Abstract

The central thesis of Part 2 of this study is that no justificatory theory seems to show any prospects of solving the Agrippa problem. Does this show that there is no fact of the matter in knowing? At restricted levels of scrutiny, there are facts of the matter in knowing. However, if the Agrippa problem cannot be solved, then in the sense in which philosophers have sought a fact of the matter, it seems that there is none. Pyrrhonism or Neopyrrhonism seems to be the terminating point of the epistemological enterprise. As indicated in the introduction, Pyrrhonism is taken to be urbane, not rustic. The Pyrrhonist is not concerned with the everyday use of words like “know,” “certain,” and “justified,” which are not freighted with extreme philosophical commitments. He can use them as freely as anyone.