Sextus Empiricus, Pyrrhoniae Hypotyposes, ed. Hermann Mutschmann, 2.13.190

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

View: By Chapter

← Previous Next →

[190] πάλιν δ᾿ αὖ συγχωρούντων ἡμῶν καθ᾿ ὑπόθεσιν ὑγιὲς εἶναι τόδε τὸ συνημμένον ῾εἰ οὐκ ἔστιν ἀπόδειξις, ἔστιν ἀπόδειξις', δύναται συνυπάρχειν τὸ ‘εἰ ἔστιν ἀπόδειξις᾿ τῷ ῾οὐκ ἔστιν ἀπόδειξις᾿. εἰ δὲ δύναται αὐτῷ συνυπάρχειν,
οὐ μάχεται αὐτῷ. ἐν ἄρα τῷ ῾εἰ ἔστιν ἀπόδειξις, ἔστιν ἀπόδειξις᾿ συνημμένῳ οὐ μάχεται τὸ ἀντικείμενον τοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ λήγοντος τῷ ἐν αὐτῷ ἡγουμένῳ, ὥστε οὐκ ἔσται ὑγιὲς πάλιν τοῦτο τὸ συνημμένον,

Pyrrhoniae Hypotyposes. Sextus Empiricus. ed. Hermann Mutschmann. Germany. 2014.

Current edition First1KGreek

Pyrrhoniae Hypotyposes (Greek) (Sextus Empiricus. Sexti Empiricii Opera, Volume 1. Mutschmann, Hermann, editor. Leipzig: Teubner, 1912.)

Translations (1)

Outlines of Pyrrhonism First1KGreek (Sextus Empiricus, Vol. 1. Bury, Robert Gregg, translator. London: William Heinemann Ltd.; New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1933.) — 2.13.190 focus

[190] And again. conversely, if we grant by way of assumption that the premiss ‟If proof exists not, proof exists” is valid, then the clause ‟If proof exists” can co-exist with ‟proof exists not.” But if it can co-exist with it, it is not in conflict with it. Therefore, in the premiss ‟If proof exists, proof exists,” the contrary of its consequent is not in conflict with its antecedent, so that, conversely, this premiss will not be valid, as the former was posited, by agreement, as valid.

Sextus Empiricus Pyrrhoniae Hypotyposes 2.13.190

ed. Hermann Mutschmann

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

Current edition First1KGreek

Stable identifiers