How did Michel de Montaigne’s skepticism differ from denying that truth exists?

Michel de Montaigne’s skepticism did not involve denying that truth exists; rather, it served as a defense against the danger of accepting false, unexamined, or externally imposed notions as truth.12

Instead of rejecting the possibility of truth, Montaigne’s intellectual attitude—famously summarized by his question, "que sais-je?" (what do I know?)—was a project of tentative exploration and continuous assessment. His skepticism functioned as a tool to:123

• Reject Dogmatism: He distrusted generalizations, abstractions, and commonly accepted ideas that lacked a basis in concrete reality.12
• Prioritize Authenticity: He believed the search for truth must begin with the self, accepting one's own body-and-mind as a "changeable and fragmented" reality rather than seeking stability in "alien semblances".12
• Value Experience: He advocated for concrete experience over abstract learning, viewing his essays as "attempts" at understanding rather than transmissions of proven, final knowledge.12

Ultimately, Montaigne’s approach was not a denial of truth, but an ethical commitment to remaining faithful to the reality of his own being, acknowledging human limitations while rejecting the "dangerously inflated claims to knowledge" of his time.12