Sextus Empiricus: The Modes 329
utterances of the so-called non-rational animals, it is not completely
unlikely that they in fact do converse but that we do not understand;
for when we hear the utterances of foreigners we do not understand but
think that it all sounds the same. 75. And we hear dogs uttering different
sounds when they ward people off, when they howl, when they are
beaten, and yet another when they are fawning. Generally, if one cared
to attend to the point, one would find a great variation of utterances
in this and other animals according to their different circumstances;
consequently, on this basis it would not be unreasonable to say that the
so-called non-rational animals do participate in verbalized reason. 76.
And if they fall short of men neither in the accuracy of their perceptions
nor in internal reason nor (as a kind of extra) in verbalized reason, they
would be no more untrustworthy with respect to presentations than we
ourselves ....
- I have made this comparison, as I indicated above, as a kind of
extra, after giving what I think is a sufficient demonstration that we are
not in a position to prefer our own presentations over those of the non-
rational animals. But if it is not the case that the non-rational animals
are less trustworthy than we are with respect to judging presentations,
and presentations differ with respect to the varieties of animals, then for
the above reasons I shall be able to say how each object appears to me
but I shall be compelled to suspend judgement regarding its nature.
- That is what the first mode for suspension of judgement is like;
[2] we said that the second was that which employed the differences
among men. Suppose for the sake of argument that someone grants that
men are more trustworthy than the non-rational animals, we shall find,
even as far as concerns the differences among us, that suspension of
judgement is introduced. There are said to be two components of which
a man is composed, soul and body; and we differ from each other with
respect to both of them. For example, in body [we differ] with respect
to our shapes and our idiosyncracies. 80. For the body of a Scythian
differs from that of an Indian in shape, and, as they say, the difference
is produced by the dominance of the humours. But as a result of the
differing dominance of humours, our presentations too become different,
as was shown in our first argument. Accordingly, there is a great difference
among them in respect to both choice and avoidance of external things;
for Indians and people in our region enjoy different things, and enjoying
different things is an indication that varying presentations are received
from the external objects. 81. We differ with respect to idiosyncracies
in that some people digest beef more easily than rock-fish, or are more
readily afflicted with diarrhoea from drinking Lesbian wine. There was
once, they say, an old woman of Attica who ingested thirty measures of
