Montaigne's Apology for Raymond Sebond Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Montaignes Apology for Raymond Sebond - Essay ExampleThey ar founded on ones capability to provide sufficient testimony to sustain such claims. He argues that anything can search truthful or not depending on ones interpretation and the amount of backing provided to reward the claims. In Montaignes view, it is a somebodys ability to provide irrefutable evidence, which determines if he or she appears stupid or clever, obscure or inconsistent. However, there is always the likelihood that someone else will battle any belief, agree with it, or be at a tangent to it. In his opinion, Montagne argues that the divers(prenominal) perceptual experiences or considerations are what have given value to many things worth nothing. In this essay, the problematic issue is on the question of whether honey is sweet, or bitter. The discussion revolves around Heraclitus, Protagoras, and Democritus and Pyrrhonists opinions regarding the taste of honey. According to Heraclitus and Protagoras, honey h as both qualities of world sweet and bitter. On the other hand, Democritus argues that honey is incomplete sweet nor bitter while Pyrrhonists claims not to issue whether honey is sweet or bitter. This is an analysis of the different views regarding the reliability of senses as trackers of truth. Each of the four philosophers tries to stick out their own opinion. From the fact that honey was sweet to one and bitter to another Democritus and Protagoras drew their conclusion that it is neither sweet not bitter. In their opinion, sweetness or resentment exists by convention. Sweetness or bitterness is therefrom not a quality of honey. Additionally they felt that attribution of traits or qualities are innate affection that depicts our own perceptions regarding different things. In their view, honey is neither sweet nor bitter, the sweetness and the bitterness is an idea belonging to mind of the person tasting it. Bitterness and sweetness are two different things and thus it is not possible for something to have both qualities. Consequently, it is not possible for two conflicting opinions to be correct. The perception that something can be both sweet and bitter demonstrates that the language we use to describe things does not preserve to anything in actuality. Qualities associated with different things are thus a mere depiction of our discernments and not the truth. Democritus and Protagoras opinion was different from that of Heraclitus who concluded that honey is both sweet and bitter. Heraclitus proposition was that all things have in them features we discern (Montaigne 147). By this, he meant that the attributes or traits associated with anything could vary depending on the person viewing it. Therefore, the qualities of bitterness and sweetness are in the honey but different people will perceive and describe them differently. For that reason, the opinions regarding anything depend on what the person demands to propose. There is thus no specific or consta nt outlook into anything. Heraclitus message was that our perception tends to be partial and thus the conclusion depends on ones discernment but does not requirement mean it is the truth of the matter. Our senses are thus inadequate since they perceive whatever we want them to or want we want to advocate but not the reality. Pyrrhonian claimed not to know if honey is sweet, bitter, neither, or both. This opinion demonstrates doubts on whether any of the above quality exists or not. The