Pyrrho 295
because it is incorporeal, it would not come to be because of anything.
So, there is no cause. With this the conclusion is also drawn that the
first principles of the universe are non-existent, for that which acts and
effects must be a something.
Moreover, there is no motion. For that which is moved is moved in
the place in which it is or in the place in which it is not. But it cannot
be moved in the place in which it is nor can it be moved in the place in
which it is not. Therefore, there is no motion.- They also eliminated learning. For if, they say, something is
taught, either what exists is taught by means of what is or what is not
is taught by means of what is not. But what is is not taught by means
of what is-for the nature of things appears to everyone and is known
to all; nor is what is not taught by what is not; for what is not has no
accidents, and consequently not even 'being taught'. Nor does it come
to be, they say. For what is does not come to be, since it is; nor does
what is not, since it does not exist; and that which neither exists nor is
also comes off badly with respect to coming to be. - And there is nothing good or bad by nature. For if good and bad
exist by nature, then it must be either good or bad for everyone, just as
snow is something cold for everyone. But there is nothing which is good
or bad for everyone in common; therefore, there is nothing good or bad
by nature. For either one should say that everything which is thought
[to be good] by anyone is good, or not everything. And one cannot say
that everything is, since the same thing is thought to be good by one
person (for example, pleasure [is thought to be good] by Epicurus) and
thought to be bad by someone else, viz. Antisthenes. It will turn out,
then, that the same thing is both good and bad. But if we say that not
everything which is thought [to be good] by anyone is good, it will be
necessary for us to make a distinction among opinions. But that is not
possible because of the equal force of the arguments. So what is good
by nature is unknowable. - The entirety of their approach can be comprehended from the
extant treatises. For Pyrrho himself left no writings, but his associates,
Timon, Aenesidemus, Numenius, Nausiphanes and others like them did.
The dogmatists, responding to them, say that they themselves [the
sceptics] grasp things and dogmatize. For, insofar as they believe they
have refuted someone, they are grasping [something], since by the same
act they are confirming [their belief] and dogmatizing. Moreover, when
they say that they determine nothing and that for every argument there
is an opposing argument, they determine something and dogmatize about
these very things. 103. The sceptics reply: "We concede the point about
what we experience qua human; for we acknowledge that it is daytime,