i quote this segment a lot but > once blatant sophisms are exempted, the fact that scepticism has never been enacted is the sole argument of the dogmatists, and it is a powerful one, despite its empirical flavour. there can be little doubt that the philosophical advocates of disbelief have tended to exploit the very conventions they profess to despise as the shelter for an insincere madness. as was the case with socrates, philosophy has sought to peel itself away from sophism by admitting to its ignorance, as if unknowing were a pathos to be confessed. profound ecsanity ['ecsane' - out of one's mind] alone is effective scepticism, in comparison to which sceptical philosophies fall prey to nave theories of belief, as if belief could simply be discarded, or withheld. we know nothing of course, but we do not remotely know even this, and mere assertion in no way ameliorates our destitution. belief is not a possession but a prison, and we continue to believe in achieved knowledge even after denying it with intellectual comprehensiveness. the refusal to accept a dungeon is no substitute for a hole in the wall. only in a voyage to the unknown is there real escape from conviction.
United States