Skepticism

If the above position is true, then what is the major consequence for all science?

all science disappears including skepticism

Name the first member of this school we discussed and outline his position.

pyro of ellis - since we dont know anything we must treat all opinions as equally valid

Name the epistemological theory that claims that no certain knowledge at all is possible.

skepticism

If the above position is true, two possible alternatives to a moral science were outlined in class. What were they?

the path of toleration, and the way of tyranny. these are opposite and the only way to prove which is better wold be trough war.

Does his/their position hold? Why or why not? What member of this school critiques this position?

Antiochus proved this is wrong, any statement of probability implies a statement of necessity. EX: when you flip a coin and say the odds are 50/50 you must KNOW there are only two sides

Who were the second member(s) of this school and what did he/they hold? Does their position open up the possibility for any sort of science?

Arcesilaus and Carneades they believe that some things are more valid than others and probably can be taken as fact

What modern theory has its roots in this theory, and how does it typically work

Pluralism, it works just like middles skepticism but is just as flawed