The aim of the paper is to assess the tenability of two classical arguments for axiological relativism elaborated by Sextus Empiricus and Blaise Pascal. Sextus’ argument is an a priori proof; Pascal’s argument is an a posteriori proof. Sextus’ argument does not rely on any empirical (or factual) belief: it relies on the possibility of conflicting axiological judgements; on the contrary, Pascal’s argument does rely on the empirical (or factual) belief that conflicting axiological judgements have in fact been held in the history of human kind and that no agreement has been attained.
On the Tenability of Axiological Relativism
Stefano Colloca
2018-01-01
Abstract
The aim of the paper is to assess the tenability of two classical arguments for axiological relativism elaborated by Sextus Empiricus and Blaise Pascal. Sextus’ argument is an a priori proof; Pascal’s argument is an a posteriori proof. Sextus’ argument does not rely on any empirical (or factual) belief: it relies on the possibility of conflicting axiological judgements; on the contrary, Pascal’s argument does rely on the empirical (or factual) belief that conflicting axiological judgements have in fact been held in the history of human kind and that no agreement has been attained.File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
