M. de Montaigne fue simultáneamente hijo del Renacimiento y de la Reforma, y un lúcido seguidor de Sexto Empírico. Se muestra cómo el pirronismo lo condujo a cuestionar las convicciones de su tiempo y a atenerse a las costumbres y leyes vigentes. Esto le dio pie a una posición política moderada, así como a una adhesión no dogmática al catolicismo. Se analiza su original posición frente a la Reforma, bajo la hipótesis de que su postura político-religiosa solo cabe entenderla a (...) la luz de su escepticismo. . de Montaigne was a child of both the Renaissance and the Reformation, as well as a lucid follower of Sextus Empiricus. The article shows how Pyrrhonism led him to question the beliefs of his time and to abide by the prevailing customs and laws. This gave rise to his moderate political position and to his non-dogmatic adhesion to Catholicism. On the basis of the hypothesis that Montaigne's political-religious views can only be understood in the light of his skepticism, the paper also analyzes his original reaction to the Reformation. M. de Montaigne foi simultaneamente filho do Renascimento e da Reforma, e um lúcido seguidor de Sexto Empírico. Mostra-se como o pirronismo o conduziu a questionar as convicções de seu tempo e a estar atado aos costumes e leis vigentes. Isso o levou a uma posição política moderada, bem como a uma adesão não dogmática ao catolicismo. Analisa-se sua original posição ante a Reforma, sob a hipótese de que sua postura político-religiosa só cabe entendê-la à luz de seu ceticismo. (shrink)

Atheism is skeptical towards gods, and atheology advances philosophical positions defending the reasonableness of that rejection. The history of philosophy encompasses many unorthodox and irreligious movements of thought, and these varieties of unbelief deserve more exegesis and analysis than presently available. Going back to philosophy’s origins, two primary types of atheology have dominated the advancement of atheism, yet they have not cooperated very well. Materialist philosophies assemble cosmologies that leave nothing for gods to do, while skeptical philosophies find conceptions of (...) god to be too unintelligible or unsupported by evidence to warrant credibility. The origins and genealogies of these two atheologies are sketched and compared over many centuries down to present-day atheism, which still displays signs of this internecine divide between confident naturalists and agnostic skeptics. (shrink)

In 1938 Max Horkheimer published an article entitled “Montaigne and the Function of Skepticism” trying to clarify and criticize the role of skepticism at his times, close to World War II. According to Horkheimer there are two essential features of skepticism: radical reactionarism and defense of individuals. Following the German philosopher both were key elements in the rise of bourgeois society in Montaigne´s epoch and, in that sense, his skepticism was progressive. However, at the time of Horkheimer both traits were, (...) as the skeptical position, reactionaries, and the only valid alternative to the danger of authoritarian states would be his own Critical Theory. Our paper aims to question the essential character of both traits and, at the same time, the interpretation of skepticism provided in Horkheimer´s article. (shrink)