The absurd and ridiculous kind of scepticism of our modern philosophers

A digitized copy of the 1771 edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica is available at the Scottish National Library (https://digital.nls.uk/144133900); readers can download PDF files for each of the three volumes, containing high-resolution scanned page images; or they may amuse themselves with the results of the automated optical character recognition. Here is a fragment from the article on Academics or Academists, written with admirable self-assurance by the Society of Gentlemen in Scotland who endeavored to compile and publish this Dictionary of Arts and Sciences destined to illuminate the world:

Before the days of Plato, philosophy had, in a great measure, fallen into contempt. The contradictory systems and hypotheses that had successively been urged upon the world, were become so numerous, that, from a view of this inconstancy and uncertainty of human opinions, many were led to conclude, that truth lay beyond the reach of our comprehension. Absolute and universal scepticism was the natural consequence of this conclusion. In order to remedy this abuse of philosophy and of the human faculties, Plato laid hold of the principles of the academical philosophy, and, in his Phaedo, reasons in the following manner:

“If we ate unable to discover truth, (says he), it must be owing to two circumstances; either there is no truth in the nature of things, or the mind, from a defect in its powers, is not able to apprehend it. Upon the latter supposition, all the uncertainly and fluctuation in the opinions and judgments of mankind admit of an easy solution: Let us therefore be modest, and ascribe our errors to the real weakness of our own minds, and not to the nature of things themselves. Truth is often difficult of access: in order to come at it, we must proceed with caution and diffidence, carefully examining every step; and after all our labour, we will frequently find our greatest efforts disappointed, and be obliged to confess our ignorance and weakness.”

Labour and caution in our researches, in opposition to rash and hasty decisions, were the distinguishing characteristics of the disciples of the ancient academy. A philo­sopher possessed of these principles, will be slow in his progress, but will seldom fall into errors, or have occasion to alter his opinion after it is once formed.

Vanity and precipitance are the great sources of scepticism: hurried on by these, instead of attending to the cool and deliberate principles recommended by the academy, several of our modern philosophers have plunged themselves into an absurd and ridiculous kind of scepticism. They pretend to discredit things that are plain, simple, and easily comprehended; but give peremptory and decisive judgments upon subjects that evidently exceed the limits of our capacity.

Of these Berkley and Hume are the most considerable. Berkley denied the exigence of every thing, excepting his own ideas. Mr Hume has gone a step further, and ques­tioned even the existence of ideas; but at the same time has not hesitated to give determined opinions with regard to eternity, providence, and a future state, miraculous interpositions of the Deity, &c. subjects far above the reach of our faculties. In his essay on the academical or sceptical philosophy, he has confounded two very opposite species of philosophy.

After the days of Plato, indeed, the principles of the first academy were grossly corrupted by Arcesilas, Carneades, &c. This might lead Mr Hume into the notion that the academical and sceptical philosophy were synonimous terms. But no principles can be of a more opposite nature than those which were inculcated by the old academy of Socrates and Plato, and the sceptical notions which were propagated by Arcesilas, Carneades, and the other disciples of the succeeding academics.

The Berkeley and Hume, whom the Scottish Encyclopedists valiantly criticize for their absurd scepticism, are the famous George Berkeley, (Anglican) Bishop of Cloyne (after whom is named the city of Berkeley in California), and the massively influential David Hume. As they say, nemo propheta acceptus est in patria sua.