Sextus Empiricus: The Modes 327
depends on presentations, then animals get different presentations
from objects.
- And if the same things appear dissimilar in accordance with the
differences among animals, we shall be able to say how the object looks
to us, but we shall suspend judgement about how it really is in its nature.
For we ourselves shall not be able to decide between our own presentations
and those of the other animals, since we are ourselves a party to the
disagreement and for this reason shall be in need of someone to make
the decision, rather than being able to do so ourselves. 60. Also, we are
not in a position to prefer our own presentations over those which occur
in the non-rational animals either with or without a demonstration. For
in addition to the fact that demonstration probably does not exist, as we
shall suggest, either the so-called demonstration will itself be apparent
to us or not. And if it is not apparent, we shall also not receive it with
confidence; but if it is apparent to us, then since the investigation is
about what appears to animals and the demonstration appears to us who
are animals, it too will be investigated [to see] whether it is true in so
far as it is apparent. 61. But it is absurd to try to establish what is under
investigation by means of what is under investigation, since the same
thing will be trustworthy and untrustworthy, which is impossible; trust-
worthy in so far as it purports to demonstrate, but untrustworthy in so
far as it is [itself to be] demonstrated. Therefore we shall not have a
demonstration by means of which we may prefer our own presentations
over those which occur in the so-called non-rational animals. So if presen-
tations are different in accordance with the variety among animals, and it
is impossible to decide between them, it is necessary to suspend judgement
about external objects.
- As an extra we also compare the so-called non-rational animals
and men with respect to their presentations; for after [relating] our
effective arguments we do not disapprove of ridiculing these pompous and
boastful dogmatists. So our side customarily makes a simple comparison
between the many non-rational animals and man. But since the dogmatists
contrive to say that the comparison is unfair, we shall add another extra
and ridicule them even more, basing our argument on one animal, the
dog for instance, if you like, which is held to be the lowest [animal]. For
we shall find in this way too that the animals, which are our topic, are
not inferior to us with respect to the trustworthiness of what appears
to them.
- So the dogmatists agree that this animal is superior to us with
regard to sense-perception; for it has a keener sense of smell than we do
and by means of this can track down animals which it cannot see, and
it also has keener vision than we do and a sharper sense of hearing. 65.
