko's research interests include literary and cultural theory, history of literature, comparative cultural studies, translation theory and philosophy. Departing from the assumption of the aporetic (ontic/discursive) character of reality, Jędrzejko fosters research penetrating the common grounds of human cognitive experience and creative activity and focusing upon the complex interdependencies between individual awareness of the worldmaking power of language and the shape of daily interpersonal and intercultural relations. The areas of his particular interest include the philosophy of friendship, the philosophy of existence, the history of 19th century American literature, the literary philosophies of the "American Renaissance" the oeuvre of Herman Melville, postcolonial and post-dependence theories, as well as translation theories.
|
|
In the Preface, Rescher identifies the work as an attempt to "synthesize and systematize an aporetic procedure for dealing with information overload (of 'cognitive dissonance', as it is sometimes called)" (ix). The text is also useful in that it provides a more precise (although specialized) definition of the concept: "any cognitive situation in which the threat of inconsistency confronts us" (1). Rescher further introduces his specific study of the apory by qualifying the term as "a group of individually plausible but collectively incompatible theses", a designation he illustrates with the following syllogism or "cluster of contentions": The aporia, or "apory" of this syllogism lies in the fact that, while each of these assertions is individually conceivable, together they are inconsistent or impossible (i.e. they constitute a paradox).
|
|
Delfim's philosophical writings cover the study of modern and contemporary European thinkers, specially the contemporary German Phenomenologists, adopting the aporetic and anti-systematic approach to philosophical inquiry similar to onto-phenomenologist Nicolai Hartmann. Also from Hartmann's 'levels of reality' he adapted and further developed his own pluriversal or rather pluriregional views on 'reality', ascribing the scientific method of study exclusively to the material world and not to philosophical matters as the neopositivists propounded. He wrote comprehensively about the history of philosophical thinking in Portugal and Brazil, particularly on Silvestre Pinheiro Ferreira (1769–1846) arguably Brazil's first philosopher, and on Francisco Suárez (1548–1617), a Spanish scholar active at Coimbra University between 1597 and 1616. In Education his work was highly influential to the renewal of Portuguese pedagogical ideas, aiming at an existential synthesis between Philosophy and Pedagogy.
|
|
The Pyrrhonists, > on the other hand, are aporetic and free of all doctrine. Not one of them > has said either that all things are incognitive, or that they are cognitive, > but that they are no more of this kind than of that, or that they are > sometimes of this kind, sometimes not, or that for one person they are of > this kind, for another person not of this kind, and for another person not > even existent at all. Nor do they say that all things in general, or some > things, are accessible to us, or not accessible to us, but that they are no > more accessible to us than not, or that they are sometimes accessible to us, > sometimes not, or that they are accessible to one person but not to another. > Nor indeed, do they say there is true or false, convincing or unconvincing, > existent or non-existent.
|
|