怀疑论也可以根据其方法进行分类。西方哲学有两种基本的怀疑论方法:笛卡尔怀疑论(又称学院怀疑论)和皮浪主义怀疑论。笛卡尔怀疑论相信,对某一命题域 F,“我们应当对该命题领域 F 中的任何命题悬置判断”这一命题。而皮浪主义怀疑论不仅怀疑一阶命题,也怀疑对二阶或更高阶命题,并相信悬置判断是对任何命题唯一合理的态度。也就是说,我们可以通过改变命题域 F 来生成不同版本的笛卡尔怀疑论,但对于皮浪主义怀疑论来说,F 包括所有命题。
两个旅行者的轶事:旅行者 A 和 B 试图到达同一个目的地。在岔路口,一个贫穷的牧羊人告诉他们向左走。旅行者 A 立即相信他,并到达了正确的目的地。旅行者 B 则悬置信念,转而相信一个衣冠楚楚的市民向右走的建议,因为他的建议似乎更有说服力。然而,这个市民实际上是一个骗子,结果旅行者 B 无法到达正确的目的地。
他最著名的关于怀疑论的著作出现在一篇主要写于 1575-1576 年的文章“雷蒙·塞邦赞”(An Apology for Raymond Sebond)中,当时他正在阅读塞克斯图斯·恩丕里柯并试图翻译雷蒙·塞邦的著作,包括他对基督教自然存在的证明。对蒙田翻译的反响中包括了对塞邦德证明的一些批评。蒙田在“雷蒙·塞邦赞”中回应了其中的一些,为塞邦类似于皮浪主义的怀疑主义逻辑辩护。他的反驳如下:
休谟认为,任何连贯的想法必须要么是印象(impression,直接的感知)的心理复制,要么是多种印象的创新性组合的复制。由于某些人类活动,如宗教、迷信和形而上学,并不以任何实际的感官印象为前提,因此他们对知识的主张在逻辑上是不合理的。此外,休谟甚至证明科学只是一种基于“观念的连结(英语:Association of ideas)”的心理现象:具体来说,是一种因果关系的假设,而这种假设本身并不以任何感官印象为基础。因此,即使是科学知识在逻辑上也是不合理的,实际上不是客观的或可证明的,而更确切地说,仅仅是基于我们的思想基于感知到不同事件之间的恒常连结(英语:Constant conjunction)而产生的脆弱推测。休谟因此对任何确定知识的可能性持极度怀疑态度。最后,他提出,充其量,人性科学是“其他科学的唯一坚实基础”。
^ 1.01.1Comesaña, Juan; Klein, Peter. Skepticism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. 2019 [24 August 2022]. (原始内容存档于2020-08-23).
^Reed, Baron. Certainty. Zalta, Edward N. (编). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Spring 2022. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. 2022 [2023-03-08]. (原始内容存档于2023-03-08).
^Stroud, Barry; Stroud, Willis S. and Marion Slusser Professor of Philosophy Emeritus Barry. Preface. OUP Oxford. 5 July 1984 [2023-03-08]. ISBN 978-0-19-824761-6. (原始内容存档于2023-03-09) (英语).
^Comesaña, Juan; Klein, Peter. Skepticism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. 2019 [24 August 2022]. (原始内容存档于2020-08-23).
^Stroud, Barry; Stroud, Willis S. and Marion Slusser Professor of Philosophy Emeritus Barry. Preface. OUP Oxford. 5 July 1984 [2023-03-08]. ISBN 978-0-19-824761-6. (原始内容存档于2023-03-09) (英语).
^Stroud, Barry; Stroud, Willis S. and Marion Slusser Professor of Philosophy Emeritus Barry. Preface. OUP Oxford. 5 July 1984 [2023-03-08]. ISBN 978-0-19-824761-6. (原始内容存档于2023-03-09) (英语).
^ 16.016.1Hansson, Sven Ove. The Uses and Misuses of Philosophical Scepticism: Editorial. Theoria. September 2017, 83 (3): 169–174. doi:10.1111/theo.12123.
^Vogt, Katja. Ancient Skepticism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. 2021 [30 August 2022]. (原始内容存档于2023-03-17).
^Comesaña, Juan; Klein, Peter. Skepticism. Zalta, Edward N. (编). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Winter 2019. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. 2019 [2023-03-08]. (原始内容存档于2023-03-10).
^Skepticism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [12 July 2020]. (原始内容存档于2020-08-23).
^Thorsrud, Harald. Ancient scepticism. Stocksfield : Acumen. 2009: 108–109 [2023-03-08]. ISBN 978-1844654093. OCLC 715184861. (原始内容存档于2021-05-19). Undecidability and the ten modes As part of his Pyrrhonian revival Aenesidemus assembled various kinds of skeptical arguments, or modes, designed to induce epoche.
^Thorsrud, Harald. Ancient scepticism. Stocksfield : Acumen. 2009: 120–121 [2023-03-08]. ISBN 978-1844654093. OCLC 715184861. (原始内容存档于2021-05-19). Pyrrhonism, in whatever form it might have taken after Timon's death in 230 BCE, was utterly neglected until Aenesidemus brought it back to public attention
^ 44.044.1Thorsrud, Harald. Ancient scepticism. Stocksfield : Acumen. 2009: 102–103 [2023-03-08]. ISBN 978-1844654093. OCLC 715184861. (原始内容存档于2021-05-19). Aenesidemus criticized his fellow Academics for being dogmatic...Aenesidemus committed his scepticism to writing probably some time in the early-to-mid first century BCE...leading Aenesidemus to dismiss them as "Stoics fighting against Stoics."
^Thorsrud, Harald. Ancient scepticism. Stocksfield : Acumen. 2009: 108–109 [2023-03-08]. ISBN 978-1844654093. OCLC 715184861. (原始内容存档于2021-05-19). Undecidability and the ten modes As part of his Pyrrhonian revival Aenesidemus assembled various kinds of skeptical arguments, or modes, designed to induce epoche.
^On the ten modes, see Sextus Empiricus. Outlines of Skepticism I.35–164.
^Skepticism in the modern age : building on the work of Richard Popkin. Maia Neto; José Raimundo; Paganini, Gianni Laursen; John Christian, "Skepticism from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment: a Conference in Memory of Richard H. Popkin (1923–2005)" (2007 : Belo Horizonte, Brazil). Leiden: Brill. 2009. ISBN 978-9047431909. OCLC 700517388.
^Popkin, Richard Henry. The history of scepticism : from Savonarola to Bayle. Popkin, Richard Henry Rev. and expanded. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003. ISBN 978-0195355390. OCLC 65192690.
^Popkin, Richard Henry. The history of scepticism : from Savonarola to Bayle. Popkin, Richard Henry Rev. and expanded. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003. ISBN 978-0195355390. OCLC 65192690.
^Skepticism in the modern age : building on the work of Richard Popkin. Maia Neto; José Raimundo; Paganini, Gianni Laursen; John Christian, "Skepticism from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment: a Conference in Memory of Richard H. Popkin (1923–2005)" (2007 : Belo Horizonte, Brazil). Leiden: Brill. 2009. ISBN 978-9047431909. OCLC 700517388.
^Popkin, Richard Henry. The history of scepticism : from Savonarola to Bayle. Popkin, Richard Henry Rev. and expanded. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003. ISBN 978-0195355390. OCLC 65192690.
^Popkin, Richard Henry. The history of scepticism : from Savonarola to Bayle. Popkin, Richard Henry Rev. and expanded. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003. ISBN 978-0195355390. OCLC 65192690.
^Missner, Marshall. Skepticism and Hobbes's Political Philosophy. Journal of the History of Ideas. 1983, 44 (3): 407–427. JSTOR 2709174. doi:10.2307/2709174.
^Popkin, Richard Henry. The history of scepticism : from Savonarola to Bayle. Popkin, Richard Henry Rev. and expanded. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003. ISBN 978-0195355390. OCLC 65192690.
^Batnitzky, Leora. Spinoza's Critique of Religious Authority: Spinoza's Critique of Miracles. Cardozo Law Review. December 2003, 25: 57.
^Popkin, Richard Henry. The history of scepticism : from Savonarola to Bayle. Popkin, Richard Henry Rev. and expanded. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003. ISBN 978-0195355390. OCLC 65192690.
^Popkin, Richard Henry. The history of scepticism : from Savonarola to Bayle. Popkin, Richard Henry Rev. and expanded. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003. ISBN 978-0195355390. OCLC 65192690.
^Lennon, Thomas M. What Kind of a Skeptic Was Bayle?. Midwest Studies in Philosophy. 2002, 26–1: 258–279. doi:10.1111/1475-4975.261066.
^Popkin, Richard Henry. The history of scepticism : from Savonarola to Bayle. Popkin, Richard Henry Rev. and expanded. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003. ISBN 978-0195355390. OCLC 65192690.
^See G. E. Schulze, Aenesidemus (1792), excerpted in Between Kant and Hegel: Texts in the Development of Post-Kantian Idealism, Translated with Introductions by George di Giovanni and H. S. Harris, Indianapolis, Indiana: Hackett Publishing, 2000. See also Frederick C. Beiser, The Fate of Reason: German Philosophy from Kant to Fichte, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1987; Chapter 9, "Schulze's Skepticism".
^See (1) H. S. Harris, "Skepticism, Dogmatism and Speculation in the Critical Journal" (1985), in Between Kant and Hegel: Texts in the Development of Post-Kantian Idealism, Translated with Introductions by George di Giovanni and H. S. Harris, Indianapolis, Indiana: Hackett Publishing, 2000; (2) G. W. F. Hegel, "On the Relationship of Skepticism to Philosophy, Exposition of its Different Modifications and Comparison of the Latest Form with the Ancient One", Translated by H. S. Harris, in di Giovanni and Harris (2000) (cited just above); and (3) Michael N. Forster, Hegel and Skepticism, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1989.
^Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, The Encyclopedia Logic (1830), § 28, pp. 65–68, Translated by T. F. Garaets, W. A. Suchting, and H. S. Harris, Indianapolis, Indiana: Hackett Publishing, 1991.
^ 79.079.1Skepticism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [12 July 2020]. (原始内容存档于2020-08-23).
^Jesús Padilla Gálvez, Scepticism as Philosophical Superlative, in: Wittgenstein and the Sceptical Tradition, António Marques & Rui Bertrand Romao (Eds.), Bern, Berlin, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Wien: Peter Lang, 2020, pp. 113–122. ISBN978-3034315951.
^Sedley, David Louis. Sublimity and skepticism in Montaigne and Milton. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. 2005. ISBN 978-0472115280. OCLC 60715259.
^Berthel, Ken. Language in Zhuangzi: A Theme that Reveals the Nature of its Relativism and Skepticism. Journal of Chinese Philosophy. 2015-12-01, 42: 562–576. ISSN 1540-6253. doi:10.1111/1540-6253.12215(英语).
^Xuerong, Ouyang. 略论王充的怀疑主义. Journal of Kaifeng University. December 2003, 17–04: 11–13.
^Chatterjea, Tara. Knowledge and Freedom in Indian Philosophy. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. 2001: 77–87. ISBN 978-0739106921.
^Annotated translations by Richard Joseph McCarthy (Freedom and Fulfillment, Boston: Twayne, 1980; Deliverance From Error, Louisville, Ky.: Fons Vitae, 1999) and George F. McLean (Deliverance from error and mystical union with the Almighty, Washington, D.C.: Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, 2001). An earlier translation by William Montgomery Watt was first published in 1953 (The faith and practice of al-Ghazālī, London: G. Allen and Unwin).