Talk:Radical skepticism

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 October 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

Philosophy Low‑importance

	Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sorry, but I can't figure out why a deletion was proposed. In any case, I object to a deletion. The issue of radical skepticism has intrigued philosophers for centuries and deserves to have a special heading. I included my own book as a resource because it has received glowing reviews from an eminent philosopher and an editor of a major publishing house. My book, unlike most material on the topic, is written in a simple style so lay people as well as philosophers can read it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Zr6374 (talk • contribs) 22:56, 25 October 2008

Merge discussion[edit]

I'm suggesting that this be merged with pyrrhonism and suggest that discussion take place at talk:pyrrhonism. --TS 18:07, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've withdrawn this proposal. Pyrrhonism was a completely agnostic position, disavowing as dogmatic even the statement that all knowledge was impossible. --TS 12:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probably impossible or impossible?[edit]

Radical scepticism is not proposing that knowledge is impossible but that the knowledge is PROBABLY impossible. Otherwise, the claiming would be paradoxal. Please correct such.