Encyclopedia of Renaissance Philosophy

Living Edition
| Editors: Marco Sgarbi

Skepticism, Renaissance

  • Gianni PaganiniEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02848-4_237-1

Abstract

Skepticism played a major role during the Renaissance, both before and after the rediscovery of Sextus Empiricus’ works and the revival of Pyrrhonism. In its various branches, this philosophical movement connected with various orientations, bringing forth new combinations that, albeit somehow eclectic, revealed its fecundity and strength of innovation. It connected with fideism (Gianfrancesco Pico), rhetoric and dialectic (Talon), occultism and Neoplatonism (H. C. Agrippa), empiricism (Montaigne), Stoicism (Charron), and epistemology and metaphysics (Sanches and Campanella). Skepticism acted as a factor of moderation in theological debates (Erasmus, Castellion) and had an important impact on seventeenth-century philosophy, until Campanella, Descartes, and Hobbes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

Primary Literature

  1. Agrippa von Nettesheim, H.C. 1530. De incertitudine et vanitate scientiarum. Antwerp: J. Gryphaeus.Google Scholar
  2. Agrippa von Nettesheim, H.C. ca 1600. Opera. Lyons: Per Beringos fratres (repr. New York 1970, ed. R.H. Popkin).Google Scholar
  3. Agrippa von Nettesheim, H. C. 1533. De occulta philosophia libri tres. Cologne: J. SoterGoogle Scholar
  4. Campanella, T. 1638. Universalis philosophiae, seu metaphysicarum rerum, iuxta propria dogmata, partes tres, libri 18. Ph. Burelly, Parisiis (repr. Bottega d’Erasmo, Turin, 1961, ed. L. Firpo).Google Scholar
  5. Campanella, T. 1994. Metafisica, Liber I. Latin text with Italian trans. and ed. Paolo Ponzio. Bari: Levante Editore.Google Scholar
  6. Campanella, T. 2004. L’ateismo trionfato overo Riconoscimento filosofico della religione universale contra l’antichristianesimo macchiavellesco. ed. G. Ernst. Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore.Google Scholar
  7. Castellio, S. 1937, 1981. De arte dubitandi et confitendi, ignorandi et sciendi. ed. Elisabeth Feist Hirsch. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  8. Castellio, S. 1971. De l’impunité des hérétiques. De haereticis non puniendis. ed. B. Becker. Geneva: Droz.Google Scholar
  9. Charron, P. 1986. De la sagesse. ed. B. De Negroni. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
  10. de Valencia, Pedro. 1596. Academica sive de iudicio erga verum ex ipsis primis fontibus. Antwerp: Plantin.Google Scholar
  11. Descartes, R. 1964–1974. Œuvres publiées par C. Adam et P. Tannery, nouvelle présentation par B. Rochot et P. Costabel, 11 vols. Paris: Vrin-CNRS.Google Scholar
  12. Erasmus from Rotterdam. 1511, 1515. Stultitiae laus. Basel: Frobenius.Google Scholar
  13. Erasmus from Rotterdam. 1524. De libero arbitrio diatribe sive collatio. Basel: Frobenius.Google Scholar
  14. Mersenne, M. 1625. La Vérité des sciences. Contre les septiques ou Pyrrhoniens. Paris: Toussainct du Bray. (repr. Frommann, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1969).Google Scholar
  15. Montaigne, M. 1999. Essais. ed. P. Villey. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  16. Pico, G.F. 1573. Examen vanitatis doctrinae gentium, et veritatis Christianae disciplinae. In ed. G.F. Pico, Opera Omnia, Basel: Henricus Petri. (repr. 1969 Olms, Hildesheim).Google Scholar
  17. Pico, G. 1946–1952. Disputationes adversus astrologiam divinatricem. ed. E. Garin, Vol. 2. Florence: Vallecchi.Google Scholar
  18. Sanches, F. 1955. Quod nihil scitur. In Opera philosophica, ed. F. Sanches and J. de Carvalho, Vol. XVIII. Coimbra: Revista da Universidade de Coimbra.Google Scholar
  19. Sanches, F. 1988. That nothing is known. ed. E. Limbrick and D. Thomson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Talon, O. 1547. Academia, Ejusdem in Academicum Ciceronis fragmentum explication. Paris: I. Roigny.Google Scholar

Secondary Literature

  1. Backus, I. 2009. The issue of reformation skepticism revisited: What Erasmus and Sebastian Castellio did or did not know. In Renaissance Scepticisms, ed. G. Paganini and J.R. Maia Neto, 63–89. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Barnes, J. 1983, 1997. The beliefs of a pyrrhonist. Elenchos, 4 (1983). Repr. in The original sceptics: A controversy, eds. M.F. Burnyeat and M. Frede, 59–60. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett.Google Scholar
  3. Brunschvicg, L. 1945, 1995. Descartes et Pascal lecteurs de Montaigne. Neuchâtel: La Baconniere (nouv. éd., Pocket, Paris, 1995).Google Scholar
  4. Burnyeat, M.F. 1983. Can the skeptic live his skepticism. In The skeptical tradition, ed. M.F. Burnyeat. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cao, G.M. 2007. Scepticism and orthodoxy. Gianfrancesco Pico as a reader of Sextus Empiricus. Pisa-Roma: Serra Editore.Google Scholar
  6. Cao, G.M. 2009. Inter alias philosophorum gentium sectas, et humani, et mites: Gianfrancesco Pico and the sceptics. In Renaissance Scepticisms, ed. G. Paganini and J.R. Maia Neto, 127–147. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Cassirer, E. 1922. Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit. Berlin: Erster Band. B. Cassirer.Google Scholar
  8. Charles, S., and M.A. Bernier, eds. 2005. Scepticisme et modernité. Saint-Etienne: Publications de l’Université de Saint-Étienne.Google Scholar
  9. Eva, L.A.A. 2009. Montaigne’s radical skepticism. In Skepticism in the modern age. Building on the work of Richard Popkin, ed. J.R. Maia Neto, G. Paganini, and J.C. Laursen, 83–103. Leiden-Boston: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Floridi, L. 2002. Sextus Empiricus. The transmission and recovery of Pyrrhonism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Gilson, E. 1967. In R. Descartes, Discours de la méthode. Texte et commentaire par Etienne Gilson. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  12. Laursen, J.C. 2009. Pedro de Valencia’s Academica and scepticism in late Renaissance Spain. In Renaissance Scepticisms, ed. G. Paganini and J.R. Maia Neto, 111–123. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Lupoli, A. 2009. Humanus Animus Nusquam Consistit: Doctor Sanchez’s diagnosis of the incurable human unrest and ignorance. In Renaissance Scepticisms, ed. G. Paganini and J.R. Maia Neto, 149–181. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Maia Neto, J.R. 2003. Charron’s épochè and Descartes’s cogito: The sceptical base of Descartes’s refutation of scepticism. In The return of Scepticism from Hobbes and Descartes to Bayle, ed. G. Paganini, 81–113. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maia Neto, J.R., G. Paganini, and J.C. Laursen. 2009. Skepticism in the modern age. Building on the work of Richard Popkin. Leiden/Boston: Brill.Google Scholar
  16. Maia Neto, J.R. 2016. Academic scepticism in seventeenth-century French philosophy. The Charronian legacy 1601–1662. Heidelberg/New York/Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  17. Mates, B. 1996. The skeptic way. Sextus Empiricus’s outlines of Pyrrhonism. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Moreau, P.F., ed. 2001. Le scepticisme au XVI e et au XVII e siècle. Paris: A. Michel.Google Scholar
  19. Naya, E. 2000. Le phénomène pyrrhonien: lire le scepticisme au XVIe siècle. Grenoble: Thèse Université de Grenoble III.Google Scholar
  20. Naya, E. 2001. Traduire les Hypotyposes Pyrrhoniennes: Henri Estienne entre la fièvre quarte et la folie chrétienne. In Le scepticisme au XVI e et au XVII e siècle, ed. P.F. Moreau, 48–101. Paris: A. Michel.Google Scholar
  21. Naya, E. 2004. Sextus à Genève: la Réforme du doute. Libertinage et philosophie 8: 7–30.Google Scholar
  22. Naya, E. 2009. Renaissance pyrrhonism: A relative phenomenon. In Renaissance Scepticisms, ed. G. Paganini and J.R. Maia Neto, 15–32. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Paganini, G., ed. 2003a. The return of Scepticism. From Hobbes and Descartes to Bayle. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  24. Paganini, G. 2003b. Hobbes among ancient and modern sceptics: Phenomena and bodies. In The return of scepticism. From Hobbes and Descartes to Bayle, ed. G. Paganini, 3–35. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Paganini, G. 2004. Montaigne, Sanches et la connaissance par phénomènes. In Montaigne: Scepticisme, métaphysique et théologie, ed. V. Carraud and J.L. Marion, 107–135. Paris: P.U.F.Google Scholar
  26. Paganini, G. 2004b. Hobbes and the “continental” tradition of Scepticism. In Scepticism as a force in renaissance and post-renaissance thought. New findings and new interpretations of the role and influence of modern Scepticism, ed. R.H. Popkin and J.R. Maia Neto, 65–105. Amherst: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  27. Paganini, G. 2005. Mersenne plagiaire: les doutes de Campanella dans la Vérité des sciences. Dix-septième siècle 57: 747–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Paganini, G. 2006. Scetticismo. In Enciclopedia bruniana e campanelliana, I, ed. G. Ernst and E. Canone, 342–351. Pisa-Roma: Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali.Google Scholar
  29. Paganini, G. 2008. Skepsis. Le débat des modernes sur le scepticisme. Montaigne – Le Vayer – Campanella – Hobbes – Descartes – Bayle. (Prix La Bruyère de l’Académie Française). Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  30. Paganini, G. 2008b. The quarrel over ancient and modern Scepticism: Some reflections on Descartes and his context. In The legacies of Richard Popkin, ed. J. Popkin, 173–194. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Paganini, G. 2009. Charron et le scepticisme des modernes. Corpus 55: 231–250.Google Scholar
  32. Paganini, G. 2009b. Descartes and renaissance skepticism : The Sanches case. In Skepticism in the modern age. Building on the work of Richard Popkin, ed. J.R. Maia Neto, G. Paganini, and J.C. Laursen, 249–267. Leiden/Boston: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Paganini, G. 2013. Les transformations du doute de Montaigne à Descartes. Montaigne Studies 25: 39–48.Google Scholar
  34. Paganini, G. 2016. Sanches et Descartes. Subjectivité et connaissance réflexive au temps des sceptiques. Bulletin de la Société internationale des amis de Montaigne 64: 173–185.Google Scholar
  35. Paganini, G. 2017. Descartes, Elisabeth e Campanella. Connessioni e reazioni intorno alla “terza nozione primitiva”. Rinascimento 2017: 1–26.Google Scholar
  36. Paganini, G., and J.R. Maia Neto, eds. 2009. Renaissance Scepticisms. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  37. Panichi, N, and M.F. Spallanzani, eds. 2013. Montaigne and Descartes. A philosophical genealogy. Special Issue: Montaigne Studies 25.Google Scholar
  38. Perrone Compagni, V. 2009. Tutius ignorare quam scire: Cornelius Agrippa and scepticism. In Renaissance Scepticisms, ed. G. Paganini and J.R. Maia Neto, 91–110. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  39. Popkin, R.H. 1954. Charron and Descartes. The fruits of systematic doubt. Journal of Philosophy 51: 831–837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Popkin, R.H. 2003. The history of scepticism. From Savonarola to Bayle. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (revised and expanded edition).Google Scholar
  41. Popkin, J., ed. 2008. The legacies of Richard Popkin. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  42. Schmitt, C.B. 1967. Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirandola (1469–1533) and his critique of Aristotle. The Hague: M. Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schmitt, C.B. 1972. Cicero scepticus. A study of the influence of the ‘Academica’ in the renaissance. The Hague: M. Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  44. Yrjökonsuuri, M. 2000. Self-knowledge and the renaissance sceptics. In Ancient scepticism and the sceptical tradition, ed. J. Sihvola, 225–254. Helsinki: Acta Philosophica Fennica.Google Scholar
  45. Zerba, M. 2012. Doubt and scepticism in antiquity and the renaissance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of HumanitiesUniversity of PiedmontVercelliItaly
  2. 2.Research Center of the Accademia dei LinceiRomeItaly

Section editors and affiliations

  • Marco Sgarbi
    • 1
  • Peter Mack
    • 2
  1. 1.University Ca' Foscari VeniceVeniceItaly
  2. 2.The Warburg Institute, School of Advanced StudyUniversity of LondonLondonUK