stopping to help him, for which consistency of conduct Anaxarchus afterwards praised him.  There are two instances given by Diogenes when he lost control of himself; once in getting angry with his sister, and once in trying to save himself when chased by a dog.  When accused of inconsistency, he said it was difficult to entirely give up one’s humanity.[5] He was greatly venerated by the people among whom he lived, who made him high priest, and on his account exempted all philosophers from taxation,[6] and after his death erected a statue to his memory.  These facts testify to his moral character, and also to fulfil the functions of high priest a certain amount of dogmatism must have been necessary.

    [1] Diog.  IX. 11, 61, 62.

    [2] Diog.  IX. 11, 66.

    [3] Diog.  IX. 11, 63.

    [4] Diog.  IX. 11, 67.

    [5] Diog.  IX. 11, 66.

    [6] Diog.  IX. 11, 64.

According to Diogenes, “We cannot know,” said Pyrrho, “what things are in themselves, either by sensation or by judgment, and, as we cannot distinguish the true from the false, therefore we should live impassively, and without an opinion.”  The term [Greek:  epoche], so characteristic of Pyrrhonism, goes back, according to Diogenes, to the time of Pyrrho.[1] Nothing is, in itself, one thing more than another, but all experience is related to phenomena, and no knowledge is possible through the senses.[2] Pyrrho’s aim was [Greek:  ataraxia] and his life furnished a marked example of the spirit of indifference, for which the expression [Greek:  apatheia] is better suited than the later one, [Greek:  ataraxia].  The description of his life with his sister confirms this, where the term [Greek:  adiaphoria] is used to describe his conduct.[3] He founded his Scepticism on the equivalence of opposing arguments.[4]

    [1] Diog.  IX. 11, 61.

    [2] Diog.  IX. 11, 61-62.

    [3] Diog.  IX. 11. 66.

    [4] Diog.  IX. 11. 106.

The picture given of Pyrrho by Cicero is entirely different from that of Diogenes, and contrasts decidedly with it.[1] Cicero knows Pyrrho as a severe moralist, not as a Sceptic.  Both authors attribute to Pyrrho the doctrine of indifference and apathy, but, according to Cicero, Pyrrho taught of virtue, honesty, and the summum bonum, while Diogenes plainly tells us that he considered nothing as good in itself, “and of all things nothing as true."[2] Cicero does not once allude to Pyrrhonean doubt.  We see on the one hand, in Cicero’s idea of Pyrrho, the influence of the Academy, perhaps even of Antiochus himself,[3] which probably colored the representations given of Pyrrho; but, on the other hand, there is much in Diogenes’ account of Pyrrho’s life and teachings, and in the writings of Timon, which shows us the positive side of Pyrrho.  Pyrrho, in denying the possibility of all knowledge, made that rather a motive for indifference in the relations of life, than the foundation thought of a philosophical system.  His teaching has a decided ethical side, showing in that respect the strong influence of Democritus over him, who, like Pyrrho, made happiness to consist in a state of feeling.[4] The one motive of all of Pyrrho’s teaching is a positive one, the desire for happiness.