Philosophy: Agrippa’s Trilemma, part 1

Self-tutoring about philosophy: the tutor mentions Agrippa’s Trilemma.

The following is according to my understanding.

One of my sons mentioned Agrippa’s Trilemma to me today. I hadn’t heard of it; the only philosophy course I recall taking was about the philosophy of education, wherein more situational considerations seemed to dwell.

Agrippa’s Trilemma seems to state, to me, three ways an attempt to prove a truth can be blocked:

Rejected axiom. Some ideas, to be embraced, require certain truths to be agreed upon beforehand. In math, for instance, one needs to believe that zero is inequal to one in order to believe that two plus two equals four. If the hearer of a certain idea rejects its required axioms, said idea will not be provable, even if true.

Circularity. This is the situation wherein the listener will say, more or less subly, “What you’re saying is false because it’s just not true.” While it seems absurd, this style of reasoning seems surprisingly common.

Infinite regress. This means the familiar, endless chain of “Why?” questions. Since the prover never stops answering them, they can’t make progress with their proof, even if it’s true.

Interesting, eh? I suspect there’s lots more to talk about regarding this:)

Source:

hrphilosopher.com