Pyrrho’s Tetralemma

This chapter continues the reading of Pyrrho’s fragments. It focuses now on his famous ou mallon (“no more”) sentence. Against most readings of this sentence, I suggest interpreting it not with regard to the first two words of the sentence, which recuperates it within the sphere of logicity, but as a tetralemma, of assumptive Buddhist origin. The aim of doing so is to acknowledge the illogicity and inconsistency of Pyrrho’s famous fragment, giving it free rein to actually do what it intimates instead of forcing it to abide to Aristotle’s Principle of Non-contradiction, which is explored in Chap. 5 . Having put a pause to all human logic with the tetralemma, Pyrrho thereby continues to advocate for an aporetic relation to reality, one that is not simply sceptical as Empiricus advocates in his appropriation of his thought some 500 years later but remains steadfast in the way that both human differential and nature’s non-differential logic can occur together when one perceives reality as being undifferentiated, unstable, and undecided.