Search Results

In case anyone else would find it useful, I've attached a dense, but relatively clear and informative piece of recent scholarship on Epicurean perception, truth, and illusion. It seems to me that the author (Hahmann) manages to both survey the puzzles and advance some of his own lines of interpretation.

Yeah, I also get the sense that they largely agree, especially about the what Hahmann calls a 'coherence-based approach' to adjudicating conflicting sense impressions (for example, 'the stick looks bent, but feels straight'). They are certainly both aiming to explain why the view is perfectly normal, possibly right, definitely not insane. What I appreciate about Hahmann is that his Greek is transliterated, and he is less prone to using it without translation. I also appreciate that he explores t…

(Quote from Todd) Ah, yes, now I get it! I guess there's always the question of whether the person attempts to faithfully represent the view, but then cavalierly dismisses it on specious grounds or willfully mis-represents the view to make it easier to dismiss. They do seem to agree that we should rely on Sextus for the definition of truth, which is where DeWitt so effusively praises Sextus. (Quote from Hahmann)