2 added link for equipollent
source | link

It sounds to me like you're saying philosophical skepticism is the position where we know true knowledge is impossible. I prefer ancient skepticism which advocates that we create equipollent argumentsequipollent arguments wherever we can and thereby suspend judgement. It's different than simply assuming we can't know anything, it leaves scarce room for cessation of inquiry. Jessica Berry's recent book on Nietzsche and the ancient skeptical tradition is an excellent in-depth discussion of this topic.

It sounds to me like you're saying philosophical skepticism is the position where we know true knowledge is impossible. I prefer ancient skepticism which advocates that we create equipollent arguments wherever we can and thereby suspend judgement. It's different than simply assuming we can't know anything, it leaves scarce room for cessation of inquiry. Jessica Berry's recent book on Nietzsche and the ancient skeptical tradition is an excellent in-depth discussion of this topic.

It sounds to me like you're saying philosophical skepticism is the position where we know true knowledge is impossible. I prefer ancient skepticism which advocates that we create equipollent arguments wherever we can and thereby suspend judgement. It's different than simply assuming we can't know anything, it leaves scarce room for cessation of inquiry. Jessica Berry's recent book on Nietzsche and the ancient skeptical tradition is an excellent in-depth discussion of this topic.

1
source | link

It sounds to me like you're saying philosophical skepticism is the position where we know true knowledge is impossible. I prefer ancient skepticism which advocates that we create equipollent arguments wherever we can and thereby suspend judgement. It's different than simply assuming we can't know anything, it leaves scarce room for cessation of inquiry. Jessica Berry's recent book on Nietzsche and the ancient skeptical tradition is an excellent in-depth discussion of this topic.