Research on Scepticism in Brazilian Philosophy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31649/sent42.01.147Keywords:
Neo-Pyrrhonism, Oswaldo Porchat, Ezequiel de OlasoAbstract
Olexandr Lukovyna’s interview with Professor Plínio Junqueira Smith is devoted to skeptic research in Brazilian philosophy, the beginning of skeptic studies in Brazil, Oswaldo Porchat’s and Ezequiel de Olaso’s roles in establishing the tradition of skeptic studies, contemporary studies in skepticism, and the global state of affairs in skeptic research.
References
Arantes, P. E. (1994). Um departamento francês de ultramar. São Paulo: Paz e Terra.
Barnes, J. (1998). The Beliefs of a Pyrrhonist. In M. Burnyeat & M. Frede (Eds.). The Original Sceptics: A Controversy (pp. 58-91). Indianapolis; Cambridge: Hackett.
Barrio, E. (2000). La otra cara del escéptico. In L. H. Dutra & P. J. Smith (Eds.), Ceticismo: perspectivas históricas e filosóficas (pp. 63-80). Florianópolis: Editora da UFSC-NEL.
Bolzani Filho, R. (2013). Acadêmicos versus pirrônicos. São Paulo: Alameda Editorial.
Burnyeat, M. (1998). Can the Sceptic Live his Scepticism? In M. Burnyeat & M. Frede (Eds.), The Original Sceptics: A Controversy (pp. 25-57). Indianapolis; Cambridge: Hackett.
Charles, S., & Smith, P. J. (Eds.). (2013). Scepticism in the Eighteenth Century: Enlightenment, Lumières, Aufklärung. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4810-2
Charles, S., & Smith, P. J. (Eds.). (2017). Academic Scepticism in the Development of Early Modern Philosophy. Dordrecht: Springer.
Costa, J. C. (1956). Contribuição à história das ideias no Brasil. São Paulo: Livraria José Olympio Editora.
Dutra, L. H. de A., & Smith, P. J. (Eds.). (2000). Ceticismo: perspectivas históricas e filosóficas. Florianópolis: Editora da UFSC-NEL.
Figueiredo, Nara M. & Smith, P. J. (Eds.). 2022. Epistemologia dos eixos: interpretações e debates sobre as (in)certezas de Wittgenstein. Porto Alegre: Editora Fundação Fênix. https://doi.org/10.36592/9786554600019
Fogelin, R. J. (1994). Pyrrhonian Reflections on Knowledge and Justification. Oxford: Oxford UP. https://doi.org/10.1093/0195089871.001.0001
Fogelin, R. J. (2004). The skeptics are coming! The skeptics are coming! In S.-A. Walter (Ed.), Pyrrhonian Skepticism (pp. 161-173). Oxford: Oxford UP. https://doi.org/10.1093/0195169727.003.0009
Frede, M. (1998). The Sceptic’s Belief. In M. Burnyeat & M. Frede (Eds.), The Original Sceptics: A Controversy (pp. 1-24). Indianapolis; Cambridge: Hackett.
Kornblith, H. (2010). Belief in the Face of Controversy. In R. Feldman & T. Warfield (Eds.), Disa-greement (pp. 29-52). Oxford: Oxford UP. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226078.003.0003
Kornblith, H. (2013). Is Philosophical Knowledge Possible? In D. Machuca (Ed.), Disagreement and Skepticism (pp. 260-273). New York; London: Routledge.
Lukovyna, O. (2022). Defense of Authentic Neo-Pyrrhonism. Smith, P. (2022). Sextus Empiricus’ Neo-Pyrrhonism: Skepticism as a Rationally Ordered Experience. Cham: Springer. [In Ukrainian]. Sententiae, 41(2), 124-143. https://doi.org/10.31649/sent41.02.124
Nobre, M., & Rego, J. M. (Eds.). (2000). Conversas com filósofos brasileiros. São Paulo: Editora 34.
Pettersen, B. (2012). A narrativa neopirrônica: uma análise das obras de Porchat e Fogelin. Tese de doutorado. Belo Horizonte: UFMG.
Pinto, Á. V. (1960). Consciência e realidade nacional. Rio de Janeiro: ISEB.
Porchat Pereira, O. (1969). O conflito das filosofias. Revista Brasileira de Filosofia, 19(73), 3-15. [Reprinted in Porchat 2007, pp. 13-23.]
Porchat Pereira, O. (1975). Prefácio a uma filosofia. Discurso, 6, 9-24. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2318-8863.discurso.1975.37789 [Reprinted in Porchat 2007, pp. 25-39.]
Porchat Pereira, O. (1979). A filosofia e a visão comum do mundo. Manuscrito, 3(1), 143-159. [Reprinted in Porchat 2007, pp. 41-71.]
Porchat Pereira, O. (1986). Saber comum e ceticismo. Manuscrito, 9(1), 143-159. [Reprinted in Porchat 2007, pp. 73-88.]
Porchat Pereira, O. (1991). Sobre o que aparece. Revista Latinoamericana de Filosofia, 17(2), 195-229. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2318-8863.discurso.1992.37951 [Reprinted in Discurso, 19, 83-121; and in Porchat 2007, pp. 117-145.]
Porchat Pereira, O. (1995). Verdade, realismo, ceticismo. Discurso, 35, 61-108. [Reprinted in Porchat 2007, pp. 173-217.]
Porchat Pereira, O. (1996). O ceticismo pirrônico e os problemas filosóficos. Cadernos de Hitória e Filosofia da Ciência, 3(6), 97-157. [Reprinted in Porchat 2007, pp. 219-257.]
Porchat Pereira, O. (2002). O argumento da loucura. Manuscrito, 26(1), 11-43. [Reprinted in Porchat 2007, pp. 323-343.]
Porchat Pereira, O. (2005). Empirismo e ceticismo. Discurso, 35, 61-108. [Reprinted in Porchat 2007, pp. 289-322.]
Porchat Pereira, O. (2007). Rumo ao ceticismo. São Paulo: Editora Unesp. https://doi.org/10.7476/9788539304486
Prado Jr., B. (1985). O problema da filosofia no Brasil. In Alguns ensaios: filosofia, literatura, psicanálise (pp. 173-194). São Paulo: Max Limonad.
Prado Jr., B. (1989). Presença e campo transcendental: consciência e negatividade na filosofia de Bergson. São Paulo: EDUSP.
Quine, W. v. O. (1996). O sentido da nova lógica. Curitiba: Editora da UFPR.
Raga Rosaleny, V., & Smith, P. J. (Eds.). (2021). Sceptical Doubt and Disbelief in Modern Europe-an Thought. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55362-3
Silva Filho, W. J. (Ed.). (2005). O ceticismo e a possibilidade da filosofia. Ijuí: Editoria Unijuí.
Silva Filho, W. J., & Smith, P. J. (Eds.). (2007). Ensaios sobre o ceticismo. São Paulo: Alameda editorial.
Silva Filho, W. J., & Smith, P. J. (Eds.). (2012). As consequências do ceticismo. São Paulo: Alameda editorial.
Smith, P. J. (Ed.). (2015). O neopirronismo de Oswaldo Porchat. São Paulo: Alameda editorial.
Smith, P. J., & Otávio, B. (2016). Skepticism in Latin America. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/skepticism-latin-america
Smith, P. J., & Wrigley, M. B. (Eds.). (2003). O filósofo e sua história: uma homenagem a Oswaldo Porchat. Campinas: Editora Unicamp-CLE.
Smith, P. J. (1995a). O ceticismo de Hume. São Paulo: Loyola.
Smith, P. J. (1995b). Terapia e vida comum. Discurso, 25, 69-95. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2318-8863.discurso.1995.37995 [Reprinted in Smith 2005, pp. 49-88.]
Smith, P. J. (2000). Ceticismo filosófico. São Paulo & Curitiba: EPU-Editora da UFPR.
Smith, P. J. (2005). Do começo da filosofia e outros ensaios. São Paulo: Discurso Editorial.
Smith, P. J. (2005b). La raison sceptique de Hume. In M.-A. Berneir & S. Charles (Eds.), Scepticisme et modernité (pp. 103-122). Saint-Étienne: Publications de l’Université de Saint-Étienne.
Smith, P. J. (2008). La Critique de la raison pure face aux scepticismes cartésien, baylien et humien. Dialogue, 47, 463-500. https://doi.org/10.1017/S001221730000281X
Smith, P. J. (2011a). Pascal ou l’ invention du scepticisme pur à partir de Montaigne et Descartes. In S. Charles & S. Malinowski-Charles (Eds.), Descartes et ses critiques (pp. 115-134). Canada: Les Presses de l’Université Laval.
Smith, P. J. (2011b). Hume on skeptical arguments In D. Machuca (Ed.), Pyrrhonism in Ancient, Modern, and Contemporary Philosophy (pp. 171-189). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1991-0_9
Smith, P. J. (2012). Truth, Ontology, and Deflationism. In G. Hurtado & O. Nudler (Eds.), The furniture of the world: Essays in ontology and metaphysics (pp. 147-169). Amsterdam: Rodopi. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401207799_011
Smith, P. J. (2013a). Bayle and pyrrhonism: Antinomy, method, and history. In S. Charles & P. J. Smith (Eds.), Skepticism in the eighteenth century: Enlightenment, Lumières, Aufklärung (pp. 19-30). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4810-1_2
Smith, P. J. (2013b). Kant’s criticism and the legacy of modern Scepticism. In S. Charles & P. J. Smith (Eds.), Skepticism in the eighteenth century: Enlightenment, Lumières, Aufklärung (pp. 247-263). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4810-1_17
Smith, P. J. (2015). O método cético de oposição na filosofia moderna. São Paulo: Alameda Edito-rial.
Smith, P. J. (2016). Stroud’s Neo-Pyrrhonism and the Human Condition. Sképsis, 14, 156-187.
Smith, P. J. (2017). Uma visão cética do mundo: Oswaldo Porchat e a filosofia. São Paulo: Editora da UNESP.
Smith, P. J. (2017b). Hume’s Academic Scepticism in Its French Context. In S. Charles & P. J. Smith (Eds.), Academic Scepticism in the Development of Early Modern Philosophy (pp. 345-364). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45424-5
Smith, P. J. (2020). A experiência do cético. São Paulo: Associação Filosófica Scientiae Studia.
Smith, P. J. (2021). On the Possibility of Knowledge: Skeptical Arguments and Baconian Idols. In R. V. Rosaleny & P. J. Smith (Eds.), Sceptical Doubt and Disbelief in Modern European Thought (pp. 41-62). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55362-3_3
Smith, P. J. (2022a). O ceticismo sob suspeita. São Paulo: Associação Filosófica Scientiae Studia.
Smith, P. J. (2022b). Sextus Empiricus’ Neo-Pyrrhonism: Skepticism as a Rationally Ordered Experience. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94518-3
Sturm, F. (1998). Philosophy in Brazil. The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780415249126-ZA004-1
Downloads
-
PDF
Downloads: 311
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).