The Epistemology of the Cyrenaic School

Abstract

The Cyrenaic school was a fourth-century BC philosophical movement, related both to the Socratic tradition and to Greek Scepticism. In ethics, Cyrenaic hedonism can be seen as one of many attempts made by the associates of Socrates and their followers to endorse his ethical outlook and to explore the implications of his method. In epistemology, there are close philosophical links between the Cyrenaics and the Sceptics, both Pyrrhonists and Academics. There are further links with modern philosophy as well, for the Cyrenaics introduced a form of subjectivism which in some ways preannounces Cartesian views, endorsed by Malebranche and Hume and developed by Kant. This 1998 book reconstructs Cyrenaic epistemology, explains how it depends on Cyrenaic hedonism, locates it in the context of ancient debates, and discusses its connections with modern and contemporary epistemological positions.

The Cyrenaics on Pleasure, Happiness, and Future-Concern

“…12 Irwin (1991) p. 69. Tsouna is blunter: Òthere is not a trace of direct evidence at all that the Cyrenaics conceived of real objects and persons in compositional terms or that they voiced doubts about temporal identity.Ó (Tsouna (1998) (2) In the Theaetetus, Protagoras rejects continued personal identity, so this thesis was in the air. Furthermore, Protagoras and the Cyrenaics have similar epistemologies, so the considerations that drive Protagoras to talk about ÒSocrates wellÓ and ÒSocrates illÓ as different people would drive the Cyrenaics to similar conclusions.…”

“…Again, I do not nd this very convincing. See Tsouna (1998) pp. 124-137 for an excellent discussion of the differences between Protagorean relativism (as expounded in the Theaetetus, whatever its relationship to the historical Protagoras happens to be) and Cyrenaic subjectivism.…”

“…I nd her arguments convincing, but I will not reproduce or support them here. (Tsouna (1998), chapter 6, and pp. 109-111) 17 Tsouna gives a similar argument: the way the Cyrenaics talk about memory seems to presuppose continued personal identity.…”

“…Otherwise, he would have talked about the pleasures of Òthe past-Aristippus,Ó or the like. (Tsouna (2002) section III and Tsouna (1998) p. 133, referring to Athaneus, Deipn XII:544a ff., text [C]) Furthermore, the Cyrenaics happily coin neologisms to correct the mistakes implicit in ordinary ways of talking. 18 Thus, if they had rejected continued personal identity, they would have used this rejection to support their anti-eudaimonism and lack of future-concern, and might have coined some novel terminology to indicate the proper way of speaking about Ôper-son-stages.Õ 19 Later sources likely would have gleefully reported these bizarre views and ways of speaking.…”

Diogenes of Oenoanda on Cyrenaic Hedonism

“…Annas (1993) 236. On this aspect of Cyrenaic theory see the comprehensive study by Tsouna (1998 <Prospective pleasuro, as these people lay it down for all human beings like a snare, has the power to draw them like III 10 birds or fish open-mouthed to the names of the virtues, and sometimes enters people's minds and paints all kinds of illusory pictures of itself, and the poor wretches are not ashamed <of IV 1 bestowing favours on> each other, <and charming people by their> wit, <in pursuit of their own eventual> pleasure, agreeing adroitly <also to face 5 dangers> in order to avoid pain, like those who endure marching out to war and those who endure crag-climbing.…”