Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
PHILOSOPHY
THALES
JOHN
TO
PLATO
BURNET
NV
PUBLIC
3333
LIBRARY
THE
BRANCH
05986
LIBRARIES
1662
"x
4* "6*
"J^d^
J$rS""*
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY
TO
THALES
PLATO
BY
BURNET
JOHN
LONDON
MACMILLAN
NEW
YORK
"
"
ST
CO
MARTIN'S
1964
LTD
PRESS
This
is copyright in all
signatories to the Berne
book
are
First
Reprinted
1920,
Edition
St
also
THE
Bombay
COMPANY
Calcutta
LIMITED
WCz
London
Street
Madras
Melbourne
OF
CANADA
PRESS
INC
COMPANY
MACMILLAN
Toronto
ST
MARTIN'S
New
PRINTED
IN
1949
1943,
1960,
1955,
AND
Martin's
1932,
1961
Reprinted 1964
1950,
1953,
and
Reset
MACMILLAN
which
Convention
1914
1928,
1924,
countries
York
GREAT
BRITAIN
LIMITED
PREFACE
but
has
proved
THE
have
in
It is unfortunate
of my
edition
this in
makes
large measure
wish
who
students
to
content
Platonism
I have
I
dress.
must
be
his name,
as
Heraclius.
On
the
beautiful
name
is
Theaetetus
reach
seems,
as
chosen
for him
much
English
agreement
on
are
assist
to
of what
Plato
they
as
the earlier
Greek
by
as
his
to
are
dialogues,
names
in
writing
called
being
his father
We
wish
dialogues
the
left with
Euphronios,
Thessalonians.
of
out
disguised as
when
is best
Latin
in
titles of Plato's
Athens
of
Theaitetos
words.
knowledge
usually is
the other
English
leads
Herakleios
Emperor
been
disadvantages,
many
It often
Heraclitus.
as
there
conclusions
my
has
present
present
advantage, and
no
Ph.z)
them.
to
to
I.,but
state
Republicand
of the
it well
to
second
E. Gr.
as
maturity. So long
his
sealed book
thought
see
Herakleitos
The
not
opportunity of discussing
firsthand
dialogues of
something
later
for the
aim
know
not
have
acquire
to
in the
actuallysays
are
chief
grounds. My
their
had
I have
does
which
form
in Book
unnecessary
I may
that
their
obliged to
III. where
parts of Book
certain
anticipated.I
been
Philosophy (referredto
Greek
Early
I have
subject in
and
of detailed argument
admit
first
publishers for
the
respects that
some
parts of the
certain
with
deal
ago,
in the circumstances.
indulgence
generous
years
Platonicum, which
at
was
and
thank
to
some
the Lexicon
on
task than
formidable
more
undertaken
was
shall
'the'
but
it
never,
explain my
this
matter
; I
and
former
only
to
practice.
own
I have
for
to
thank
valuable
many
good enough
to
University
remain
am
of
above
suggestions and,
Hetherington
verify most
carefullyread
been
friend
Mr.
encouragement.
the
my
by
St.
Mr.
of my
W.
Andrews.
L.
of
Glasgow
references, and
Lorimer,
For
the
constant
University
the
Lecturer
was
proofs have
in Greek
imperfections
at
which
solelyresponsible.
J.B.
CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION
BOOK
I.
THE
CHAPTER
THE
WORLD
IONIANS
13
Miletos
The
Breakdown
of Ionian
Civilisation
22
Religion
24
Enlightenment
25
CHAPTER
II
PYTHAGORAS
29
The
Problem
Life
and
29
Doctrine
30
Music
35
Medicine
39
Numbers
40
CHAPTER
HERAKLEITOS
AND
III
PARMENIDES
45
Herakleitos
45
Parmenides
50
CHAPTER
THE
PLURALISTS
IV
55
Empedokles
56
Anaxagoras
60
viii
CONTENTS
CHAPTER
V
PAGE
ELEATICS
PYTHAGOREANS
AND
66
Zeno
66
Melissos
69
The
Later
Pythagoreans
CHAPTER
70
VI
76
LEUKIPPOS
BOOK
KNOWLEDGE
II.
CHAPTER
THE
AND
CONDUCT
VII
85
SOPHISTS
85
Law
and
The
'Sophists'
Nature
87
89
Protagoras
Hippiasand
Prodikos
95
9^
Gorgias
Eclectics and
Reactionaries
CHAPTER
THE
LIFE
OF
99
VIII
SOKRATES
The
Problem
The
Platonic
102
102
Sokrates
Aristophanesand Xenophon
CHAPTER
THE
PHILOSOPHY
OF
SOKRATES
03
1 1
IX
123
The
Associates of Sokrates
The
Forms
125
Goodness
23
138
CONTENTS
IX
CHAPTER
PAGE
THE
TRIAL
DEATH
AND
SOKRATES
OF
146
The
Condemnation
146
The
AllegedOffence
The
Real Offence
150
The
Pretext
153
The
Death
of Sokrates
155
CHAPTER
XI
DEMOKRITOS
157
Theory
of
Theory
of Conduct
Knowledge
159
1
BOOK
III.
CHAPTER
PLATO
48
Plato's
PLATO
XII
ACADEMY
THE
AND
167
EarlyLife
of the
Foundation
Academy
The
Programme
Eukleides
67
74
175
of the
The
62
Academy
of Studies
79
182
and Plato
187
CHAPTER
XIII
CRITICISM
190
The
Theaetetus
193
The
Parmenides
206
CHAPTER
LOGIC
XIV
222
The
Sophist
222
CONTENTS
CHAPTER
XV
PAGE
POLITICS
236
The
Plato
The
Statesman
and
236
Dionysios
239
Laws
245
Education
248
CHAPTER
THE
PHILOSOPHY
I.
II.
OF
Forms,
NUMBERS
One
The
Philebus
and
the
PHILOSOPHY
The
Soul
God
The
Sensibles
Indeterminate
Dyad
256
260
264
CHAPTER
THE
254
and
Mathematical
The
XVI
OF
MOVEMENT
XVII
271
271
273
World
Conclusion
275
284
APPENDIX
286
INDEX
287
INTRODUCTION
No
will
one
works
philosophies,like
in
communicated
immediate
contact
confined
in
at
that
soul could
records, and
written
to
second-hand
often
moulded
so
far
of souls
that
in
Platonic
contact
measure
this is
hand
this aspect
about
On
life in
sympathy
find
direct
which
can
references
complete
footnote.
and
read
the
to
effect
on
any
This
living,not
the
two
every
is what
Plato
dead.
often
represented
it
Unless
can
the
never
so-called
minds.
other
calls
There
That
In
able
that
be
of
who
character.
same
tries
spend
to
which
"ni"rjv(Ep.
and
depends
not
passages
not
his
sometimes
act
c), but
of
number
is
passages
unless
each
its
being
consciously
on
produce the
in which
sense
vii. 341
"
of
enumeration
proofs will
is the
can
upon
other
of
pretation.
interphilological
the
complete
way,
municable,
incom-
thing he
imperfectlyby
the
its
reconstruction
philosophers1 will
very
break
to
nothing mysterious
has
man
some
apprehend
to
so
or
inquiry,requires an
TO
value.
seems
is
the
reproduce
It is not
alone.
ancient
memory,
inquiry,like
1
written, too,
are
have
historian's
forcing itself
conviction
in
tells
present
the
be
"
will
religiousfaith
all knowledge
only means
with
the
others.
of
only
passage
in
it
wholly
are
is
for himself
contrary,
case
we
can
time, and
and
way
to
either
the
In the present
same
ready-made
over
historian
the
his work
faith
such
primarilyvalid
in another.
are
authority.They
as
of space
in the
and
past is
earlier age,
an
possible.Religiousfaith
flame
the
of
sort
some
we
for
influences
by
only, therefore, be
the
kindle
be
best
at
only by
was
these
of doubtful
or
language which
all; it
writing
one
could
philosophicaltruth
no
in
Now
of
Plato's
was
in
succeed
ever
same
philological
of faith. It is clear,
he
is
thinking
of
the
INTRODUCTION
however, that
called
be
no
repeat this
to
on
experiencehas
whose
one
professedhistories
of
act
not
philosophyare
for this
of
more
reason
hindrance
than
help.They
tasks that
humbler
seem
in
can
be
measure
performed,and
may
performancemay
be determined
help to
with
where
some
of which
direct
more
that
matters
not
are
a philoimportance.We
sopher
if
the
time
and
the
he lived at
rightly we know
surroundings
that may have helpedto shape his thought,even
though these can
useful to know
what
never
whollyexplainhim. It is particularly
he was
other philosophers
or
acquaintedwith, either directly
In the second place,
the developmentof
through their writings.
and
Greek
philosophydepends on the progress of scientific,
than on
mathematical, discoverymore
especially
anythingelse,
the stage Greek
and it is possible
to ascertain pretty accurately
science had reached
by a given time. The records are full,and,
It is for these reasons
when critically
that this
used, trustworthy.
work deals so largely
with matters
which may appear at firstto lie
outside the province of philosophy.
That is, in fact, its chief
It is an attempt to lead the reader to the right
justification.
pointof
view, from which he may then see for himself. Lastly,there is
what may be called the cathartic or purgative
function of history.
without
The
mass
have
we
to
of scholastic
the
is just the
surmount
soon
that away is
in this field.We
perhapsthe
thanks. It may
but that lies in the nature
of the
our
construction
must
students will
see
way,
and
warn
whelm
over-
be
left
to
seem
In
case.
help us
purelynegativeservice,
the longrun
the positive
the individual
student, and
of
even
have
can
do is to
alreadybeen
two
no
pointthe
found
to
lead nowhere.
Even
this,however, impliesthat
unless we have
is,and clearly,
we
some
know
alreadywhat philosophy
notion
of
that,we
shall
INTRODUCTION
III
that science
It is true, of course,
originatedat
the time
when
communication
Egypt and
it is hard
to
understand
how
it was
left for
where we
can
Italy,
Oriental influences. Of course
depends
everything
hardly assume
that
what we mean
name
on
by science. If we are preparedto give
elaborate record of celestialphenomena made for purposes
to an
of divination,then the Babylonianshad science and the Greeks
it from them. Or, if we
borrowed
are
preparedto call rough rules
for measuring fields and pyramids science,then the
of thumb
from them to Ionia. But, if we
Egyptianshad science,and it came
mean
by science what Copernicusand Galileo and Kepler, and
of that
Leibniz and Newton
trace
meant, there is not the slightest
in Egypt or even
in Babylon,while the very earliest Greek ventures
science beginsjustwhere
itsforerunners. Modern
are
unmistakably
Greek
to be traced
science left off,and its development is clearly
from Thales to the present day. Copernicussays himself that he
in the
was
put on the track by what he read of the Pythagoreans
they were
graduallyworked
Placita ascribed
out
in South
Plutarch.1
to
show
that the
down
to us
only remains that have come
without
not
a certain ingenuityin the solution of
Egyptians were
arithmetical and geometrical
particular
problems,but there is not
the slightest
of anythinglike generalmethods.2 If incontrace
The
E. Gr.Ph.2p. 349,
Copernicus', that was
2
see
n.
z.
It
was
condemned
'the
by
SCIENCE
EGYPTIAN
remainders
occur,
We
shall see that it was
regularpentagon is a different matter.
of interest
the pentagon was
to whom
known
to the Pythagoreans,
dodecahedron, the most importantfigure
as the side of the regular
be added
included,are
'pyramid'
It is true, of course,
it,and
does
so
terms,
country.
own
of Greek
methods
Egyptianpriestsappliedthe
of
the elaborate
The
science
to
the
literature
Hermetic
the later
astrological
system
things.
IV
In the
the
case
times
of
Babylon it is even
before
and
periodBabylon had
intercourse
between
after Alexander
become
the
important to distinguish
more
the Great.
Hellenistic
astronomers
of
city,and
In
the
there
Mesopotamia and
was
latter
free
Alexan-
and
honey,
influenced
INTRODUCTION
time, and
we
there
science
constituted
fully
was
astronomy
What
Greek
But
in Hellas
at
much
this,and
they
are
instructive.
know
we
Babylonian
Greek
influence.1
is any trace of it
facts about
a few
Herodotos
According to
lonian
Babybefore
that
can
of
use
(ii.109),
the
do with
it.The
Greeks
and
Babylonian duodecimal
but the
of these
use
in other
or,
to
earlydate with
at an
to
commercial
in science tillHellenistic
weights,
measures,
They
purposes.
times,when
the
of numeration,
sexagesimalsystems
limited
was
words,
also familiar
were
and currency,
not
were
ployed
em-
divided
astrologybefore
cosmologicalsystem
attention
was
no
not
called them,
irreverently
strike them
as
of
more
consequence
Pythagoreansappear to have
like.The
the
Greeks
could
find
said
was
identified the
for the
in their
to
be
evening and
place,they did
than shootingstars and the
worked
out
their
planetary
of the
nature
that first
Pythagorasor Parmenides
the morning star. The
Greek equivalents
Babyloniannames
Latin
form, appear
of the
planets,which
we
in the
still use
Platonic
did not
then, the Greeks
Epinomis (987b sq.).Evidently,
from the Babyloniansthe single
pieceof real astronomical
theypossessed.
1
For
recent
vol. ii.pp.
2
See
statements
on
this
subject,see
Jastrow in
Cumont
no
after discovering
the real
theoryquiteindependently
earth. It
paid
to
the Greeks
as
of divination,but
for purposes
importance
Enc.
1
Brit,
learn
ledge
know-
(nth edition),
16.
on
one
side.'
SCIENCE
GREEK
cyclesestablished
and
eclipses,
basis of these records. They
the
on
of
scientific or
are
the
is
sun
which
to
uses
phenomenon
they
of
the
used
for the
see,
calculations
and
which
with
put. In itself an
are
purelylocal interest,and
it would
more
no
and
shall
the purpose
depends wholly on
not
of
importantachievement
one
in this
theirs
of
use
be
it
bows.
record rain-
to
science,but
only not
not
That, however,
The
was
people that
only eastern
by the
of
astronomers
bear
can
positivenescience.
of
instrument
an
Babylon.
with
comparison
the
Greeks
it is in any
suggests
Egypt and Babylon certainly
from the Hellenistic kingdom of the North
of
truth is that
The
of the Greeks
we
are
than
far
to
more
sixth century
which
mensuration
years later
they had
B.C.
was
find the
we
study of
See
A.
on
B. Keith
pity that
M.
Sulva-sutrasin
his
It is
and
we
do
not
and
them, and
arithmetical and
the elements
ready system of
a
hundred
geometrical
progressions
firmly
of harmonics
century
saw
the rise of
Milhaud
originality
always
rough
the
underrate
to
plane geometry
established
learnt the
India
West.
exaggerate it,and
analogy
to
likely
the
remember
science.1 The
far below
case
589
ff.
for the
INTRODUCTION
solid and
added.
soon
cone
were
from
or
indirectly,
learnt,directly
Greeks
The
and
spherical
geometry,
in
recur
and
cycles,
knowledge
the
swings
fore
there-
may
that the
discovered
fifty
years they had
Within
predicted.
lon
Baby-
of its
spherical
eclipses
of
and
mathematical
there
science
astronomical
went
an
equally
simplestanatomical facts.
achieved what they did, in
the
Greeks
born
they were
sculpturein its
The
observers.
best
anatomical
accuracy
period proves
of their
never
say
But
eye in profile.
observation ; they went
an
character.
That
sources
Empedokles
between
have
; for we
It also established
should
which
by
the
less
(\6yovSiSovcu)of
of many
always
the
tried
appearances
with
content
a
quitemodern
illustrated the
flux and
of
mere
itin his
own
body
words.1
atmosphericair.
We
experiments if our
compiled.
more
intelligently
to give a rational explanation
they had observed. Their
more
and
meagre,
rest
of
description
corporealnature
certainlyhear
were
not
experimentsof
make
to
on
did
such
matical
from the mathesee
can
as we
reasoningpowers were exceptional,
also
work they have left us. On the other hand, they were
1
See
E. Gr.
Ph.* p. 253.
PHILOSOPHY
GREEK
in other words,
(f)ai,v6fjL"va)',
TO.
is the method
facts.1That
observed
do
must
all the
to
justice
of science,as
understand
we
it
that the
VI
bound
But, while philosophyis thus intimately
science,it is not to be identified with it. It is
ia. covered
ao"f)
such
as
all we
the
by
mean
of
arts
the distinction
But
the
times
true
positive
that in
realised. The
not
early
word
sides,
begreat deal more
and guessingriddles.
science and
making pontoons
was
is
two
up with
If
same.
look
we
at
Greek
can
to
decide whether
to
grapplewith
he may
sciences
of the special
one
comment
attempt
it is
the ultimate
questionthat
make.
fairly
depended,so
problem
of
serious
realitybrings
of
it a great advance
in
itself.
reality
be simply
helps to explainwhy philosophycannot
in fact,involves
identified with science. The problem of reality,
takes us beyond
at once
the problem of man's relation to it,which
And
This
Raphael
contrive
this
requirement
knows
To
save
of Greek
all about
scientific method
it. See
appearances.'
Paradise
is often
Lost, viii.
81:
INTRODUCTION
10
any
contact
will
make
with
life.
'intellectualists'
enter
into
what
we
needful
call
and
and
that
philosophy
could
only
do
should
Nor
this
was
its
it
beginning
of
best
days.
reality
circle
of
disciples,
spirit
could
learn
till
he
Sokrates
thing,
had
was
their
can
the
external,
shall
see
what
the
and
again
mysteries
of
most
the
spread
of
no
man
to
from
the
through
God,
the
and
knowledge
martyr,
martyrs.
do
the
same.
was
no
what
and
the
from
first.
of
and
world,
believing
to
this
to
that
fit themselves
he
others.
'intellectualism',
could
The
if there
The
race.
reality
so
the
seen
philosopher
The
the
pursuit
had
human
whole
it
regulate
it, sometimes
knowledge
of
he
at
one,
self-centred
believed
who
the
to
Almost
communicate
to
in
contemplative
undertaken
had
life. It
The
place
own
with
have
to
as
strong
only
was
that
had
sometimes
was
fellow-workers
be
it
in
except
includes
purely
or
mysteries
The
bound
felt
of
that
quietist
either.
vision
missionary
regarded
holiness
personal
men
it therefore
that
philosophy
was
for
do
to
what
some-
religion.
religion
lives, and
men's
and
We
was
to
satisfy
to
become
to
the
divine,
effort
this
to
that
the
to
an
apt
were
were
Greek
and
religion
appeal
corruption.
to
sought
part,
call
now
in
least
in
little
mysteries
liable
again
Ancient
sympathy
they
divine,
truth
this
contrary,
akin
is
in
was
instinct.
made
the
even
peculiarly
were
it. It
religious
the
which
soul,
the
is
in
that
the
reality
have
can
live
to
On
that
man
difference
suggestion
the
faith
with
thing,
'mysteries',
we
for
is
communion
external
and
the
on
tried
ludicrous.
seem
is based
thing
one
must
has
of
what
if it can,
who
anyone
mind
the
all, and,
at
philosophers,
Greek
philosophy
To
whether
ask
to
reality
his
to
the
with
have
We
science.
pure
lieved
bemen
to
not
death
rest
of
is such
The
lonians
MILETOS
"
of
neither
Though
i
.
personal
so
influence
thing
the
on
the
later
times
is
city
the
marked.
be
to
Cretan
of Miletos
town
is
of Thales
name
the
that
to
peoples
is
from
of Asia
"
2.
that
earlier
here
no
the
first human
such
cosmogonies
far
northern
of
as
Milesians
differed
from
barbarian,
than
look
to
doubt
speculations. No
1
Herod,
See
my
Scotland,
V.
28
paper,
1912,
of
91
ff.)-
is
observe
to
their
for
these
exist, and
as
infer
its
become
the
and
colonial
he
the
there
the
may
and
Milesian
in
Classical
the
which
Greek
belief
well
and
one,
whether
primitive
was
of science.
man
points
of
founder
fundamental
(Proceedings of
the
to
all appearance
the
of
their
the
was
predecessors,
survivals
Early
Euxine.
such
Pherekydes
fy
rrjs 'lovL-r/s
'Who
Javan?'
was
pp.
to
the
Egypt
and
Thales
and
cosmologies
important
more
of the
that
civilisation
due
with
of
period
recently
so
rightly be called
can
that
has
now
perhaps
may
Lydians,
coasts
last
measure
some
which
cosmologists,
who
We
ceived
re-
Ionia, and
in
as
has
We
call
we
in close touch
doubt
to
between
distinction
age
the
what
of
that
belief
least that
at
too.2
in
was
kept
reason
being
island
this
to
well
as
especiallythe
the
school
Milesian
it is
Miletos
to
is
There
the
The
of
Minor,
empire extended
terest
in-
themselves
excavations.
into
Crete
in the
Milesians
The
us.
in
home
at
greatness
inheritance
known
Milatos
and
recent
that
with
Milesians
belonged
civilisation,and
There
considerable
civilisation
colony,
have
rise
therefore, without
The
from
confirmation
old
explain the
can
may
It is not,
assumes.
strongly
Minoan
Late
milieu
most
their
that
the
it
that
remarkable
know
the
nor
where
believed
time
philosophy, they
as
form
observe
to
the
in
have
or
their
been
Association
of
THE
14
of them
more
with Thales
than
Of Thales
to
know.
Wise
know
we
popular tradition
the type
of the
tales
foreseen
have
to
thingcame
new
he lived
mainly as
told of him.
were
and
of his
he makes
In
true
should
we
like
one
of the 'Seven
one
of these he is
falls into
of olives and
abundance
to
well
while
himself
he shows
an
say that
into the world.
unpracticaldreamer,
star-gazing
; in another
man
practical
by the use
is said
; but
successors
himself
In
know
we
and his
IONIANS
made
corner
in
whose
anecdotes
originally
then, tell us nothing
might be attached. These stories,
anonymous
about Thales himself,but they do bear witness to the impression
when
they firstappeared
produced by science and scientificmen
simply
in
world
that
half inclined
was
is,however, another
There
which
to
typical'sage',
as
something
be
may
solar
at
Miletos
of such
does
Thales
that
not
of the
to
of
not
are
Thales
from
popular
definite scientific
certain
quiteeasy
have
understand.
to
written
be said
it cannot
anything,
stronglyin
makes
ascribed
other achievements
and
As, however,
its favour
him
to
is considered
that
Thales
case
would
before and
the
to
and
that he
B.C.
We
was
are
eclipseof
the
1
if the
become
for
be
can
name
mere
no
partlyin
us,
but it would
successors
partlyin
them
interpreting
that of what
Herodotus1
learn,then, from
" 3. We
belonged
lonian
Baby-
little difference. In
are
it makes
insufficient,
of what
him
is complete.What
evidence
some
They
scoff.
to
most
to
appear
for the
of traditions about
set
learnt.
traditions
evidence
our
achievements.
of
marvel
to
name
light
after.
came
that
the
References
which
to
put
at
an
authorities
an
end
are
to
given
battle between
in E. Gr.
Ph.2
predictedan
the
"" 2-7.
Lydians
THALES
That
was
15
28th
May
on
(O.S.)585
true
of
cause
B.C.
Now
there
prediction,
though
was
eclipses
discovered
not
quiteerroneous
of them. The Babylonians,however, were
and fantastic accounts
equallyignoranton the subject,and yet they predictedeclipses
with tolerable accuracy by means
of a cycleof 223 lunations. It is
not
even
learn
had
as
been
advanced
been
necessary
much
as
successors
gave
called
an
post of
'wise men'
to
interesting
note
the Milesian
as
monarchy, and
him.
We
that he diverted
the
of the river
course
from Herodotos
know, lastly,
that he took
Halys
for
prominent
and that he tried to save
Ionia by urgingthe twelve
part in politics,
citiesto unite in a federal state with itscapital
at Teos.
of Aristotle's disciple
" 4. We are further told on the authority
the firsthistory
of mathematics, that Thales
Eudemos, who wrote
introduced geometry into Hellas. It is extremelyprobablethat he
referred
had learnt in Egypt the elementaryrules of mensuration
to in the Introduction
have
advanced
but, if we
beyond his
may
trust
teachers. He
he
the tradition,
is said
must
taughtthe
the heightof the pyramids by means
of
Egyptianshow to measure
of finding
their shadows, and also to have invented a method
the
distance of shipsat sea.
It was
the
common
knowledge among
whose sides were
as 3 : 4 : 5 had
peoplesof the East that a triangle
laid out by means
of
always a rightangle,and rightangleswere
What we are told of Thales suggests that he invented
this triangle.
of this primitive
further applications
some
pieceof knowledge,and
if so that was
the beginningof rational science. At any rate, there
the pioneerof those investigais no reason
that he was
to doubt
tions
which were
of Pythagoras,
to bear fruit later in the hands
though itis hardlysafe to say more.
" 5. Accordingto Aristotle,Thales said that the earth floats on
the water, and he doubtless thoughtof it as a flat disc. That, at
least,
was
remained
characteristic of Ionic
successors
as
to
have
l6
THE
down
realityit
cosmology at
marks
in
It sounds
of Demokritos.
the time
to
IONIANS
advance.
notable
primitiveenough, but
The
whole
historyof
picturedas
Greeks,
date the
earth
as
was
or,
doubt
no
material
cause
the
about
as
is
water
of
tenet
principal
water,
natural
was
for
by
sort
them, began
connected
with
what
To
Aristotle
early
of the
regardit as
view.
truer
were
an
think
to
the
somethingto
This
of
island surrounded
an
restingon
as
bottom
was
It
regardsas
is made
Thales, namely, that everything
was
the
of
out
grounds on
this doctrine
was
of any
do
to
try
we
these
days,and
water
in
and
vaporous
the sea,
take
stones
regardedas only a
mist, while
still purer
purer
form
was
of the Mediterranean
properlythe brightblue
fire on
is
it
was
freezes,and Anaximenes
water
were
frozen
to
in any
the
more
sense
one
or
his
hand
and
harder
water
was
earth
on
at
least held
that
the other
less conjectural
account;
arose.
That, of
but, if Anaximenes
identified with
was
after,|'air'
(aijp)
solid when
earth and
was
to
becomes
course,
of
called
at once
In fact it was
state.
is
is
that of the
fire and
which
time
some
which
(al0TJp),
sky,and
seemed
for
transparent form
more
'aether'
to
attention
this,our
must
have
lie in his
been
having
he gave it.
answer
questionrather than in the particular
Henceforth
the questionwhether
everythingcan be regardedas a
singlerealityappearing in different forms is the central one of
Greek
the
theory.
we
have
to
tellis how
ANAXIMANDER
" 6. The
of
generation
next
Anaximander.1
by
We
doctrines;for he
wrote
Theophrastosand
book
written
are
the Milesian
on
later. It is
in prose, and
which
was
probablethat
it may
school is
be noted
represented
regardto his
with
ground
surer
book
17
extant
in the time
it
the firstGreek
was
here
of
the
was
of philosophical
and scientific writing.
regularmedium
Greek
Parmenides
and Empedokles,wrote
in
philosophers,
and due to
at a later date, but that was
quite exceptional,
Two
verse
causes
stillto
can
we
extent
some
firstcartographer,
and this
citizen
Anaximander's
connects
work
Hekataios,whose
Anaximander
trace.
him
formed,
was
also the
as
said,the
fellowtext
of
map.
have
to
seems
of the
solitary
said that things
'givesatisfaction and reparationto one another for their injustice,
as is appointed
accordingto the orderingof time'. This conception
than once
in Ionic natural
and injustice
of justice
recurs
more
at
any
assume
References
I do
called
not
an
the heavens
though
to
use
ovpavos
arise in it elsewhere
authorities
the term
at
this
are
'world'
and
not
the
From
sun
with
us.
Each
world
in E. Gr. Ph.z
""12 sqq.
the equivalentof what
was
later a KOO^OS.
It means
everything within
our
point of view, it is a 'planetarysystem',
for the
date, and
the earth
given
than
earth,but
as
are
part of it.
l8
is
THE
of
sort
IONIANS
in the boundless
vortex
Anaximander, and
Our
mass.
authorities attribute
tend
the
to
Plato
to
It was,
in many
substitute for this old
centre.
same
led
was
no
to
singleworld, and
ways,
misfortune
that
thus
the way
for the reactionary
to
prepare
cosmology of Aristotle. The Epicureans,who took up the old
Ionic view at a later date,were
too unscientific to make
good use of
combined
actually
it,and
and
absolute up
innumerable
of the
of the
there is
another.
system
He
On
down.
between
is, of
make
and
space,
it fall in
the
one
was
world
clear that
perfectly
swings free in
nothingto
the other
of
meaning
the
as
and
due
view
the
to
of the earth
primitive
theory.
not
rest
on
anything,
that
he gave was
direction rather than
reason
has
been
assumption of
the
called his
course,
it does
an
Anaximander's
opposites.
he is
In the firstplace,
theoryof
of scientificintuition and
curious mixture
but
are
the inconsistent
'gods'.The
formation
out'
'separating
is
We
down.
worlds
shortly.
" 7. The
it with
in
observed, his
absolute up and
shape intermediate
sphereof
an
the
Pythagoreans.
and
regardedit as a short cylinder'likethe drum of a pillar',
supposed that we are livingon the upper surface while there is
another antipodal
His theory of the heavenlybodies shows
to us.
that he was
stillunable to separate meteorologyand astronomy.
So long as all 'the thingsaloft' (ra/xerecopa)
classed together,
are
He
that
is inevitable. Even
Galileo
atmosphericphenomena, and
than Anaximander
had
bodies.
his
Nor
was
for
maintained
he had
takingthe
that
far less
same
hypothesiswithout
excuse
comets
for
certain
were
doing so
heavenly
audacious
grandeur.He supposed that the sun, moon, and stars were really
ringsof fire surroundingthe earth. We do not see them as rings,
however, because they are encased in 'air'or mist. What we do
is only the singleaperture through which
the fire escapes
see
'as through the nozzle of a pair of bellows'. We
here the
note
beginning of the theory that the heavenly bodies
round
on
rings,a theory which held its ground
are
carried
till Eudoxos
IONIANS
THE
20
According to Anaximenes,
not
are
hidden
did
that Anaximenes
for this line of
know
not
thought might
it was,
of its axis. As
of the
the scientificview
the
led him
have
he
regarded it
earth,and
to
discover
as
was
tion
the inclina-
disc,and
able
said the
accept
continued to
never
Demokritos
even
earth;
of the
sphericalshape
surrounded
heavens
also float on
heavenlybodies
to
to
was
suggestivetheory of Anaximander
be developedin another region.
logy
" 10. It has recentlybeen maintained that the Milesian 'cosmobased on the primitiveand popular theory of 'the four
was
elements'. It is not meant, of course, that the scientificconception
flat.The
believe it was
of
'element'
an
due
to
existed
this date. We
at
Empedokles, and
it is only the
of
in that of
avoid
in
it,and
two
we
undeniable
that,from
of this kind
was
to
an
his system,
these
was
quaternion
and
wards
after-
four
perforcecontinue
have
which
senses
occupiedin
unfortunate
must
see
placethat
It is an
elements'.
shall
very
to
the word
use
littleto do with
earlydate,a
It can
recognised.
fourfold
or
'element'
It is
another.
one
threefold division
and
be traced in Homer
Hesiod,
it has been
retains in
Pherekydes.Here
once
more
Milesian
the
Indeed, if we
1
This
is pointed
made
Theophrastos
take
out
an
broad
view
of
it,we
the
had
breach
gone
shall
see
between
before
is
the
really
that it depends
he
28.
nor
MATTER
the extension
on
to
earth and
other
In
of the observed
stones
the
on
bears
of
states
for the
to
and
elements'
what
to
steam
the other.
primitive'four
closer resemblance
much
identityof ice,water,
hand, and
one
words, it substitutes
somethingwhich
21
now
are
the
another,fleshAnd blood
rocks
of
"{"vais
guessingthat
liquidstate
he said
is intermediate
therefore
can
third. The
all things.
(Thalessaid it was
in
wrong
and
because, as
so
cannot
we
Averts,
for the
be far
we
between
one
asked
Milesians
water,
of which
the gaseous,
and
pass
leave his Boundless
that
body, so
that,after
saw
and
of its own,
stage between
had introduced
alone makes
had
he
able
was
do because
to
he
condensation, which
the whole
the
drawn
and fire.This
water
sense
form
in
our
text-books.
That, and
not
the
recognisable
astronomical
particular
to
answer
The
the
in 494
Anaximenes',
more
is reality
?3
school doubtless
Milesian
Miletos
Ionian
'What
question,
B.C., but
as
it
was
we
shall
came
see
to
an
end
called,continued
to
be
with
the fall of
Philosophy of
taught in other
Ionia was
its influence when
and that it regained
once
cities,
freed from a foreign
yoke.For the present, however, what we
Plato,Laws. 891 c: KivSwevei -yap 6 AeycovTO.VTO. -nvp Kal uScopKO.I yfjv Kal depa
airrd. The
ndvrcav elvai,Kal TTJV "j"vatv
question
ovo/na"etvravra
rwv
TrpaJra rj-yeladai
of
is
the
whether
"l"vais 'growth'.Aristotle (Met. A,
originalmeaning
really is
it means
'growth',it is
b, 16) did not think so; for he says that,when
4. 1014
did
it
at once
with
In
other
it
not
if
words,
v.
a
to
were
long
as
one
pronounce
this
For
on
see
verb
him
the
subject,
to
controversy
(Aeol.^ut'o/xai).
"{"vopai
suggest
Academy of Arts and Sciences,
(Proceedingsof the American
Heidel, Flepl"/"voea"s
in the Greek
xlv. 4), and
sophical
Physiologers'(PhiloLovejoy, 'The Meaning of "j"vais
called the
the fact that the Atomists
Review, xviii. 4). To my mind
See Ar. Phys 265 b, 25 ; Simpl. Phys. p. 1 3 1 8, 34. Atoms
is conclusive.
atoms
(J"VOLS
do not 'grow'.
1
THE
22
have
is the effect
consider
to
IONIANS
philosophyof
on
the Persian
conquest
THE
"
BREAKDOWN
spiritof
The
ii.
OF
CIVILISATION
civilisation had
Ionian
no
IONIAN
of the
doubt, one
originof this
been
thoroughly
that favoured
causes
the
secular
is to be found in the
spirit
described by Homer.
The princesand chiefs for whom
he
have been completely
detached
from the religious
must
ideas
to
we
have
been
potent
be said'that the
cannot
of them
number
offered. It is very
earnest, it is not
that
significant
spiritof
Homer
to
or
and
sacrifices are
actually
of Dodona.
is very different no
doubt; for he is no
he feels himself to be in oppositionto Homer, but the
Ionian,and
influence
when
to
far-off Pelasgic
Zeus
The
that prayers
was
too
Hesiod
of the
by anyone, and
natural phenomena, or
it is of most
He
god
'gods'in
some
even
the
of them
of human
reallydid
from
even
that of
mere
than
worship. It
Theogonywere
are
more
never
is
shipped
wor-
of
personifications
For
passions.
our
present
cosmogonies.
SECULARISM
23
had been
" 12. The feudal societypicturedfor us by Homer
but the
replacedin the Ionic cities by a commercial aristocracy,
the bards
in the market-place,
rhapsodes still recited Homer
as
had done at the feudal prince'sboard. It was
to get
impossible
Olympian gods,and in practiceit was of
away from the humanised
these that men
thought when
they worshipped at the shrines
founded
stillawful beings to
in earlier days,when
the gods were
be approachedwith dread. A peoplebrought up on Homer
could
hardly think of the gods as moral beings,though they were
posed
supthe only divine
to be the guardiansof morality.Almost
attribute
they possessedwas
as
chiefly
foil to human
deeply conscious.
are
leaves of the
and
power,
that
even
impotence,a thingof
The
of
generations
men
which
is retained
the lonians
like the
pass away
or at best a
shadowy
of which the departed 'soul' is itselfunconscious. Only so
one,
and visions ; the
is left of it as will serve
much
to explaindreams
himself
man
for
is gone
when
ever
come,
to
men
think
The
only mortal thoughts (avdpatTnva.
mysterious
"j"pov".lv).
and is as often
power that awards happinessand misery in this life,
called 'the godhead'(TO delov)as God, appears to be jealousof
and bringslow everyone that exalts himself. So we should eat,
man,
drink,and be merry, but take heed withal to do 'naughttoo much'
who
observes the precept 'Know
ayav).The man
(/zrjSei/
thyself
will not
be puffedup. For overmuch
brings
prosperity
(6'A/3o?)
and that in turn
the
satiety(Kopos),which begets pride(vfipis),
blindness
ruin. A
to
" 13.
like doctrine
appears
Such
view
of life comes
over-civilised nation
an
always demands
We
God
which
(O.TTJ),
sends
on
those he is resolved
Wisdom
in the Hebrew
literature
later.
generations
some
in
of heart
stillsee
can
some
clear
to
naturally
bring no satisfactionto
stillretained
It is
for
not
conveyed
traces
of
Athens
of the
to
'twice
Crete,went
and
sixth
which
people,
memories
some
nothingthat
the
the
classes
instincts.
definite satisfactionfor its religious
the wealthier
the
seven'
to
times had
prehistoric
from
youths and maidens
boat, which
Ionian
Delos
Hyperboreansconnected
Aegean religion.
in
with
stillmore
legend
and
remote
B.C.
P.
THE
24
regions.It was
to fructify
; for
wonderful
were
germs
at
IONIANS
not,
days of
the
an
new
homes
was
no
once
men
felt
more
age had
new
begun
real need
had
to
in which
Homer.
of
almost
were
after another
light-hearted
polytheismof
for the
room
state
one
freedom
Ionian
not
seek
there
When
satisfy
god who is
in
freed from the restraints that keep ordinary men
just a man
check. That is also why the worship of two
gods,who
agricultural
and Dionysos,come
to be
Demeter
almost unknown
to Homer,
are
of such importance at this date. They had not been completely
of the process in
humanised
yet, though we can see the beginnings
for men
still possible
to worship
the Homeric
Hymns, so it was
them sincerely.
them.
It is easier
to
worship a
tree
or
an
animal, than
RELIGION
based
on
real
or
initiated and
became
promised
to
obey the
rule. Its
to
all who
teachingwas
oppositeof
the Ionian
Orpic
'saint'
and would
used. What
of
the
immortal;
was
(ocrto?)
soul
animal, and
men
call life is
in
it had
are
improperly
reallydeath, and
is
which
(crcD/tia
arjfjia),
even
For
evermore.
vegetablebodies, until
the
its final
purification
ENLIGHTENMENT
liberates it from
the
25
of birth'. Those
'wheel
souls,on
incurable
aviaroi)are
(d^/cecrrot,
The
for ever.
ideas
'Slough'(f36pf3opos)
hand, which
lie in the
are
the other
condemned
to
of heaven
and
reasons
the
but, on
degenerateinto
to
great
shall
whole, it is for
new
That it was
anonymous.
is natural ; for there were
superstition
mere
we
know, who
to
could
charlatans
easy prey
however, that certain
see,
apt
us
have
and
no
preserved
postors.
im-
elements, which
seemed
and
were
so
value,were
have permanent
to
seem,
firstsight,
to be furthest removed
at
from
it.
ENLIGHTENMENT
" 15.
the
to
It need
hardly be
men
enlightened
of the
ideas
wholly foreign
saying that 'all
belongs in any
were
cities. The
Ionian
thingsare
"
'I do
sacred
that any disease is more
divine or more
I think that those who first called this disease sacred
think
not
others.
...
men
such
as
againin
were
there
(Kadaprai)and
to cloak
(TOde'iov')
And
than
the treatise
'Nothing is more
thingsare alike and
and
on
divine
cover
their
own
Airs, Waters
or
more
all divine.'
human
incapacity.'
and Sites
than
"
anythingelse,but
all
26
is the
That
the
note
true
schools.
Ionian
satiricalpoet, who
is often
Xenophanes, who
school,a point we
this
pointin
with
any
been
arrived
lifeare
return
to
it
for those
accuracy;
at
by
later. In any
it is
from
know
his
the dates of
most
improbable.He
no
take him
up
authorities have
of
a citizen
certainly
was
statement
own
have
may
that he
was
visited Elea
biguously
unam-
Kolophon, and
that he had
stillwritingpoetry when
was
in Sicily,
chiefly
that he lived
facts of his
authoritystates
ancient
to
Xenophanes' life
ancient
given by
places,but
other
as
instructive
most
chronological
case,
also obscure.
well
of the Eleatic
the founder
mere
that he did. He
we
regardedas
an
our
rhapsode,and
as
shall
of all
note
elegiacand
the standpoint
I refer to
scientificinvestigator.
story.
determine
1 6. It is difficultto
"
of the
considerations make
other
and
the
and it was
'enlightenment',
It is most
stronglymarked in
approachedthe questionfrom
of
rather than
of the reformer
at
IONIANS
THE
it is
at
B.C.
the
court
of Hiero
is also said
He
to
of
have
of
management
feast,another
which
the
denounces
exaggerated
attack
and several which
importance attached to athletic victories,
the humanised
gods of Homer.2 The problem is,therefore,to find,
if we
a
singlepoint of view from which all these fragments
can,
be interpreted.
It may be that no such pointof view exists;but,
can
if one
be found, it is likelythat we
phanes
Xenoshall understand
can
know
better. Now
that a great change came
over
we
against
the
of
somewhat
Ionia,which
References
For
to
its source
authorities
translation
of the
are
given in
fragments, see
It
in the court
E. Gr.
Ph.2
E. Gr, Ph.2
was
and
reaction
daintiness
of Sardeis and
"" 55
" 57.
sqq.
28
XENOPHANES
there
only one
was
god
world.
That
called,but pantheism. It is
it has been
as
namely, the
"
not
theism,
mono-
simple reproduction
for
specialuse
himself
Xenophanes
he had
said
to
19. But
while
overthrow
the
himself
in
tellsus
anythingmore
"
of the
is
have
term
no
more.
in
or
more
religious
definitely
positive
been quoted by later writers.
Xenophanes makes
of contemporary
use
it is plainthat
Olympian hierarchy,
scientific man.
spiteof Anaximander,
In
science
he
was
not
he stillbelieves
and boundless
in all directions,
extendingto infinity
that traverses
in depth also. Consequentlyit is a different sun
our
heaven
which he
must
same
apply to the moon,
every day. The
further held to be superfluous.Both
and moon
sun
are
ignited
clouds. The
stars, too, are clouds that go out in the day time, but
a
flat earth
glow
at
understood
was
made
was
at
That
is
that
of
says
like the truth'
knowledge in
(fr.34),and
this field
"
he
'Even
know
complete truth, he cannot
this Xenophanes is the precursor
from
Ionia
mainly
this
world
two
Neither
later
hundred
the
an
hand
and
of these contained
man
science
as
Xenophanes merely
Any stick
purposes.
and
Hesiod
with. He
the
should
man
chance
to say
the
anachronism
years later.
have seen
how
(fr.34).In all
philosophythat came
difference
the
traditional view
is
B.C.
of the
cism
placewas taken by Orphic mystiscepticismon the other.
by enlightened
the
science
less of
chapter we
broke
on
that it was
than it was
In
at
denies
if a
not
its
in itself the
who
promise of
firstunited
science
with
religion,
II
Pythagoras
THE
"
Pythagoras
20.
but
men,
he
doctrine
we
about
it
know
knowledge
work
of
little
too
crowd
have
much
of
will be well
due
to
be
must
to
are
the
life of
his
round
of
and
science,
might
we
work
of his
that
due
belongs
an
and
to
of the
is
we
case
the
have
say
never
Pythagoreans'.
sight of
risk of
later
how
regard
to
of
to
mainly
regard
as
the
division
to
later.
to
or
we
mass
he
other
the
told
are
about
of
legend gathered
is
represented
of
of those
mathematician
to
Pythagoras
and, often, still more
are
characters
science
the
and
tales told
early centuries
as
mystic doctrines,
rationalise
miraculous
authorities
is
Pythagoreanism,
Pythagorean
doctrine
any
it
period
possible to
of the
Pythagoreans',
References
all
treat
It is also
to
or
some
whether
preacher
one
that
and
him
among
generation, and
of what
; for
him
quite uncertain
Sometimes
as
ascribinga
chapter. Such
much
made
in human
it is certain
a
the earlier
to
sometimes
attributes
so-called
lose
it is often
trustworthy
Neopythagoreans
of 'the
to
to
be
again
the collective
to
the
future
early date.
successors.
represent
Aristotle
speaks
to
tempted
be
medicine-man,
mere
for
than
the
it
meet
advances
the
met
may
take
hand,
of
have
We
to
belong
that
historical. It is
alone
as
at
name
other
least
remembered
Pythagoras
than
of the
founder
remark
rather
greatest
much
shall
we
account
give an intelligible
It is also hard
21.
man
at
these
reserve
particulardoctrine
"
it is better
founder
doctrines
the
all great
know,
individuals
the
how
development.1
general
world's
say
to
Thales, and
we
the
to
is due
One
to
so
the
to
inevitable if we
it
been
as
disciples.On
Pythagorean
but
far
school, and
of
Sokrates.
So
once.
it is hard
is later
case
of
one
Pythagorean
as
to
come
at
been
nothing, and
much
societyand how
in the
same
difficulty
when
have
must
wrote
we
PROBLEM
of
our
himself.
given in E.
as
as
the
story of
statesman.
of him
era.
as
There
He
generally
cautiously, of 'some
Gr. Ph.2 "" 37 sqq.
PYTHAGORAS
30
is
serious
alreadyknown
were
Aristotle. It is
Pythagorasthe true
in
science was
certainly
B.C., and
reallydue
should
name
to
have
been
next
of mathematical
founder
existence
been
than
another
generationtells us
beyond all other men,
(laropiri)
the
have
it must
wonders
equallydifficultto rejectthe
that makes
tradition
that his
to
of these
many
the middle
by
of
the work
of
someone.
Pythagoras,it is strange
Further, Herakleitos in
forgotten.
that Pythagoras practisedinquiry
and
he thinks
the
of him
worse
for
It
is
the laws of
the
of Greek
the thread
more
once
up
century, which
was
spheres'and
science.
planetarymotion
in
by
Kepler
was
led
took
to
cover
dis-
'harmony of
souls.
planetary
LIFE
DOCTRINE
AND
was
to
jealousyand mistrust,and
excite
we
hear
of many
to Metastruggles.
Pythagoras himself had to flee from Kroton
pontion,where he died. The chief opponent of Pythagoreanism,
said to have been rich and noble, and there is
Kylon, is expressly
evidence
no
represented'the
the Dorian
and
his
Dorian
notion
was
based
ideal;but in any
societywas
Pythagorasand
case
on
his followers
the
established in Achaian,
clear what
Pythagorashimself
not
took
was
is meant
an
by
Ionian,
Dorian, colonies.
It has
been
Herakleitos
himself.
Attic.
The
and
form
Demokritos
name
and
in form. Herodotos
Pythagoras is Dorian
he called
'Pythagores',and so no doubt
than 'Anaxagoras'. It is simply
Doric
more
no
call him
'Pythagoras'is
THE
ever,
PYTHAGOREAN
of the
soon
who
shall hear
we
ORDER
survived
went
on
and
took
of them
more
31
the
more
there
refuge at
was
Pythagorean lodges
of the brethren
many
than
Thebes
and
lost their
elsewhere,
later.
pointsto
which
the
its descent
the
connexion
'air' by
Pythagorean geometry
from
that of Miletos.
of
duplication
at
least
some
of Anaximenes.
Pythagoreans
The
way
witness
in
to
developed also bears
The
great problem at this date
a problem which
gave rise to the
the square,
theorem
of the square on the hypotenuse,
commonly known still
I. 47).If we were
as the Pythagorean proposition
rightin
(Euclid,
was
assuming
that Thales
worked
with
the
triangle,
connexion
is obvious, and
the very name
'hypotenuse'bears
witness to it;for that word means
the rope or cord 'stretching
over
the rightangle,or, as we say, 'subtending'
it.
against'
" 23. But this was not the only influence that affected Pythagoras
in his earlier days.He is said to have been a disciple
of Pherekydes
element in his teaching
as well as of Anaximander, and the mystical
is thus accounted
for. In any case, as has been indicated already,
of the Delian and Hyperborean Apollo had a mystical
the religion
side. The legendsof Abaris and Aristeas of Prokonnesos
are
enough
that. There are several pointsof contact
between
this form
to show
of mysticism (which seems
to be independent of the Dionysiac)
and Crete. We have seen
that the boat containingthe seven
youths
and
maidens
Delos
in historical times, though
went
to
seven
tradition remembered
its originaldestination
was
Crete, and
Cretan.
There
a
are
Epimenides, the great purifier,
was
many
things,in fact,which suggest that this form of mysticism had
survived from 'Minoan'
times,and itis therefore quiteunnecessary
to seek its originin Egypt or India. It is highly
probable,then, that
and mysticalbeliefs about
Pythagorasbrought his ascetic practices
PYTHAGORAS
32
the soul from
his Ionian
was
of Aristeas
statue
had
which
at
its
centre
Delos
at
in historical times
purification
was
important
teachingof
Pythagoras.The longingfor purityis something very deeplyrooted
is always reappearing in new
in human
nature, and Catharism
forms. Of course
we
mean
may
very different thingsby purity.It
be secured by
may be merely external,and in that case it can easily
that held
and
(i"d9apais),1
observed
likelythat
medical
in the
at
taboos.
of it got
no
further. It is
leadingmen
school
and
That
members
many
that the
an
of certain abstinences
place in the
Kroton
even
before
these
it is quite
ever,
certain,how-
was
an
important
there,and
Pythagoraswent
idea of purification
it appears that the old religious
was
garded
earlyrein the lightof the medical
practiceof purgation.At any
rate, Aristoxenos, who
goreans
personallyacquaintedwith the Pythaused
the
that they
medicine
to purge
the
the soul. That
already connects
was
body
and
music
scientific studies
to
purge
of the school
with
its
doctrine, since
religious
peutics
beginnings of scientific theraall. In
and harmonics
to the Pythagoreans.But that is not
Sokrates quotes a sayingthat 'philosophy
is the highest
the Phaedo
The
to be Pythagorean in origin.
music', which seems
purgative
of music
function
was
fullyrecognisedin the psychotherapyof
in the practiceof the Korybantic priests,
these days. It originated
and hysterical
treated nervous
who
patientsby wild pipe music,
followed
them
thus exciting
to the pitchof exhaustion,which
was
in turn
by a healthysleepfrom which the patientawoke cured. An
lightis thrown on this by what was known as 'Tarantism'
interesting
there is much
in later days.2Taking all these thingstogether,
to be
of Pythagorasconsisted in this,
said for the view that the originality
and especially
that he regarded scientific,
mathematical, study as
the best purge for the soul. That is the theoryof the earlypart of
there
is
doubt
no
that
we
owe
Farnell,Cults of the
See
Enc.
Brit, (nth
the
Greek
States,vol. iv. pp.
edition)s.v. 'Tarantula.'
295
sqq.
REBIRTH
AND
Phaedo, which
Plato's
is
mainly a
in
it frequently
recurs
doctrine,and
It
added
be
may
that
ascribe
to
him
to
the
of
historyof
tradition
Pythagorean
Greek philosophy.
the
represents
by Pythagoras.If
the
33
statement
first used
as having been
'philosophy'
(and there is much to be
hesitate
REMINISCENCE
that is
need
we
tradition),
sayingmentioned
word
in the Phaedo
so
not
that
probablyto
three kinds
come
to
come
to
the founder
to
and
buy
sell,and
next
Apolaustic,which
of the society.
There
is
are
of men,
the
the
lowest
above
them
consists
are
of those who
those who
to
come
to look on (0eo"peu").
simply come
Men
as lovers of wisdom
("^iAdcro"^oi
may be classifiedaccordingly
of
and
lovers
That
lovers of honour
gain (^tAo/cepSei?).
(^lAcmjiioi),
to imply the doctrine of the tripartite
soul, which is also
seems
attributed to the earlyPythagoreans on good authority,2
though it
compete.
is
references
ascribe
to
now
common
those who
it before his
to
it
to
Plato. There
are,
however, clear
better with
the
The
comparison of human
generaloutlook of the Pythagoreans.
like the Games
often repeatedin
life to a gathering
was
(rravriyvpis)
later days,3and is the ultimate source
of Bunyan's 'VanityFair'.
that the soul is a stranger and a sojournerin this life was
also destined to influence European thoughtprofoundly.
The
view
" 26.
There
of Rebirth
can
be
no
doubt that
Pythagorastaughtthe
doctrine
Cp.
The
or
of
/ca0apa"?
etc., in the Phaedo, 65 e, 66 d, e.
yvcorai, etSevat,
is
Poseidonios.
See
edition of the Phaedo, 68 c, 2, note.
authority
my
Cp. Menander, fr. 481 Kock (Pickard-Cambridge,p. 141. No. 68),Epictetus,
the
use
metempsychosisis
it would
that different
mean
being
i'a,
'born
not
souls
used
entered
again'.See
by good writers,and
into the same
body.
E. Gr. Ph.*
p. 101,
n.
2.
is inaccurate
The
older
; for
word
is
PYTHAGORAS
34
of
Reminiscence, which
It
have
must
struck
him
perceivedby
follows easily
from
not
were
" 27. As
cosmology
has been
indicated,there is
Master
of
for
adaptingthemselves
here is doubtless
for the
to
new
much
so
doctrine
watchword.
historian,and
the
progress
contradiction
conditions. The
feel
hardlyever
can
we
On
capacityfor
more
of Reminiscenc
about the
difficulty
ever
professedsuch
Pythagorean. 'The
more
reverence
dealing
was
sure
difficulty
what
to
stage
about Pythagoreanism
refers.
development any given statement
One thing,however, we
There is a form of the
can
see
distinctly.
of
that
and there
precedesthe rise of the Eleatic philosophy,
is a form that is subsequentto it.We
shall do well,therefore,to
for the present all doctrines which
to
seem
reserve
imply the
criticism. That
is really the only criterion we
Eleatic
can
apply.
to begin with that Pytha" 28. We can make out pretty clearly
goras
doctrine
started from
tells
us
that the
'air'from
with
the cosmical
'the unlimited'.
On
outside it,and
mass
the other
Anaximander
at a
As soon
cylindrical.
the
flatdisc. He
of the
cause
of
to
still,
world, though
no
came
eclipses
See
my
edition
to
have
longer
to
be
sphere,and
we
probablyattribute that discoveryto Pythagorashimself.
may
With
this exception,his generalview of the world seems
to have
Milesian in character.
been distinctly
understood, it was
natural
centre
inhaling
as
world
Aristotle
hand, Pythagorasseems
in all probability,
thoughtof it as the
regardit as
of Anaximenes.
the
Pythagoreansrepresented
the boundless
learnt from
system
of the
Phaedo,72
e, 4 note.
was
36
PYTHAGORAS
were
strings
tension
requiredpitch by
the
of
and
equallength,
and
relaxation
tuned
were
to
aWo-t?).
(enlraaiSj
entirely
by ear, and the firstthingwas to make the
and nete)1concordant, in the sense
outside strings(hypate
two
and
with one
another, with the middle string(mese),
explained,
notes
later paramese). The
it (trite,
with the stringjust above
called 'stationary'
of these four stringswere
(e'en-core?)
("j)d6yyoi)
This
done
was
were
call
littleas what
we
double
It is obvious
tone.
quarter-tone, or
that
none
of
as
much
as
what
we
scales could be
our
call a
played
tuned to the
lyre,
seven-stringed
lyreat all; an eight-stringed
in that scale,however,
diatonic scale,is requiredfor them. Even
a
on
did
Greeks
the
not
recognisethe interval
we
as
concordant.2
the
pitchof
notes
of
measuring the
of
two
rate
rate
to
stringsis inversely
proportional
similar
possiblefor
it was
of vibrations.
him
to
transform
the
problem and
tion
of vibra-
their
length,
attack it on
on
result
singlestring.The
was
to
show
that the
concordant
i, 3 : 2, and
3,
of
pitch.As a matter
for
The
terms
'high'
note
imdrrjgave
highest.
and 'low' are ogvs (acutus,'sharp'),
and fiapvs
(gravis).
2
ing
An
elementary knowledge of the Greek lyre is essential for the understandof Greek
the subject will be found
to
philosophy. A useful introduction
in the articles (by D. B. Monro)
in Smith's
Dictionary of
Lyra and Musica
Antiquities.
1
Observe
fact,the
that
the
terms
the lowest
vira-rri and
and
VTJTT) do
not
the VTJ-TT)the
refer to
MUSIC
lyrecould
of the
notes
ratios to
these
have
which
be
expressedthus
8
let
convenience
one
6
For
37
12
us
by
notes
of the
those
gamut in descendingorder:
Paramese
Nete
we
Hypate
La
Mi,
Si
Mi
and
Mese
may
follows
(1) When
high
octave
by the
expressed
gave the
fifth and
ratio
he took
(2) When
high Mi,
(SiTrAacrio?
Aoyo?).
of
length stringhalf as longagainas
it gave
That
La.
Greeks
the
: i
which
the
and
gave
fourth
high Mi,
the
it gave
Greeks
(| f
x
J^),and the
note
againas long as
Si. That
called diatessaron
call the
we
that which
is
that
call
we
Aoyo?).
(eirirpiTos
octave
is a fifth from
is
fifth and
fourth
from
the
There
further
is good
for
reason
this,and that
than
holdingthat Pythagorasdid
ratios between
the 'movable'
Archytas and
Plato. It is by
any
that the
us
tones
and
scale,which
double
no
tone;
internal
notes
made
to
these
at
See
was
tells
older musical
proceededby
what
but
Pythagoras could
the
tone
did
to
he called quarter-
not
of the tetrachord
days of
means
of quarter-tones, since
possibility
division. The
was
go any
determine
the
notes
regardto
diagrams of the
the enharmonic
attempt
no
not
admit
must,
la
admit
not
of
the
equal
then, have
musique' (Rev. de
38
PYTHAGORAS
discovered,we
related
are
the
to
the 'limit'
have
we
extremes
what
of the
9, which represents the note
exceeds and is exceeded
number, namely 3. It is
by the same
On the
is called the arithmetical mean
jueo-orT??).
(apifyt/^TiKi?
other
hand, the
and
12
mese,
exceeds
term
by
f. This
later,for obvious
or
subcontrary(uTrevaim'a),
mean
neaorrjs).
(ap^oviK-r]
called the
was
the harmonic
reasons,
is
mean
geometrical
The
8, which
term
is exceeded
and
12-^
The
means.
as
not
of
be found
to
singleoctave.
discoveryof the Mean at once suggests a new solution
of the old Milesian
problem of opposites.We know that Anaxiof one
mander
regarded the encroachment
oppositeon the other
therefore have held there was
and he must
a point
as an
'injustice',
Now
which
this
fair
was
of determining.
means
no
discoveryof
The
in
to
been.
natural
convivial
The
them.
to
proportionsof
before it was
The
and
wine
served
of the
master
out
water
to
to
be
such
made
of the Greeks
customs
of the
notes
feast used
poured into
an
idea
prescribethe
the mixing-bowl
to
is why the
octave
Demiourgos
the world
uses
remains
the
point of which
one
full
significance
here. It is
be mentioned
but which must
appear tilllater,
plainthat the octachord scale could be increased by the addition of
will
not
one
or
be
more
tetrachords
possibleto
obtain
intervals1 occurred
idea of this
at
either
octave
in
scales in which
on
for
the white
our
can
notes
get
from
have
tone.
some
to
the enharmonic
(i) i tone,
larger
rough
piano alone.
of the
present purpose
The
is taken
example given by Aristoxenos
which, according to his terminology, we may
(2) i tone, ditone,i tone, or (3)ditone,i tone, i
in
therefore
different order. We
by playingscales
It is fortunately
unnecessary
1
discuss the
tetrachord
tone,
ditone,
MEDICINE
relation of these
octave'
(eiSr)
rov
Sia
as they
7racra)v),
of which
called,to the 'modes' (apfj,oviai,
rpoTrot)
were
much
in Greek
been
these
the
of the
'figures
39
we
hear
problem
so
has
of their parts. We
arrangement
for
toxenos
that,2and
shall
we
see
have
that it is a
the
authorityof
matter
Aris-
of fundamental
importance.
MEDICINE
" 33.
In Medicine
the
the
cold,the
body. In
told
and
wet
physicianto produce
human
also
have
we
proper
well-known
by Simmias
to
the
do with
such
'opposites',
as
dry,and
it is the business
of
'blend'
passage
of
(/cpaat?)
these in the
of Plato's Phaedo
medicine
which
as
well
as
that the
(86b) we
body to be
in music.
is representedfor
similar
doctrine.
and
same
us
Now
the medical
by Alkmaion,
based
school of Kroton,
its theory on
very
the
account
stillcall it,and
are
Now
we
more
than
was
one
distinguished
climate
ing,
speak of 'temperance'in eatingand drinkequallyon Pythagorean ground.
find the word we
have translated 'figure'
used
(efSo?)
once
we
B.C.
in
con-
1
See Monro, Modes
of Ancient Greek Music (1 894) ; Macran, The Harmonics
Theories
of the Greek
Recent
of Aristoxenus
(1902); J. D. Dennistoun, 'Some
Modes'
(Classical
Quarterly,vii. (1913),pp. 83 sqq.).
2
iii. 74, is quite clear that e'Sr)
here
means
'figures',
Aristoxenos, El. Harm.
aurd.
S' 'fjfjuv
ov8ev efSos Aeyeip
e
m
TO
ra
"ia"f"epei
dyd/xara
"f"epo(j.ev
d/m^ore/aa
cr^^/iia'
rj
yap
PYTHAGORAS
40
with
nexion
disease
in many
has also
occurs
which
verb
(and
and
technical
of
pattern
in various
medicine.
The
same
patterns,
and
it were,
as
such
is also the
the constitutions
between
in ancient
sense
dividual
Kardaracns)is also applied to the ingiven body.It is surelynatural to interpret
in the lightof the 'figures
of the octave*
health and
disease
opposites on which
explainedabove. The
depend may combine
variation
with
pointedout,1 it
verb (KadiaraaOaC)
its substantive
of the word
uses
has been
as
close connexion
placesin
constitution of
these
death, and,
NUMBERS
the
alike
were
Unlimited, and
of certain
it was
'figures'
(et'Sry),
kind in
somethingof the same
for
the world
from
health
the
of this. Anaximenes
accounts
had
identified it with
and had
'air',
interested
abstract space or extension, and what chiefly
came
the problem of how itbecan
so far as we
Pythagoras,
see, was
conceptionof
limited
There
of
poem
a
is a
confirmation of this in
striking
we
shall see
No.
for
the
two
was
that
believing,
'forms'
Timaeus
(58 d) we
have
what
is
doubt
no
were
know.
we
Part of the
the Second
reason
of the world
have
privationof
Plato's
to
Pythagoreancosmology.There
men
Darkness
as
Parmenides, if,as
sketch of
which
so
(juo/"""cu)
Darkness.
a
as
with
mere
it. In
the traditional
alike forms
the famous
is
of 'air'.
Pythagorean
A. E. Taylor, Varia
Socratica (St. Andrews
University Publications,
Sid -naauiv
in confirmation
rov
ix),p. 189. Professor Taylor has not cited the ftS-rj
of his view, but it seems
to me
press
important, seeing that we have the ex-
See
authority of Aristoxenos
for e?Sos =
ox^fia.in that
case.
NUMBERS
41
table of
the
under
the head
of Limit
and
that all
" 35. Brieflystated, the doctrine of Pythagoras was
things are numbers, and it is impossible for us to attach any
unless we have a clear idea of what he is
meaning to this statement
to have meant
by a 'number'. Now we know for certain that,
likely
in certain fundamental
represented
cases, the earlyPythagoreans
numbers
of dots arranged
and explainedtheir properties
by means
in certain
very
'figures'
(el'S^,
o^T^ara) or
is universal
for the practice
primitive;
from
was
figures
to
patterns. That
the
This
swear.
to
be
at
I0)"tnus
that this
such
things
Pythagorean
of the Order
the members
used
"
it is the
=
of these
doubt,
ceived
glancewhat the Pythagoreansconten
importantproperty of the number
showed
the most
namely, that
(1+2 + 3+4
It is obvious
tetraktys,1
by which
dice and
on
celebrated
most
is,no
of the
sum
first four
natural
integers
"
could
figure
be extended
and
indefinitely,
that
which
one
is the
thus
We
see
odd
1
factors. These
may
be presented
"
at once
numbers
For
product of unequal
the form
from
these
in the form
of this word
Delian
that
figures
of
gnomon
the addition
of successive
producessquare
numbers
forms rpiKrvapxos
and
The
cp. -rpiKrvs (Att.-rpirrvs).
inscriptions(Dittenberger,Syiloge2,588,19 sqq.).
PYTHAGORAS
42
same
way
tell how
important thing to
the form
ratio
a
: i
different form
The
that of
and
that
further
notes
it is the
has
the other
On
cannot
we
figures
express the sums
integersyieldstriangular
Aristotle
yieldsoblong numbers.
of the square numbers
(etSos)
numbers
in the
on
direction.
this
yieldssquare numbers,
in
advanced
Pythagorashad
far
numbers, but
cubic
numbers
These
(etSo?).
correspondexactlyto
the concordant
knowledge
Our
of these
gorean writers,who
the ordinarynotation
known
were
regardedthe
by
we
Neopytha-
'natural' than
as
more
'figures'
letters of the
Aristotle,2and
to
chieflyfrom
things comes
have
need
no
hesitation
in
the
is stillused,
term
though in
restricted
more
It is
sense.
'How
littleremarkable
double
1
the
of
many
a
that the
Thus
ratio
between
the
are
sides
is
which
square
for doubting that
between
'
PYTHAGORAS
44
continued
It
letters.
their
and
purposes,
Tradition
and
that
another
of
he
the
the
same
he
the
fate
for
of
memory
divulged
side
and
diagonal,
the
the
tion
construc-
where
cases
which
something
for
sea
the
of
one
gorean
Pytha-
at
publishing
is
magical
elsewhere.
drowned
was
This
the
preserved
who
man
of
dodecahedron.
and
Faust,
the
says
for
real
was
important.
It
" 38.
bodies,
intervals
between
the
to
natural
and
Second
of
Part
Plato's
of
question
and
'matter',
central
doctrine
not
much
or
the
to
the
form
of
say
tuning
seemed
is
all
always
Greek
it is
that
of
of
in
some
philosophy
henceforth
string.
to
the
dominated
Eudoxos,
in
the
of
Er
that
there
is
no
but
only
the
law
as
sense
no
myth
the
in
express
'form'
is
appear
word,
the
to
conception
the
yield
of
what
some-
Pythagoreans
They
remember
most
There
than
the
also
the
the
by
older
are
and
sense
our
be
spheres'.
Anaximander.
further
which
intervals,
They
too
in
would
that
Parmenides
must
'harmony'
concordant
world.
We
spheres
the
ing
correspond-
known
the
of
conclusion
of
of
poem
Republic.
the
to
That
octave.
the
to
regarded
as
generally
celestial
he
Anaximander
harmony
wheels
or
the
'the
the
points
rings
the
of
discovery
that
probable
of
the
his
apply
to
doctrine
the
that
everything
retained
wheels
name
believe
to
three
of
explanation
reason
extremely
fifth, and
the
fourth,
Pythagoras
it is
the
misleading
and
for
natural
was
heavenly
in
with
met
afterwards
long
Goethe's
as
story
one
regular
has
tradition
in
incommensurability
the
revealing
it
Hippasos
represented
secrets,
and
with
meet
we
used
be
to
of
correlative
end,
by
the
the
the
to
is the
That
Mean.
very
of
and
idea
it is
of
Ill
and
Herakleitos
Parmenides
HERAKLEITOS
"
It is above
39.
the
feel
to
all in
of
importance
The
philosophy.
in
personality
style of
very
Herakleitos
dealingwith
his
is
made
are
we
shaping
fragments1
for him
that
of
systems
something unique
in Greek
literature,and
'the dark'
oracular
an
of the
and
12)
his
hides
at
meaning,
but
though
B.C.,
the
prophetic
entitled
thought
central
his
it'. Here
signifies
is
possible to disentangle it
when
complete
is
by
This
he
that
means
date
this
family; for
We
get
he
where
they
have
Ph.*
cast
be
For
so
out
none
sqq.
The
to
that
he
the
would
them, and
leave
is best
and
among
authorities
fragments
are
and
the
among
others."
translation
'
his
hang themselves,
to
beardless
There
of
in
of his brother.
the
be
can
any
be
fragments,
numbers.
lads ; for
them, saying,
among
quoted by Bywater's
Basileus
quotation (fr.114)
if there
us;
an
was
hereditary
city to
man
He
dignity of
in the
well
in the
(fr.16), and
in turn
(fr.6).
B.C.
it in favour
do
formulas.
our
him
to
ancient
the
the best
quite
given
his reference
by
fifth century
resigned
Ephesians
have
Xenophanes
politicalattitude
that
is
truth
it is still
big for
too
allude
to
that
Hermodoros,
of
that
ado
The
we
religious office)was
of his
of
elsewhere
references
"" 63
told
'The
man
will have
"We
him
says:
grown
every
are
glimpse
it appears
doubt
no
we
early in
nor
century
more
that
suppose
fixed
roughly
appears
wrote
and
Ephesian noble,
(at
not
is much
He
sixth
respects.
and
utters
to
tense
past
without
in other
must
man.
of Herakleitos
of the
epithet of
influence
the
see
movement
assume
its
from
the
'neither
we
quite simple,
this, we
of the
account
date
The
done
have
we
to
that
by
influenced
was
who
not
are
we
Herakleitos
that
called
been
has
what
God
won
in later times
such, let
no
see
doubt
E.
Gr.
46
HERAKLEITOS
that Herakleitos
was
mass
it
But
had
despised; he
He
he
not
even
In
equal condemnation.
him
along with
think
(withwhom
falls under
himself
fragment (fr.16) he
remarkable
Hesiod, Pythagoras,and
an
tions
men-
Hekataios
an
as
(voov
ov
by which
and
predecessors.
instance
to
sovereign
that Herakleitos
men
good word
of
run
common
with Xenophanes
agrees, of course,
classes Archilochos),but Xenophanes
men
of mankind.
only the
not
was
had
aristocrat and
convinced
are
we
with special
emphasis
rejected
arithmetical discoveries,are
is
(fr.17).Wisdom
understand
to
knowledge of one
which is 'true evermore',
his Word
as
true
(Aoyo?),
propheticstyle,
when
it is told to them
understand
it even
cannot
(fr.
though men
kleitos
endeavour, then, to discover,if we can, what Hera2).We must
meant
by his Word, the thing he felt he had been born to
anyone would listen to him or not.
say, whether
" 40. In the first place,it is plainthat the Word
the
even
theory
had
further
on
of flux is
condensation; and,
even
had
merely
only have
that would
himself,who
It is
at
not
improvement
if it were,
tone
once
that
on
such
in which
in this direction
doctrine
thought.The
an
for the
Herakleitos
of Thales.
water
thing
some-
primarysubstance, or
and
the
Anaximenes,
of rarefaction
as
(navra.pet).If
Flux
advance
substituted
obvious
of
of Fire
substituted
been
the doctrine
than
more
be
must
kleitos
Hera-
must
we
of flux is,no
an
seek
doubt,
singlescientificdiscoveryis
attributed to Herakleitos. That is significant.
Further, everything
it to have been even
told about his cosmology shows
more
are
we
but
great scientificgeneralisation,
than
reactionary
that of
no
Xenophanes
or
hand, though he
the other
124)
be
must
Clement
threatened
of
the contemporary
Alexandria, who
them
uses
the
Orphics, and
we
are
told
by
SOUL
has
Herakleitos
Yet
shade,
or
attribute
but
the
with
common
to
as
thing in
one
47
real
most
was
thing of
the
on
feeble
longera
no
all,and
religious
its
ghost
important
most
Now
(TO cro^oV).
thought (yvc^r?)or wisdom
Anaximenes
had alreadyillustrated the doctrine of 'air' by the
remark that it is breath which keeps us in life ("9),and we
have
how the same
idea affected the Pythagoreancosmology (" 28).
seen
The Delphic precept 'Know
thyselfwas a household word in those
days,and Herakleitos says 'I sought myself (eSt^rjadfJurjv
e/ieowrov,
'You
the
fr. 80).He also said (fr.
find
boundaries
of
cannot
out
71):
was
soul; so deep
it.' If
follow up
the righttrack.
hath
measure
perhapsfind ourselves on
" 41. A glanceat the fragments will
may
Herakleitos
dominated
was
that this
that
see
to
to
life are
lifeand
dry soul
to
souls
to
the advance
with
and
water,
these exhalations
were
no
look
we
is the
same.
way
clear that
same
of the
wet
were
no
are
water,
there could be
fire,
next
at
in
no
turn
to
water'
become
(fr.
and
and fire,
of warmth
further that
see
produced by
there could
exhalations
the macrocosm,
awake, and
processes ; sleepalternates
is fed by the exhalations of
there is
it is
(fr.
74).We
the best'
the former.
death.
moisture, as is shown
due
from
onlyfullyalive when
73).'It is death
(fr.
and
68).Waking
If
of
the advance
of drunkenness
'the
thought of
be understood
a stage between
sleepis really
due
are
that the
we
dry. More
Now
show
hints
Milesian
traditional
and
the
by
these
we
we
shall
be
see
fire ;
no
from
the warmth
the
the
and, if
water.
explanation
the
dry,the
cold and
that it is
the
to make
wrong
'air'.It must
be the
it must
be fire like
to
be
seen
best
which
in the sun,
is lit up
be fire. Pure
afresh every
48
HERAKLEITOS
morning, and
night.It and
in a
fire ignited
traverse
from
dealingwith
not
Darkness
as
they
from
exhalations
due
to
is an
too
partial
exhalation
last remarks
kind. These
scientificman,
heavenlybodies
of basin in which
kept up by
and eclipses
are
total
sort
this fire is
the other
at
of pure
justmasses
are
out
put
science
are
prove we
understood
in Italy.
was
that we
it seems
" 42. But, if fire is the primary form of reality,
had described as
gain a clearer view of what Anaximander
may
had explainedby 'rarefaction
out' ("7),and Anaximenes
'separating
is the key both
and condensation' ("9).The process of combustion
life and
human
to
to
It is
always to be fed by
steadiness of
smoke.
The
and it is always turning into vapour
or
and the
the 'measures' of fuel kindled
the flame depends on
in smoke
'measures' of fire extinguished
remaining constant. Now
fire' (fr.
the world is 'an everliving
20),and therefore there will be
an
unceasingprocess of 'flux'.That will applyto the world at large
rests
and
; for
also
river'
to
the soul of
41),and
(fr.
the same'
way
69) are
(fr.
part
parts, one
Anaximander
Now
the
true
up and
also the
cannot
macrocosm.
two
'You
man.
it is justas
'The
given moment.
and
has
flame
Boundless, and
and
injustice,
what
these
two
at once,
travelling
up
so
ways
that
same
'measures'
the
being traversed
reallyconsists of
everything
are
forever
down.
travelling
held
and
'one
to
seems
are
of fire are
It is justthe fact
its stability
; for
alwaysbeing kindled
and
going out
its nourishment
impossible for fire to consume
time givingback what it has consumed
without at the same
already.
like that of gold for
It is a process of eternal 'exchange'(a/noi/S^)
for gold (fr.
and wares
22); and 'the sun will not exceed his
wares
if he does, the Erinyes,the auxiliaries of Justice,will
measures;
find him out' (fr.
22),not
justice(fr.
29).For all this strifeis really
(fr.20). It
is
FIRE
like that
together,
though it is a
(fr.47). For
AND
FLUX
stringin
of the
the bow
and
45),and
lyre(fr.
the
it is better than
hidden
attunement,
all his
condemnation
from
49
of
the tuned
string.
But, in spiteof all this,it is possiblefor the 'measures' to vary
that from the facts of sleepingand
see
up to a certain point.We
waking, death and life,with which we started,and also from the
and winter. These
correspondingfacts of night and day,summer
fluctuations are due to the processes of evaportionor exhalation
and liquefaction
(xvais)which formed the starting(avadvfjiiaais)
point of all early Ionian physics.Yet these fluctuations exactly
cannot
get away
balance
the 'measures'
one
It appears
to be certain that Herakleitos
the survival of soul in some
form
this periodicity
inferred
exceeded.
not
from
We
see
know
that
that
follows
waking
sleep.In
the
the
the soul
thing in
same
once
us
he
way,
same
more
that is
far
so
Herakleitos,and
know
is the
and
as
we
now
is wisdom.
which
make
can
we
to
seems
have
it out, is the
game
thingto
opposites
is
'beyondgood and
attain wisdom
and the
one
of his own'
is
bad'
to
(fr.
57, 61).Therefore
hold
fast
to
turn
world, but sleepers
same
95).If we
(fr.
keep our
Ionian.
soul is
are
He
as
had
all his
learnt indeed
individual
bear this
world
was
doctrine
the conclusion
of
evaporation
Herakleitos
remains
an
originality,
the importance of soul,but his fire-
seem
we
Soul
interpretation.
waking have
aside,each into
Such
certainly
fragments that
is
'The
all
do to
must
we
the
souls
that
what
'the common'.
of
generalview of
we
other.
or
winter, and
follows
summer
are
to
There
immortalityof the
them, we see they cannot
assert
examine
of Anaximenes.
the
is only immortal
in
so
far
as
it is part
HERAKLEITOS
5O
of the
fire which
everliving
soul of every
is in
man
immortalityhave
can
into the
? It is
instants. That
wish
same
man
too, in his
That
is
to
by
means
not
are
the
argument
an
could
to
he be
the debt?
His wisdom,
theology.
'wills and
things,
we
step twice
cannot
we
for
same
two
pay. How
that contracted
not
that
onlytrue
not
contemporariesmost
of it by puttingit as
did
constant
same
successive
wills not
debtor
liable,seeinghe is
And
which
Herakleitos
is
and
one
is
who
the
not
Ionian,
an
apart from
all
be called
to
say, it is no
God
than the
of
fun
more
Air
of Zeus' (fr.
by the name
65).
the
what
religiousconsciousness
of Anaximenes
the World
or
of
PARMENIDES
" 45.
have
We
the fundamental
side. That
consider
to
now
assumptions of
Parmenides
oppositionto him,
to
Ionian
directed
cosmology
from
after Herakleitos,and
wrote
seems
the criticisms
be
proved by
what
against
another
in conscious
surelybe
must
an
it is and is not
The words 'for whom
express illusion in his poem.
the same
and
the same,
and
all thing?travel in opposite
not
directions'
Salamis.
We
who
was
written
from
wrote
him
addresses
the
to
some
poem
anyone
else,and
we
may
Marathon
time between
that Parmenides
was
to Athens
came
were
know
he
when
man
young
to him
well refer
6, 8),cannot
(fr.
then
B.C.,
as
or
shortlyafter it.Parmenides
was
citizen
of Elea,for which
as
and he is generally
cityhe legislated,
represented
of
It
has
been
disciple Xenophanes.
pointedout, however,
that there is
(" 1 6),and
derived
no
evidence
from
playfulremark
of
Xenophanes
Plato's,which
would
seems
at
Elea
to
be
also prove
PARMENIDES
52
the gate and
the
and
are
journey is
the
palaceof
instructs him
of
way
without
interpreted
by
the
error
represent his
revealed to him. We
must
purely
conventional
of the
canons
former
have
and
error
seen
case,
to
reason
a
originally
Pythagorean, and
suggest that the Way of Belief
any
anything else than
goal of
it is
there
is
an
it
so
manner,
apocalypticstyle.It
had
truth
(night)to
was
cosmology.In
The
Parmenides
welcomes
goddess who
passedfrom
Day.
in
to
of
two
inspirationand
meant
clearly
he had
in the
Belief,in which
be
must
in the realms
of course,
now,
converted, that
been
and
(day),
the Two
the
which
truth
believe
are
account
is
Ways
is
now
that Parmenides
many
of
surelyimpossible to
things which
Pythagorean
regard it as
goddess says
The
error.
descriptionof some
that cannot
be explainedaway. Further, this erroneous
so in words
belief is not the ordinaryman's view of the world, but an elaborate
to be a natural
development of the Ionian
seems
system, which
cosmology on certain lines,and there is no other system but the
Pythagorean that fulfilsthis requirement.
would
have
To this it has been objectedthat Parmenides
not
taken the trouble to expound in detail a system he had altogether
the character of the apocalyptic
but that is to mistake
rejected,
convention.
It is not Parmenides, but the goddess,that expounds
the system,
said
it is for this
and
reason
of the
of the ascent
description
soul would
be quite incomplete without
a
pictureof the region
from which
it had escaped.The goddess must
reveal the two
ways
Parmenides
at the partingof which
stands,and bid him choose the
better. That itself is a Pythagorean idea. It was
symbolisedby the
be traced right down
letter Y, and can
times. The
to Christian
consists,therefore,of two well-known
machinery of the Proem
apocalypticdevices,the Ascent into Heaven, and the Partingof the
himself,his conversion
Ways, and it follows that,for Parmenides
from Pythagoreanism to Truth
the central thing in his poem,
was
and it is from that point of view we
him.
must
try to understand
It is probable too that,if the Pythagoreans
had not been a religious
to
societyas well as a scientificschool,he would have been content
to
are
to
a
languageof religion.
*IS
All the
" 47.
substance
fire,a view
suggestedby
transformations
of
NOT?'
IT
IS
taken
for
the
granted that
observed
the like.Anaximenes
due
as
53
assume
and
evaporation,
OR
had
lonians
could
IT
primary
earth,water, and
phenomena
of
freezing,
these
explained
condensation
("9).That,
had
rarefaction and
to
as
the
further
to
by
the
them,
use
as
we
mind.
The
outside
mass
Now
limits
When
by the 'figures'.
inevitable.
were
put in this way, further questions
the rise of mathematics
in this same
Pythagorean
thingwas
" 48.
immediatelyobvious
not
the boundless
the
it is
now
were
marked
out
of all men
thought.To
the
else than
into
come
could do
what
being;for
so.
it is the
of
is. Nor
there
can
same
can
be
space in which
all at once.
it is now,
Is it or is it not? If it is,then
it
empty
no
of the
originof the
In
world.
be more
Further, if it is,it simply is,and it cannot
or less. There
is,therefore,as much of it in one placeas in another. (That makes
1
foriv
This
re
is how
KO.I
separate
eon.
voelv
Zeller
elvai,and
it still
takes
the
to
'are thinkable'
mean
infinitive
is
ever
the
voelv
cannot
from
subject of
even
in such
PARMENIDES
54
and
rarefaction
indivisible
for
and
is finite
be
empty
the
it
directed
it
and
must
there
be
cannot
is the
sphere
therefore
full,
the
against
in
is
figure
empty
more
any
which
of
it
Also
nothing.
no
direction
one
only
into
move
this
can
said.
What
is
still
and
plenum,
and
being
is, therefore
(TO eoV)
continuous
ceasing
colour
more
thought
are
of
and
'names',
They
not
are
is
so
into
Coming
it.
is, and
and
motion,
thoughts
even
that
something
motionless,
spherical,
beyond
nothing
mere
thought
is
like.
the
and
be
must
there
be
to
finite,
none
for
of
these
real
as
be.
can
"
Such
49.
single
matter,
we
deprives
an
the
which
intelligible
motion
more,
explain
again
as
it
it if
we
is
somehow.
by
are
to
of
all
escape
even
can
early
from
we
be
cosmologists
If
impossible
and
we
conclusions
we
for
must
of
It
reduces
are
certainly
taken
than
Parmenides.
existence,
must
of
subsequent
was
of
that
illusion.
never
the
it
course
to
else
something
No
it. The
(TO edV)
real
reality.
like
an
world,
That
for
of
claim
the
the
from
escape
just
of
of
view
no
room
doctrine
the
the
is
account
hardly
of
account
was
in
know
we
is
this, but
ignore
to
world
his
the
there
find
can
to
permanently
something
to
we
up
afford
acquiesce
to
shut
are
could
system
unless
and,
and
text-books
physical
our
which
to
leads,
inevitably
of
Parmenides
conclusion
is the
body
'matter'
it
and
another,
in
moved,
nothing,
for
spherical;
and
is
its
prevent
reality.)
If it
is
space
is
and
continuous
could
It
(That
discontinuous
is
which
another.
one
it is immoveable.
Further,
itself
but
plenum.
of
theory
Pythagorean
than
with
contact
It
impossible.)
nothing
is
indivisible
continuous
space,
there
in
being
parts
condensation
to
give
introduce
granted
attempt
Parmenides.
any
to
IV
Pluralists
The
"
It
50.
only possible
was
Parmenides
Thales,
be
must
should
given
denied
have
had
which
motion
that
unity. If any
could
only
both
consider, while
world
know
we
of
number
translation
which
does
not
of
One
taken
be
at
pleno
the
days of
quite
tion
assump-
by
once
is
to
were
preciselythe
an
both
meant
they
both
the
the
move,
equal
an
same
that
as
given
of the
for
motion, which
that
be
must
spite of Parmenides,
granted
both
tion
separais
ception
con-
called
Empedokles
his
alphabet',
called
'seeds', but
they
anything else,and
to
the
to
senses
as
something
Empedokles
they
is that
of the motion
source
the former
(vovs).What
'letter of the
perceive with
we
and
elementum
word
irreducible
and
The
one.
be
porary
tem-
of these.
originor
Accordingly,
Anaxagoras
eternal
condition
in
The
till a later
end, agree
of real than
the mixture
to
o-rot^etov,
sense
Parmenidean
without
quite clearlyformed.
things
combinations
explained
Greek
was
something
second
kinds
more
of
'roots',and
held
are
of
in this
and
beginning
explained as due
primary 'elements'.
occur
the
insistingon
be
element
elements
The
and
that there
may
Latin
accepting
maintaining also
Mind
in
that
Parmenides
why
reason
Parmenidean
place was
the
since
explainanything on
not
doctrine
taken
no
belief
it
could
his
place, the
everyone
of
conclusions
would
be nil, and
it
displaced,the result of the motion
be distinguishedfrom
find accordingly that
We
not
rest.
have
to
we
now
Empedokles and Anaxagoras, whose
systems
which
in
the
this. Motion
except
that its
by
was
part of the
mean
first
the
held
There
up.
In
been
from
escape
conditions.
two
on
to
calls Love
were
which
inherent
and
account
some
in
had
the
is
be
to
be
must
been
hitherto
of
nature
body.
of
Anaxagoras postulatecauses
and
Strife,and
feelingafter
was
the
latter calls
obviously
the
B.C.
later
P.
56
PLURALISM
of
it is
times.
recent
fairly
Empedokles
felt
obliged to
It is
to
be observed
two
assume
of
sources
the
or
motion, like the force of attraction and the force of repulsion,
later
forces of
and centrifugal
centripetal
only required a single force which
rotatory motion
rotation. The
was
days,while Anaxagoras
capable of producing
itself could
for
account
everything
else.
Taking
these
things together,we
two
can
the
understand
doctrine which
to
common
must
be different kinds
there
must
be
place,that
a cause
of
of mixture
separation.
EMPEDOKLES
and he
a citizen of Akragas in Sicily,
" 51. Empedokles was
played a considerable part in his native cityas a democratic leader.1
His date is roughly fixed for us by the well-attested fact that he
to Thourioi
went
shortlyafter its foundation in 444/3 B.C. That was
his native city.He
from
was,
probably after his banishment
the meridian
with
splendour of the
therefore, contemporary
Periklean
age
Protagorasat
combined
at
Athens, and
Thourioi.
scientific
References
of the
to
In his
must
case
we
have
met
know
Herodotus
and
authorities
fragments,see
he
are
given
in E. Gr.
Ph.2
"" 97
sqq.
For
translation
EMPEDOKLES
took.
inquiries
We
know
that marks
It
speculations.
57
that
of
Empedokles, though
which
bloody sacrifices,
that between
as
here with
we
religious
teaching
passing his horror of
in
note
may
the
he
His
transmigration.
or
difference
same
later date.
at a
concerned
directly
not
are
is the
of Rebirth
which
siderable
con-
is his
In this matter
he
strictly
philosophical
poem.
imitated Parmenides, as is proved by his sometimes
reproducing
his actual words. The only difference is that he was
real
a
poet, and
so
Parmenides
the
not.
was
has been
As
" 52.
more
doctrine
indicated,Empedokles unreservedlyaccepts
of Parmenides
and
four
respects this
was
put earth
on
fire,air,earth,and water,
"
return
alreadyleftbehind
to
them
air with
co-ordinating
and
body,
and
was
vapour
discoveryby the
was
mist
or
wrong.
This
it
he
did
klepsydraor water-clock.
of
This
water
He
call
we
and in
"
an
be
some
noticed,
advance
by
by
means
showed
could
againstthe
imagine he has a
for
of
two.
Parmenides
can
the
between
from
necessary
He
'roots'. Of
or
Empedokles
hand
to
existence
this
of
direct ception
perhe
to show
experiment with
air could keep water
an
that
the
out
escaped.
air and
importantdiscoveryoutweighs his error in regarding
elements. He had no means
of discovering
as
theywere not.
water
Herakleitos,but here
and
form
empty
the other. He
was
of
conclusions
must
made
time
same
that what
polemic of
plain man
space. The
of this,and
three. It
transitional
on
destruct
in-
it with
water, instead of identifying
quite distinct
from
empty
the
at
as
in fact discovered
and
the other
fire and
regardingit
and
level with
vapour
He had
is' is uncreated
he
these he assumed
to
'what
the Eleatic
had
that
stars
were
must
we
believed
to
only enter
as
hint of the
true
remember
that,so
consist of
fire,it was
the air
nature
not
of fire from
long as
easy
to
the
sun
discern
58
EMPEDOKLES
adoptedthe
Aristotle
four elements
of
Empedokles,
attraction
to
explainthe
((/"iAia)
Love
of different
to account
something called Strife (VCLKOS)
bodies.
for their separation.
as
He speaks of these quitedistinctly
been suggestedby the
The way in which
to have
they act seems
experiment with the klepsydraalreadyreferred to. We start with
something like the sphere of Parmenides, in which the four
forms
of matter, and
elements
mingled in
are
surrounds
of
the
of solution
sort
Strife
sphere on
the
begins to
and
another.
That
one
Strife
while
its centre,
enter
four
the
is clearly
breathing.Empedokles
adaptationof
an
by Love,
and
held, however, that respiration
depended on the systole
Strife
find that,as soon
diastole of the heart,and therefore we
as
also
has
penetratedto
and
Love
is confined
begins.Love
the
the lowest
enters
it. In
air
to
are
expands
the founder
a
The
conceptionof
their
own
does
not
is
proportionas
expelledfrom
and
Strife
occupiesmore
the klepsydrawhen
water
blood
what
the world
to
are
and
Love
and
influenced
analogynaturally
physiological
medical
theoryof the
says
he tells us
in
body.The
of
sphere,
of it,the reverse
the very middle
process
of
and Strife is driven outwards, passing
out
fact,Love
the
of the
to
more
central)part
(ormost
had
school,who
flux and
as
and
is
Love
No
himself,of physiological
origin.
one
to
lated
formu-
the heart.
also,as Empedokles
had observed,
know
in
the very same
force men
bodies playsa part in the life of the great world too. He
to give any mechanical
to have thought it necessary
seem
explanationof
the cosmic
and
systole
diastole. It
was
justthe
lifeof
the world.
" 54.
exist when
world
both
therefore,be
two
(fr.17, 3-5),one
of
perishablethingssuch
Love
and
births and
when
Love
Strife
two
is
are
as
we
know
in the world.
passingsaway
increasingand
only
can
There
of mortal
will,
things
are
the
coming togetherinto one, the other when Strife is re-entering
The
more.
Sphere and the elements are being separatedonce
elements
the particular
alone are everlasting;
thingswe know are
60
EMPEDOKLES
of
sort
worked
focus.
out
have
We
this
no
of
means
singulartheory in
tellinghow Empedokles
detail. We
can
only say that he
and
primarilya physiologist,
was
strong
case
astronomy
was
his
not
point.
the
it is certainly
And
that
that his
physiology,though primitive
favourable
impression.We have seen
and how
he connected
to respiration,
natural,therefore,for him
was
to
and to
(o"(frpovovfjiev),1
In this he departedfrom the
make the heart the central sensorium.
of Kroton, who had discovered the importance
theoryof Alkmaion
but he adopted from him the
of the brain for sense-perception,
of the various senses
by 'pores'or passages (nopai).
explanation
into these.
Sensation was produced by 'effluences' (aTroppoai)
fitting
ascribed to the increasing
action of Strife.
The originof species
was
undifferentiated living
At the beginning of this world there were
the
which
were
graduallydifferentiated,
masses
(ovXofivels
TVTTOL),
mortal
how
fittest surviving.Empedokles also described
beings
Love was
in the periodwhen
gainingthe mastery, and when
arose
everythinghappened in just the oppositeway to what we see in
regard the
blood
world.
our
In
and
separation,
as
that
were
'what
case,
then
think
we
the
with'
limbs
and
organs
first
arose
and men
produced, 'oxen with heads of men
heads of oxen.' This strange pictureof a reversed evolution
have been suggestedby the Egyptian monuments.
possibly
monsters
were
in
that
with
may
ANAXAGORAS
of Klazomenai
is said
by
Aristotle
to
have
His
date is
which
was
(acre/Seta)
Anaxagoras to the accusation for irreligion
brought againsthim. That is usuallysaid to have happened just
1
Plato,Phaedo, 96
References
to
b.
authorities
are
given in
E. Gr. Ph.z
""
120
sqq.
'SEEDS'
61
reallyknow either
have been
of the charge.It must
the date of
about the sun.
We
definite than his speculations
something more
Diagoras,the typicalatheist of those
happen to know that even
days,was not tried for his opinions,but for offences in language
againstthe temples and festivals.1 Perikles got Anaxagoras off in
he founded
and he retired to Lampsakos, where
a
some
way,
PeloponnesianWar,
it or the precisenature
before the
It is
school.
but
we
do
not
remarkable
Sokrates
makes
never
him, though he
meet
was
wrote
"
speaking
fragmentsof
the
that
remain.
his book
Hellenes
in
wrong
are
and
ceasing to be
coming into being (yiveadai)
They oughtto call these 'commixture' (av^iayeoQaC)
(ct77oAAuo-#ai).
and 'decomposition'
(Sia/cpiVecr^at)
(fr.17).That is almost in so
words
the doctrine of Empedokles, with which
Anaxagoras
many
In any case, it is certain
been acquainted.
to have
seems
certainly
account
that he started,like Empedokles, from the Parmenidean
Ionian. We
are
of 'what is'.On the other hand, Anaxagoras was
an
of
had
told that he
been
is correct.
Anaxi-
cosmology that
the
shall be
quite different
from
started
We
philosophyof
of 'the
adherent
an
medical
Medicine
sources.
was
of the time.
dependen
of inEmpedokles, Anaxagoras postulateda plurality
he called 'seeds'. They were
which
elements
not,
Like
on
the
trary,
con-
were
that from
out
bread
of what
These
words
See
the
is
not
and
water
arose
flesh,
hair,veins, 'arteries',2
he
asked
read
certainly
is
'How
preserved
among
hair be
flesh?' (fr.
10).
not
can
Empedokles.
of
Lysias
the
works
not
The
yet known.
the wind-pipe or
(6. 17).
2
The
arteries
trachea
true
distinction
between
were
supposed to contain
sc. dpTrjpia.).
(i-pa^eia,
veins
air and
and
were
arteries
was
connected
with
62
ANAXAGORAS
of
way
the whole.
blood.
The
That
flesh,and
parts of bone
are
blood, and
mean
be minute
must
in bread
particles
were
could
'air'more
or
been
at
cosmology.He
less rarefied
Parmenides.
destroyedby
must
all,an original
plurality
If the world
was
be admitted.
He
not
condensed,
or
for the
part of it would
could
to
be
therefore
in which
world
explained
tuted
substi-
'allthings
quantityand in
that the original
mass
in
far division
was
smallwas
carried,every
'things'
(xp^ara), and would in
that respect be justlike the whole. That is the very oppositeof the
doctrine of 'elements',
which
to be expresslydenied
seems
by the
dictum
that 'the thingsthat are
world
in one
not
are
separated
from one
another or cut off with a hatchet' (fr.
8).Everything has
of everythingelse in it.
'portions'
(/notpat)
But if that
world
stillcontain
all
all,we should be
than before; for there would
'seed' from
were
another.
The
answer
to
of the
explanation
one
nothing to distinguish
no
nearer
be
an
this is
of everythingin it,however
'portion'
have more
of another. This was
of one
some
thingand others more
where
'all
undifferentiated mass
to be seen
alreadyin the original
thingswere together'
; for there the portionsof air and 'aether' (by
than
which word Anaxagoras means
far more
numerous
were
fire)
the
'aether'.
Anaxagoras could
not
had
say it
the appearance
was
actually
of air and
air,as Anaxi-
63
MIND
had
menes
Empedokles the
from
have
air. We
as
We
know
we
the
which
it has
littleas
departas
is nevertheless
" 59.
most
used
this. He
for himself
inflated skins
possiblefrom
learned
or
for the
the doctrine
The
purpose.
of Anaximenes
apparent.
see,
it
are
be
discovered
corporealexistence of atmospheric
the experiments by which
he
to
separate
references
some
demonstrated
effort to
he had
done, because
the white
well
as
far exceeds
so
as
white,1but
the black.
As
call it white
we
natural,the
was
'things'
Anaxagoras chieflythought of as contained in each 'seed'
the traditional opposites,
hot and cold, wet
and dry, and so
were
forth. It is of these he is expressly
speakingwhen he says that 'the
thingsin one world are not cut off from one another with a hatchet'
a 'root'
8).Empedokles had made each of these four opposites
(fr.
by itself;each of the 'seeds' of Anaxagoras contains them all. In
this way he thought he could explainnutrition and growth ; for it is
of 'seeds' might present quite
clear that the product of a number
than any one
of them if they
a different proportionof the opposites
taken severally.
were
of motion, still
" 60. The other problem, that of the source
remains.
How
things were
we
to
Empedokles,Anaxagoras looked
as
to
the
of
source
in
Empedokles had
we
reality
the microcosm
to
of the world
state
for
(vovs)',
us.
He
know?
for
such
one
suggestion
and
this is what
knowing and
things and
between
of
not
however, succeed
cause
any more
of motion
is
separates and
than
a
sort
all,it
animate
the
of
source
Like
incorporealforce
an
all
sufficient
source
that is the
did not,
when
orders
),which
and
the
no
inanimate.
The
way
in which
it
Sextus,Pyrrh. hypot. i.
33.
64
ANAXAGORAS
further. That
Plato makes
Phaedo
deiis
Ionian
true
he
tried
rest
give
to
mechanical
had
complain
machina
ex
Sokrates
he
once
order the
to
and
of Anaximenes
had
to
the
moon.
his
struck
have
in
directed
been
invisible
to
disc. That
to
us
probably connected
is
That
to
regarded it as
dark bodies
assume
seems
sphere.In
was
contemporariesmost.
the doctrine
the
being so, he
for eclipses
of
theory which
His
attention
account
with
to
had
which
stone
way to the huge meteoric
to him
in 468/7 B.C., and this suggested
some
fell
that
Aigospotamos
portionsof the earth might be detached and flungto a distance as
been far more
from a slingby the rotatory motion. That had once
of red-hot
rapid than it is now, and so the sun, which was a mass
which
and the moon,
iron 'largerthan the Peloponnesos,'
was
their present places.All this seems
made
of earth, had reached
retrogradeenough when we compare it with Pythagorean science.
could never
That was
reallyassimilate. Even
a thing the lonians
as
Demokritos
Anaxagoras,
was
nearlyas backward in these matters
and Aristotle himself could not grasp the Pythagoreanconception
into the
completely.
" 62. Though
as
the
also
mixed
are
in the
of mixture
causes
which
sense
the
to
seems
motion
call him
Empedokles
with
which
to
'god'.In
in which
have
that
the founder
we
are
now
continued
taken
the step of
sense
and
of theism.
On
to
Strife
the four
elements
call them
all 'gods'
they were
to
and
Love
distinguished
separationfrom
he
separated,
and
Sphere
and
had
that
all mixed
goras
Anaxatogether.
source
of
incorrect
to
callingonly the
extent
the other
name
it is
not
hand, it seems
to
have
65
RELIGION
been
atheist.
of
lead
his
his
In
desire
though
we
charge
was
that
his
still
were
The
secular
spirit
in
of
may
of
the
have
solar
the
that
lonians,
their
Sun
the
or
say
and
mentioned
him,
whether
that
quite
the
Perikles
conceivable
religious
bilities
suscepti-
ceremonies
ridiculing
by
else,
which
eyes.1
and
Moon
ridiculed
eclipse
it is
the
against
to,
and
offended
Athenians
brought
only
an
followed
usually
are
can
him
everything
referred
We
have
may
old-fashioned
sacred
of
of
irreligion
not.
or
circle
worship
Anaxagoras
occasion
founded
well
immediate
of
what
now
moon
have
to
seems
divinity
the
of
charge
tell
cannot
the
shared
the
he
the
and
sun
called
contemporaries
Nous,
denying
the
with
his
exalt
in
about
connexion
that
to
Xenophanes
statements
in
this
for
precisely
of
the
463
B.C.
was
no
measures
That,
part
of
Athenian
prescribed
no
doubt,
by
would
but
religion,
the
efjjy^rai
on
the
Eleatics and
Pythagoreans
ZENO
" 63.
from
have
We
and
Pythagoreanism,
the
support
teaching
he
twenty-five years
was
just after
Athens
admirably
Zeno
'heard'
which
well
also appears
He
Zeno.
by
to
out,
him
that
showing
least
at
that
Plato
from
and
was
visit
to
B.C.
statement
that
also
the
and
as
Zeno
he
that
his celebrated
on
the
Parmenides,
than
to
intended
was
consequences
further
learn
According
man,
young
revolt
its detailed
with
Perikles
accounts
Protagoras.
as
have
to
was
things are
Anaxagoras,
as
Zeno
represent
well-authenticated
the
as
was
accompanied
the middle
with
'if
younger
he
old when
fortyyears
consider
Parmenides
of
to
now
great critic
when
have
we
The
originatedin
Eleaticism
how
("46)
seen
A
of Zeno's
is cited by the title,
that a work
significant
^Xoao^ovs} ; for there is reason
Reply to the Philosophers(IlposTOVS
meant
that in these days 'philosopher'
Pythagorean. At
to believe
It is
" 64.
any
rate, it is
against the
understood.
can
be
was
simply
that
that
the
suppose
we
should
terminated
things
are
be
unit
in
Pythagoreans
able
to
Farm.
References
128
far
so
this it
say
straightline, and
that
many,
an
of Zeno
arguments
as
directed
is
to
to
how
as
it is
ought
have
many
further
the
'unit
said
in
so
points
that
having position'
follow, though
to
all
authorities
are
given
in E.
Gr.
so
there
words,
in
are
""155
need
we
many
magnitudes
Ph.2
differs
point only
c.
to
say
arithmetical
the
regard the
we
assumption
of units'
'multitude
from
if
only
sqq.
must
given
be
68
ZENO
of
infinite number
(2)Achilles
the point at
littleway
so
on
given moment
The
rest.
at
itself with
thing repeats
same
finite time.
he
comes
to
up
the tortoise
The
on.
and
way,
which
impossible in
overtake
never
can
that is
points,and
got
this little
regard to
is at rest. At any
(3) The flyingarrow
infinitum.
it is in a space equal to its own
length,and therefore
ad
of
sum
of
infinite number
an
positionsof
is
rest
not
motion.
the other
two
the
the number
twice
time
point of
interpreter's
and
time
C that it passes
this last argument
is the
view
against the
of all. If it is directed
points
points in
of
of moments,
sum
of these
reductio ad absurdum
that
view
it is
the
same
the
in A. From
important
most
of
perfectlylegitimate
views, otherwise
it has
meaning
no
at
all.
The
" 66.
that the
and
integers,but
other
no
fractions
such
of number
nature
series of
unknown
was
it for the
and
it was
only in
take
to
and
space
time
be
units
them.
the
What
consist
cannot
points or
with
the
of the
of
in the
shortest
series of natural
at
prove
which
continuum
or,
is that
selves
them-
out
what
than
there
to
comes
of
the
points on
more
lapse of time,
numbers,
later
cannot
constructed
be
must
as
number,
made
was
moments
continuum
effort
actuallydoes
Zeno
of
instance, as
or
homogeneous
line,more
for
treat
we
Still harder
another.1
integerto
regard a surd,
Academy that an
magnitude,
He
members
rational
suggested.Even
yet been
to
largerview.
have
had
ratios of
Greeks
valid
are
Greek
to
expressedas
are
date
on
of number
view
are
of Zeno
arguments
are
the
is infinitely
divisible,
thing, that, though every continuum
infinite divisibility
is not an adequate criterion of continuity.2
That,
same
an
was
to
ad
argumentum
prove.
We
know
homines, and
as
from
such
it is
entirely
successful.
1
Cf
e.g. the
take
this
ij/itoAio?
Ao'yo?3
way
of
and
stating the
the emrpiros
from
matter
Xo-yos4:3Prof.
A.
Ethics.
E.
Taylor's
article
69
MELISSOS
MELISSOS
of the
that the next
It is very significant
representative
the
As a result of the Persian wars,
Eleatic doctrine is a Samian.
" 67.
Italic and
their
Ionic
common
Anaxagoras
himself
had come
into
philosophies
meeting-groundwas Athens.
some
Melissos
men
Sokrates
alreadyin
was
foughtagainst
know
Perikles in 441 B.C. We
nothingelse about him. We
acquaintedwith Eleaticism at
guess that he had become
and
we
can
due
to
'the
see
had
his 'teens.
fleet that
of the Samian
in command
was
and
Empedokles
colonisation of
part in the Athenian
themselves Athenians, but they
were
took
and
disciples,
had Athenian
and
more,
visited Athens
to
Both
once
of Parmenides, who
influence
the
under
came
contact
he introduced
philosophyof Anaximenes',
only
can
Athens,
into it
were
still survived
which
in
Ionia.
" 68.
main
The
of Melissos
arguments
that
except
great innovation
instead of making it
they are
His
that
was
much
be limited
by empty
there
reason
same
of
can
such
an
argument. He
it
empty
no
no
for Parmenides.
was
had, however,
reason
held it to be
that Melissos
made
as
corporeal,
course,
sometimes
a
cogent
more
of Parmenides,
finite
from
spatialinfinity
language that might suggest
a
just those
are
The
statement
is based
incorporeal
on
misunderstanding.1
There
own
can
day
as
be
no
the most
doubt
that Melissos
looked
upon
in his
of Eleaticism,and
representative
objectof specialaversion to the writer
advanced
of the
was
Hippokrateantreatise
on
The
Nature
of Man,
while
Plato
Sokrates
the formula
of
Atomism,
as
1
we
E. Gr.
" 169.
Melissos
it
rejected
THE
70
Leukippos to
THE
is certain that
PYTHAGOREANS
had a
already("27) that the Pythagoreans
of adaptingtheir theories to new
conditions,and it
to give
time or other they felt called upon
at some
of the
account
LATER
for
said
It has been
singular
power
an
that,too, he
In
space.
preparedthe
" 69.
of empty
the existence
denied
he
because
PYTHAGOREANS
LATER
of elements
doctrine
new
in
of their
terms
own
who lived
system. It is probablethat this was the work of Philolaos,
towards the end of the fifth century B.C., but returned to
at Thebes
selves
themsafe for Pythagoreans
to show
South Italyas soon
as it was
in those
parts
(Tarentum) was
more
of it when
I
Archytas.For reasons
have
fragments which
Philolaos
some
as
to
come
of the
seat
have
consider
school, and
down
hints
as
to
the
shall hear
we
to
us
regard the
cannot
the
under
development
of
of
name
old and
valuable
Taras
given elsewhere,I
come
forward
that time
From
more.
chief
the
we
once
contain
Pythagorean
doctrine.1
most
remarkable
feature
of later
Pythagoreanismis
of Aristoxenos
in their
day
and
Dikaiarchos,but it must
scientific Pythagoreanismhad
ceased
be
to
older; for
exist. The
a
Hippasos of Metapontion was guiltyof publishing
mystic discourse 'with the view of misrepresentingPythagoras'2
later date no
must
go back to this generationof the school ; for at a
would
have any interest in making it. A book by Hippasos
one
existed ; for Aristotle is able to state that he made
almost certainly
like Herakleitos. That agrees very well with
fire the first principle
what we
infer as to the earliest Pythagoreancosmology. There
can
all sorts of stories about this Hippasos,who is said to have been
are
then
drowned
at sea or to have been expelledfrom the order,which
the story was
dead. Finally,
made
for him as if he were
a sepulchre
statement
that
1E.
Gr.Ph.*"" itfsqq.
Diog. viii. 7 TOV Be MVOTIKOV
Uv6ay6pov.
2
Xoyov
'Imrdaov
elvai
.
eVi
yeypaju.jueVov
PHILOLAOS
71
grade.It
is
impossible,of
from
there
was
real
Pythagoreans
the leader
representedas
was
for
course,
we
are,
strugglebetwreen
us
gradesin
two
held
and
of the
truth
disentangle
to
think,entitled
those who
the
to
infer that
the
Pythagorist
attached
themselves
the
to
exclusively
scientific side of the doctrine. In the fourth century the Pythagorean
scientific school expired and its place was
taken by the
the other hand, maintained
on
Academy ; the Pythagoristreligion,
its existence even
from
the fragmentsof the
later,as we know
a
religionand
comic
those
who
poets.
The
" 71.
there
is
discovered
belongedto
hot and
The
The
enough.
in
that school
that
believing
that is natural
London
the
was
fragmentof
its
'elements',
itself
(aroix^ov)
the author of the theory,
Menon's
latrika recently
name
depended
cold,wet
medical
on
and
dry,with
Pythagoreanshad
somehow,
Pythagoreanism is
Empedoklean
for
reason
at
originated
he
to
find
to
though they
of
'opposites',
Empedokles.1
room
continued
in their tem
sysresist the doctrine that
to
some
the
constructions
must
belong
to
later date
than
Philolaos.
The
" 72.
Pythagoreans appear
like numbers
were
and
later
here
shall
we
rather
The
hot and
Philistion
that
have
said that
they actuallywere
cold,wet
quotes
and
dry
the
are
doctrine
in both
things
numbers,
criticism. Aristotle
and
than
to
Zeno's
forms, and
he
in Uepl dpxairjs
spoken of as etSij
laTpiKrjs
15,
iSe'ai(E. Gr. Ph.2 p. 235, n. 2).
hardlyseems
to
Further, he
ideas'
PYTHAGOREANS
LATER
THE
72
them.
of any great difference between
is usuallycalled the Platonic 'theoryof
be conscious
treats
what
identical
practically
as
with
of
form
some
Pythagoreanism.
later;for the
questionswe shall have to
present, it will be enough to consider what the later Pythagoreans
instead of
'like numbers'
by saying things were
probablymeant
So far as we
numbers.
can
were
see, it
saying that they actually
of the
have been something like this. For the construction
must
elements we
require,not merely groups of 'units having position',
of forming
but plane surfaces limited by lines and capablein turn
raises
That
the
built
of
out
up
with
deal
points or
of which
trianglesout
had
Zeno
the
that lines
shown
units, and
the
therefore
are
'figures'
constructed
be
cannot
elementary
be
cannot
numbers.
The fateful doctrine of two
worlds, the
triangular
in fact originatedfrom
world of thought and the world of sense,
of number
of reconcilingthe nature
the apparent impossibility
of the
with
to
to
common
was
the
limited
un-
something
to
not
You
may
go
process of becoming (yeVecri?).
of a square as long as you
and the diagonal
come
There
it,or
of thought,and it was
resist the power
but was
have true reality
at best
(ouo-ia),
called
measure,
though
you
are
on
bisectingthe side
it.
" 73.
with
the
The
are
'figures'
(et'S^)
numbers, but
as
now
regarded,then, not
likenesses of
them, and
we
as
identical
shall
not
be
tion
complete identificahad been given up, an
made
to explain other
attempt was
that is
thingsthan the elements in this way. According to Aristotle,
to
on
exactlywhat happened. The Pythagoreans went
say that
of
number, and to give similar accounts
a
justicewas
square
and the like. They only gave a few such
marriage,opportunity,
surprisedto
find
that,once
the demand
*Cf.p.55,".i.
for
FORMS
THE
73
definitions,
however, and Aristotle observes
piece of
valuable
most
numbers
between
likenesses
superficial
mere
on
he
information
based
they were
and things.The
is that Eurytos, a
that
givesus
black,and others
down, he took 250 counters, some
green and some
red, and all sorts of other colours,and then, smearing the wall with
it a
plasterand sketchingon
of the
some
and
hands
in number
in that of other
some
to
he had
man
in that of the
face,some
parts, and
imaged by
fix
plant,he proceededto
counters
outline of the
and
man
so
he
of
number
completed the
counters
equal
forms, and
Plato
saying that
at
and
of
ocean
nonsense
to
it is
such
an
on
between
form
Academy
Pythagorean origin.Proklos
commentaries
Plato,some
of which
he
Eurytos gave
as
went
back
are:
'The
Pythagoreans,
too, had
as
the
the
in all
it. It
was
question
in the
ancient
the
earlydays
originalform of
to
attributes the
Academy, and
distinctly
theory to the Pythagoreans and its elaboration
His words
means.
and
doctrine in
well read
an
seems
even
the Platonic
that the
was
that
he
of the
the
extravagant
into
falling
what
theoryof ideas',and
theory,which
of the
see
given up
regardsall this
that Aristotle
the differences
of the
fear of
fire,
man,
as
for
call 'the
minimise
assume
forms
quite clear
we
Pythagorean form
cases
have
(130 c-d) as
thoughtsuch thingsas
from
everything
^AuaptW).We now
(fivOos
originof what
anxious
he had
findingforms
Nevertheless
was
time
one
the idea of
in the Parmenides
represents him
to
Sokrates.
THE
74
Plato himself
and
in honour
we
of
men
Sokrates
it was
above
Italyfriends of
all that held the
explicitly
postulatedthem.'1
most
this when
to
return
wise
by callingthe
(Soph.248 a).But
the forms
forms
that
shows
PLANET
EARTH
to
come
shall
We
it is
sufficient
To
" 74.
the
could
that Proklos
point out
to
of
generation
same
the school
remarkable
belongsa
is
in
advance
a Central
Fire,round
postulated
all revolved.
properlyobserved
is the
which
the moon,
by
the naked
It follows
little as
as
there
we
was
is invisible
can
also
to
us
see
body
we
on
body
eclipsesof
the
seems
moon.
for them
can
side of the
The
all,and
it is between
have
to
Fire
the
just
In this system
which
(avrixBaiv),
the earth
of the
shadow
face
same
moon.
assumed
been
the
the Central
see
to
the
because
us
naturally
explainedon the
only heavenly body that can be
the earth
the other
because
Fire. This
account
that
to
planets
was
face to
always presents the same
and the planets,
includingthe earth,all turned
centre.
and
moon,
invisible
was
heavenly bodies
analogy of
Fire
Central
This
the sun,
which
the Central
and
in order
earth did
not
to
explain
seem
another
to
was
that this
moon
required.It will be seen
shines by lightreflected from the Central Fire, and it is not surprising
that the same
explanationshould have been given of the
The
whole
sun's light.
cosmology of this perioddepends, in fact,
the extension
on
of the observed
facts
regardingthe
moon
to
other
bodies.
remarkable
thing in the Pythagorean
" 75. Perhaps the most
doctrine of this generationis that the soul has come
to be regarded
is the belief exof the body. That
'attunement'
pounded
as
an
(ap^ovLa.}
discipleof Philolaos,in the
by Simmias, the Theban
1
r"ov
ev
Proclus
et'Stovdeaipia,
/cat
'/raAi'a
ev
VI
Leukippos
first
The
" 76.
founder
of Atomism
of Thales.1
Demokritos.
been
his
disciple. Indeed
and
it is
such
in
of the
out
of
Miletos
of
or
particular,of
know
we
had
been
Zeno.
We
shall
origin
probability that
influence
at
was
well
does
he
was
; for
Athens
known
not
the
if he
had
of the
account
to
so
give
little
him,St
of
of Plato
in default
it
arose.
gives
about
known
originatedin
impossibility
of
with
the
likelythat
not
to
appear
all
some
under
come
have
it
been
Plato, in particular,
it would
certainly
the Eleatic
multiplicity
than
in the
denial
and
chief
our
as
appears
statement
atomism
is
perfectly clear
It almost
strictlyhistorical
more
was
way
in
by
out
infer
It is
of Aristotle.
it, though
the
on
Eleatics, and,
had
not
of
native
have
it.
known
atomism,
does
points.
based
may
who
theory
to
we
decieved
was
fully borne
elsewhere.
or
time
allude
to
appear
Elea
atomic
till the
there
him
at
doctrine, and
the
is
this
that
see
phrastos
Theo-
theory,
certain
on
of
and
on
distinguished the
is doubtless
disciple
though
been
Leukippos
view
famous
atomic
have
of Demokritos
Milesian
of Parmenides
interested
the
of his
of the
of
have
to
more
Aristotle
should
whether
works
denied,
Theophrastos
latter
he
of the
they
as
that
The
Elea.
that
statement
that
uncertain
was
real author
the
hi^ book
seems
of his
that
that
as
from
from
It is certain
especially
Leukippos
Theophrastos
him
Theophrastos
the
question
collected
the
been
question
matter,
teaching
regarded
in
the
life,and
his
has
existence
very
about
to
teaching
his
Leukippos,
with
reallyanswered
nothing
to
subsequent
distinguish
to
he that
incorporated
writer
No
able
next
ends
story
our
it was
been
have
to
appears
; for
know
We
of
part
motion
and
if he
intelligible
were
usual
Academy.
of the
authority on
just because
According
void, from
had
anxious
been
which
to
the
deduced.
ATOMS
Leukippos supposed
would
AND
himself
THE
VOID
have
to
77
discovered
theory which
avoid
this consequence.
He admitted
that there could be
if there was
void, and he inferred that it was wrong
no
motion
identifythe
void with
the Parmenidean
is justas much
sense
words, Leukippos
What
is
what
as
he
doing,the
was
to
not
is
was
of what
consciousness
the non-existent.
no
affirm,with
of empty
existence
full
space.
The
words, there
was
of empty
assumption
was
empty
no
an
space
in
'full'(vaarov),
or,
was
it,but it was
it
not
one.
possibleto
reals,invisible
because
one
that for
to
the
held
as
reductio ad absurdum
it,and made
" 78.
be such
must
The
atoms
of
itthe foundation
of the
nature
atoms
one
another. There
conceptionto
we
that Demokritos
shall see,
is
need
no
the
have
place,we
evidence
of his
own
in the 'natural
1
The
Aristotelian
to
or
end
derivation
vindicate
of Atomism
from
Eleaticism
has
been
contested,
It is true, of course,
that the Milesian
Leukippos
the old Ionic cosmology7,and, in particular,to save
was
as
he could. So was
as
Anaxagoras (" 61).
'philosophy of Anaximenes'
tinctly
That, however, has no bearing on the point at issue. Theophrastos stated disthat Leukippos had been a member
of the school of Parmenides
and Zeno.
2
Cic. de Finibus,i. 17 ; Diog. Laert. ix. 44.
much
of the
was
pointof
theory of absolute weight and lightnessresulting
of the elements
motions'
upwards or downwards,
especiallyby Gomperz.
concerned
to
earlyatomists. In the
regardweightas a primary
said there
ascribed
by Leukippos
a
Epicureans
downwards
fallingeternally
through
it very hard for them to explainhow
discussed. At
intended
of his system.
are
as
be. He
motion
original
to
78
LEUKIPPOS
as
case
directions,and
shall
we
of the worlds.
formation
atoms
of the soul
hither
and
to
see
that of the
the
same
which
there
is
dart
wind,1
no
of
motion
regardedthe original
that he
we
when
even
of the
motions
in the sunbeam
motes
for the
will account
compared the
Demokritos
assume
fairly
may
in much
the other atoms
and
the
way.
not
are
mathematicallyindivisible like the
" 79. The atoms
indivisible because
Pythagorean monads, but they are physically
there is no empty
then, there is no
space in them. Theoretically,
why
reason
should
atom
an
atom
would
be much
the
were
it
for the
empty
not
worlds. As
does
is
not
for
be
as
thingas
same
largeas
the
outside
space
it and
Such
world.
an
of
Parmenides,
the
of
plurality
are
invisible. That
an
that
msibile.
minimum
of
Sphere
of course,
mean,
room
of
matter
not
and
atoms
their
combinations, but he
from
explained,
be
Epicurus
and
of
excess
magnitude.2It
early atomists
Aristotle.
than
even
far
were
The
more
scientific than
conception of
of
is reallyone
The
differences
"(i)arrangement
illustration from
1
2
and
and
between
(2)
groups
position.It is
Aristotle,
deAnima, 403 b, 31.
be no question of mass;
There
can
each
atom
is a continuum.
of
not
atoms
of
"f"vois
absolute
the
the
Greek
due
are
clear whether
all the
atoms
most
of it,while
alphabet quoted by
for the
that
will be observed
to
the
Aristotle
is
identical,
ATOMISM
AND
PYTHAGOREANISM
79
in any
was
the
of the word
use
found
in
in the
crrotxetov
Plato, who,
believe,knew
as
of
sense
for
satisfactorily
nothing of
that may
be, the pointsof resemblance
were
goreanism and Atomism
alreadynoted by
However
had
direct
unless
not
how
see
regardthe
called the
between
Pythahe
Aristotle,and
we
meaning
or
numbers', and, in
'figurate
Demokritos
Atomism.
the
knowledgeon
make
he says, 'virtually
numbers.'
I do
from
it is
case
this
statement
have
can
Pythagoreannumbers
any
patterns
as
that
striking
'forms' (t'Se'ai).
The void
or
'figures'
is also a Pythagoreanconception,though,as we
have seen, it was
before Leukippos. It is hardly,
not formulated with precision
then,
much
to say that the atoms
too
are
Pythagoreanmonads endowed
with
propertiesof
the
which
arise from
atoms
are,
rate,
to
gladifhe
" Si.
Parmenidean
the various
so
seems
atoms
had
himself
explained
fully.
more
The
retarded,not
of the
atoms
is that the
larger
because they
because
but
they are 'heavy',
atoms
more
are
exposed to impact than the smaller. In particular,
of an irregular
shape become entangledwith one another and form
stillmore
are
exposed to impact and consequent
groups of atoms, which
atoms
are
retardation. The
motions
hand, preserve their original
for
acts
best,and these
of which
grantedthat
it so
upon
as
an
to
originalmotion
retard it or
appeared incredible,and
established
on
the
firm basis
will
had
truth
the other
on
the
are
atoms
that it is simplytaken
persistunless something
bringit to
by
atoms,
to
Galileo and
stop. To
be
Aristotle that
rediscovered
Newton.
It
was
and
really
that
now
conclusion
it was
rest
Leukippos
and
had
not
discovered
of
Parmenides, it was
an
infinitevoid in which
older view.
" 82.
In
countless
another
an
infinite number
of
atoms
of
one
upon
of places
8o
LEUKIPPOS
where
this
is
set
up
the beginning of
have
happens, we
ascribe
motion
vortex
chance,
by
their
impact. When
world.
later writers
It is
not
this
correct
to
do. It follows
necessarily
from the presuppositions
of the system. The
fragment of
solitary
Leukippos we possess is to the effect that 'Naught happens for
and of necessity'.
It
nothing,but all thingsfrom a ground (Ao'yo?)
will be observed
that the vortex
theory is derived from that of
Anaxagoras ("60),which in turn was a development of the older
Ionic doctrine. So far we
that Leukippos was
see
a Milesian, but
he has thought the matter
much
than his preout
more
carefully
decessor.
Anaxagoras had supposed that the analogy of a sling
would
apply, and that the larger or 'heavier' bodies 'would,
to
therefore,be
to
the
furthest
which
is not
been
formed.
of bodies
He
in
therefore
looked
eddy
of wind
an
from
distance
left
Leukippos
case
driven
as
the
as
altogether,
when
rather
or
the
to
water,
and
property
has
already
happens in the
vortex
what
centre.
he
that the
saw
must
motion
therefore
the
centre
offer
than
centre.
resistance
more
the
vortex
where
out
towards
To
to
vortex
come
to
(avrepeims)
to
motion.
the motion
impacts in
this,we
in contact
those within
smaller,simply because
the circumference,
understand
exposed
more
neutralise the
the
parts is communicated
outermost
largerbodies
to
forced
with one
(eTTLifjavaLs)
of the
are
them.
The
cated
this communi-
they are
largerand
different directions
which
In this way
they make their way
is least,
while the smaller bodies
to
are
where
it is greatest. That
squeezed out towards the circumference
is the explanationof weight,which
but
is not an 'occult quality',
arises from purelymechanical
causes.
find that Leukippos showed
to details,
we
we
come
" 84. When
THE
8l
VORTEX
himself
off the
better. It
his
Ionian.
true
Eleatic teachers
His
was
fellow-citizen
distinguished
know
doubtless
of his system
turn
give him
not
the theories of
to
Anaximenes,
him
warned
and
the
little
we
done
have
south
shows
was
less able
to
support
theoryof
it. In
fact,the Atomists
therefore
the Pythagorean
rejected
the earth
that
the
centre
was
of the
spherical
shape.
" 85. It is not
the
universe, it
worth
while
never
follow
to
him
to
occurs
to
in detail the
doubt
its
of
application
atomic
planation
theoryto particularphenomena, and the atomic exof sensation and knowledge will be better kept till we
it was
to Demokritos, to whom
due. All we need say
come
chiefly
further here is that Leukipposhas answered
the questionof Thales
in the
in which
sense
these
possibleon
was
Thales
had
asked
lines. Before
it,and
that could
how
that
further
no
take
place it was
kindred
lems
prob-
the
to
advance
shall
see
in the
next
cal
completenessof the mechanibeen given broughtscience
theory of the world which
it also provoked a revolt against
to a standstill for a time, and
from specialists
in the particular
cosmology.On one side that came
sciences,especially
medicine, who disliked the sweeping generalisations
of the cosmologists,and maintained
the right of each
science to deal with its own
province.The Hippokratean treatise
about. The
came
very
had now
on
Ancient
on
experienceand observation,as
medical
Medicine
(by which
of the school
theories
best evidence
of this. On
science which
proceeded from
life.How
is
by
the
art
contrasted
of
the other
side,there
? Those
theory of knowledgeand
based
new-fangled
others)is the
and
was
revolt
chief interest
thingsare
us
of medicine
with the
Empedokles
whose
men
meant
against
in tical
pracand
even
true, they said,
can
only
questions
theoryof conduct.
two
a
was
VII
The
Sophists
"
86.
have
We
reconstruction.
Science
and
intelligible,
the
the
to
evidence
science
say about
as
truer
is said
can
be?
to
fundamental
some
right
and
at
thing
In the
unlikelythat
as
that
of
any
the
nations, Hellenic
themselves
knowledge
and
should
antithesis,that of
latter
term
knowledge.
same.
The
do
This
the
legislativeactivityof
regularityof
than
law
the
and
human
even
custom,
that
but
It is
law
of
the
truth
have
as
have
Such
nature.
one
surely just
barbarian, should
or
and
them
in
only agree
possess
were
vated
culti-
to
B.C.
difficulties
of
the
two
Law
term
the
the
which
felt
were
summed
been
problems
as
to
in the
up
evidently
was
nature.
world
been
far
Man
around
him
due
In
to
be
to
the
the
great
early days
the
clearlyapprehended
more
lived
felt
were
preceding centuries.
life had
course
realityin
of
nature
shows
of
use
wrong.
should
is
there
and
law (vd/xo?),
though the
(fivais)
primarilywith conduct and the former with
same
to
sense
as
true
both
we
ing,
think-
that
are
of science
misleading
can
conduct
has
the
have
must
then,
of human
assumption
are
schools
world
this
not
fundamental
no
world
the
the world
as
we
schools
all other
significantthat
It is very
is
not
and
flat contradiction
was
way
in the middle
men
is
foul, vary
the
that
thoughts
on
of these
among
make
product
the
any
the
established
same
that
namely,
"
is
It is very
there
cityto city,so
rate.
any
that?
fair and
wrong,
from
even
for
we
it
regard
thought
proceeds
to
realityin
we
which
reality("/"u'cn?)
have
guarantee
should
all,that world
Science
breakdown
altogether.What,
one
tell that
we
of
Apparently
senses.
of
all it could
view
? Why
it? After
how
was
period
done
another
this world
than
and
the
but
explained
to
had
result
of
consider
to
now
NATURE
AND
LAW
in
charmed
still seemed
circle of
lawless.
86
LAW
much
So
observed,
be
to
this
was
better
a word
Justice(BLKITJ),
that
guided
the
encroachment
measures'
whose
could
of
not
be
things.It
have
been
of
could
be found
for it than
have
the
that
seen
element
one
Right,
that
of laws
accepted in
sun
drawn
Zaleukos,
or
clearlysomething 'made',
was
otherwise
made
made
not
or
spoke of
'injustice'
("6),
as
at
human
Charondas,
part of the
as
custom
Anaximander
up
a
began
Right or
nature
unchanging
another
on
the
keep
code
known,
was
regularcourse
Herakleitos, it is the
to
("42). But
name
the
properly meant
life.We
of
of
handmaids
name
which
human
and, according
NATURE
that, when
so
no
AND
and
lawgiver
everlastingorder
it might
all.A
Solon,
or
well
just as
had
generationthat
seen
in the
have
some
in his work.
of
mouthpiece
which
to
it is
moralityand
be so, but
feelingwhich
to
detect
his
proof he
laughed at
were
to
can
is
as
it is just as
representativeof
we
were
those
of their
madman
each
Whence
Herod,
meant
'text'
nation.'
own
would
saying that
'Law
laugh
at
So
such
'it is
of
set
In any
old-fashioned
of
nations
before
likelythat
things',and Pindar
if his
as
all
men
all the
all,would
not
for
Protagoras.
from
(vo^oi)
them
case,
King Cambyses
of other
to
time, and
his respect
that
the madness
the
at
form.
another
customs
he is the
that
likely
scepticism,just like
give of
of Protagoras
influence
and
utterlysceptical,
there
the
widely spread
was
regard him
religion.He
strongest
own
It may
is due
conventions
is that he
they could
quite wrong
The
that
thought
any
was
uses
choose
but
one
right in
is king of all.'2
significantthat
was
therefore
Pindar
familiar
THE
8?
SOPHISTS
'SOPHISTS'
THE
have now
to deal with as
we
" 87. It is usual to speak of the men
'the Sophists',
and so they called themselves and were
called by
others. For us, however, the name
Sophistis apt to be misleading
in
more
contrast
earlier
It is
men
Herodotus
generation.
It is stillmore
if it is used
misleading
and
the thinkers
calls
and
indicate
to
teachers
of
a
an
Pythagorasa Sophist(iv.95).
if it makes
misleading
think of them
us
in any sense
school, or even
a sect
or
aims and methods.
There is the further
as
as
teachers with
forming
identical
intellectual
shall have
we
Sophist from
the
to
pursuitsof
consider,was
and
Philosopher,
as
another
in
order.
the
distinguish
of his later dialogues
rich and distinguished
anxious
one
paid huntsman
of
Plato,too, for
to
do learn from
Plato,however, that,even
which made
it possiblefor
prejudiceagainstthe name
it to acquire the unfavourable
it had in the fourth. That
sense
prejudicetook two forms, an aristocratic and a democratic. From
the democratic pointof view, indeed, there was
blame attaching
no
that did not equallyattach to the word o-o"/"o?
to the title ao"/"icm??
itself.To be 'too clever' was
alwaysan offence,and in the Apology
was
Plato,Soph.
223
b; Arist. Soph.
El.
165 a,
22.
B.C.
P.
88
REACTION
it is
to
eager
SCIENCE
AGAINST
'wise man'
that Sokrates
is
most
the aristocratic
was
point of view, the name
form suggestedprofessionalism,1
Its very
objection.
shrank
from
Above
a thingthe high-born Hellene
instinctively.
all,the fact that these distinguishedmen
were
foreignersmade
them
full of
unpopular at Athens. The Athenian
public was
and that against'the foreigner'
well
prejudices,
was
particularly
to
open
another
developed.It
growing
guarded. An
Athenian
than the
weapon
of such
was
was
orator
or
comic
charge of foreignextraction.
nationalism
in
our
own
day,and
very
why
Plato
Sophistwith
This
but it can
realised.
We
no
know
something
in democratic
considerations
Protagoras as wearing
represents
effective
more
Athens
as
the
these
name
it
plain
ex-
of
certain bravado.2
is
view
poet had
more
hardly be
German
or
less
common
ground
at
day;
fully
particularcontinue to be much
influenced by a superficial
analogybetween the 'ageof the Sophists'
and the eighteenthcentury Aufkldrung,
with the result that the
Sophists are represented either as subverters of religionand
or as champions of free thought,accordingto the personal
morality,
of the writer. The truth is rather that,so far as there
predilections
is any parallel
of Greek thought at
to the Aufkldrung in the history
much
and Xenophanes, not Protagoras,
is its
all,it occurs
earlier,
but to science that Protagorasand
apostle.It is not to religion
stand
underGorgias take up a negativeattitude,and we shall never
them
if
we
writers
the present
have been
lose
in
sightof
that fundamental
distinction. The
The
makes
a
profession of 'being clever' or 'playingthe wit' (TO
ao"f"iaTrjs
makes
the lyre.
a professionof playing on
just as the Kidaptor^s
oo"f"i",ea9ai)
2
Prot.
317
b.
THE
to-do, who
SOPHISTS
the natural
of the
democracy.To
large
the art of succeeding in a
they taught was
extent, then, what
democratic
State when
belong to the ruling
you do not yourself
the art of gettingoff when
democracy, and, in particular,
you are
attacked in the courts
of law. That is the questionableside of the
work, but itis hardlyfair to make it a ground of accusation
Sophist's
the natural outcome
of the
themselves; it was
againstthe men
were
conditions
political
doubt
prey
of Athens
There
the time.
at
is
no
to
reason
that
that
sincere in his profession
Protagoraswas perfectly
he was
of 'goodness'
a teacher
: only the goodness demanded
by
his clients was
apt to be of a rather odd kind, and in practicehis
and more
confined to the arts of rhetoric
more
teachingbecame
and disputation.
He would
have been entrusted by Perikles
never
with the highlyresponsibletask of framing a code of laws for
unless he had
skill in
Thourioi
reallypossessed considerable
and jurisprudence
politics
; but
train
were
in
understand
from the
likelyto be
That was
legislation.
the Sophistsmuch
more
State than
to
the young
engaged in
of the case,
nature
on
revolutions.
sense
what
we
may
In that
sincere
the
who
though moderate
gather from
what
bear
theythe
democrat
Anytos
on
to
in mind
that,
onlywere
called
was
conspiracies
againstthe
fault,and it will help us
better if we
theywere
men
his
not
he
men
made
the
oligarchic
productsof democracy;
thought of them
really
is made
to
PROTAGORAS
earliest
Sophist
Abdera.
In the
to
him,
was
of
sense
dialoguecalled by
Athenian
gatheringof Sophistsfrom
house of Kallias,son
the
visit to Athens.
the
Hippokrates,
introduction
in
still a
He
his name,
had been
youth who
boy. This
there
Plato has
before
once
asks Sokrates
time
there
is
world
for
a
an
great
in the
PROTAGORAS
90
father he
Prodikos)whose
engagedin
his
his hearers
as
might
for
profession
not
throughhe addresses
In the
generation.
younger
years. All
many
who
belong to a
(282 e) Hippias is made
men
Hippias maior
the Meno
From
was.
to
we
when
he
in which
other
was
ten
he had
time
made
more
fortyyears
than
money
Pheidias
together.Lastly,in the
sculptorsput
in
practice,
and
any
Theaetetus,
may
visit to Athens
been
of the
years
some
been
have
cannot
and
earlier,
years
Peloponnesian War.
These
sistent
conperfectly
for Thourioi in
legislated
dates
fact that he
are
that
of the
Four
be over
forty.
accused
that Protagoras was
by Pythodoros, son of Polyzelos
the next
but
sounds
words, 'but Aristotle
ix.
circumstantial,
54),
(Diog. Laert.
the celebrated 'Suit
refers
to
shows
that
this
notice
it
really
was
Euathlos',
says
Euathlos
that
to
was
ix.
The
55)
for his Fee' (AiKij
was
(ib.
story
^ladov).
that
3
lawgiver would
The
statement
virtp
pay
the
replied,'I have
him, and then
because
he
fee when
you
not
had
won
he would
have
won."
won
a
his first
yet.'The
case
have
to
pay.
case.
When
answer
'If I
win,
was
it,he
Protagoras demanded
that Protagoras would
sue
because
I have
won;
if you
win,
PROTAGORAS
92
if the Athenians
could find
be
not
at
been
world
Greek
have
that it would
been
Abdera
all the
copiesthey
others
many
these
and
Sicily,
to
scattered
would
authorities. It is clear,then,
and
extant
was
from
burn
to
have
must
of the Athenian
the mercy
sillyas
so
Athens, there
at
throughthe
had
been
of
Protagorasin a sense
" 91. That doctrine is the famous one that 'Man is the measure
of all things,of thingsthat are that they are, and of thingsthat are
that they are not.' The meaning of this dictum has been much
not
canvassed, but the curious
of the word
use
'measure'
has
been
not
have
remarked.
We
become
the
accustomed
to
so
sufficiently
and yet it is surelynot
phrasethat it hardlystrikes us as peculiar,
obvious way of expressing
the most
any of the meanings that have
been attributed to Protagoras.
Why 'measure' ? To understand this,
should probably start from the arithmetical meaning of the
we
word.
It is recorded
the
particular
point.There
line and
square
measure,
in contact.1 It is
'measure'
which
tell us,
he may
have
no
that
and
in
the circle at a
doctrine that the tangent touches
the straight
must, he urged,be a stretch for which
of the word
Protagorasattacked mathematics,
that
due
was
were
so
to
then, that
probable,
have
common
measure,
is,they are
but in
commensurable
the
cases
his
mensurability
incom-
geometers
diagonalof
like that
use
the
is the
man
of
to the commonsense
opposition
mankind
safelybe ignored.We shall find that this is justthe
may
positionProtagoras took up on other questions.In the great
Theories
that
controversy
set
themselves
about
Law
in
and Nature
he is
decidedlyon
the side of
the former.
that tradition repreto note
interesting
sents
which
he
Zeno
at
met
Athens,
Protagorasas having
may well
have done, and there was
a
were
dialoguein which the two men
bound up with the probintroduced discussinga questionclosely
lem
and its
from it has been preserved,
of continuity.
A quotation
is guaranteedby a reference to it in Aristotle.2 'Tell
authenticity
said Zeno, 'does a singlegrain of millet make
a
Protagoras,'
me,
In this connexion
1
2
it is
Arist. Met.
B, 2. 998 a, 2.
Simplicius,Phys. 1108, 18 (R.P. 131), Ar. Phys. 250
existed is the presupposition of Plato's Parmenides.
of them.
a,
It
20.
That
such
professesto
be
logues
diaone
MENSURA
HOMO
noise in
then?
and
Is there not
ratio of
part of
the ten-thousandth
bushel
bushel
when
of millet make
of millet
to
replied,
one
grain
grain?' When
And
grain?'
And, when
not?'
it falls or
him, 'Does
asked
'What
part of
the ten-thousandth
or
falling
noise when
93
be
so
of millet makes
to
another
one
the
made
dialectic which
Eleatic
turn
men
across
come
from
away
a
of
work
science.
Protagoras
to
if there
interpretation
that the
modern
individual
he would
had.
but
man,
not
The
view
have
good
makes
which
'Man
does
seems
to
him
an
to
me
to
the
distinction
is further
confirmed
accepted if he
by the hint he
in the
Theaetetus
to
on
go
such
on
Protagorasrefer,not
he
ventured
such',attributes
as
faith of Plato
wrhen
gives us,
to
ground
no
was
have
not
have
develop an
of
sensationalist
Protagorasitself.
Nor
does
Demokritos, who
understood
that the
human
than
in his
was
younger
in the same
it precisely
Epicurean
Kolotes
had
of
interpretation
fellow-citizen
way.
accused
We
of
Protagoras,
learn from
Demokritos
of
Plutarch
throwing
lifeinto confusion
such'
this dictum.
Eus.
P.E.
x.
3, 25
(Bernays, Ges.
Abh.
i. 121).
PROTAGORAS
94
that,so
authority)
replies
far from
combated
the
man
in
not
in accordance
with
those of
normal
most
were
of the doctor
the business
condition
condition
of
be better. In the
same
way,
then, as it is
body into
bring his patient's
normally,so it is the business
to
that he
see
may
the better statement,
such
of the
which may
be the weaker
in
Sophistto make
not
a given case,
only better but stronger.
it is that Plato represents
" 93. This explains further how
Protagorasas a convinced champion of Law againstall attempts
for guidance. He
to
to
return
nature
a
was
strong believer in
organisedsociety,and he held that institutions and conventions
what
were
raised
men
above
the brutes.
That,
at
any
rate, is the
in the dialogue
meaning of the myth Plato puts into his mouth
he was
called by his name.
So far from being a revolutionary,
the
old-fashioned prejudice,
not from
champion of traditional morality,
but from
In this
himself, but he
only professedto teach 'goodness'
believed
it was
taught by the laws of the state and by public
opinion,though not perhaps so well. He had a profound belief in
the value of such teaching,
and he considered that it beginsin early
he
sense,
not
Plut. adv.
Col. 1108
Empiricus,
adv. Math.
vii.
389.
THE
The
childhood.
less he
LAW
could
95
admit
be
anythingto
he felt that
sure
anythingelse,the more
normal
and generally
recognised.
must
we
truer
cleave
to
than
what
is
attitude of
The
HIPPIAS
The
" 94.
Kallias
other
of
are
no
PRODIKOS
AND
Sophistsmentioned
great importance for
as
the
interest
as
historyof philosophy,
Hippias
typicalfigures.
sality.
his efforts in the direction of univer-
of all specialism,
the enemy
and
of his
entirely
gorgeouslyattired in a costume
He
the
was
ring on
his
finger.He
from astronomy
anything,
and
of a good memory,
There
mnemonics.
however.
This
the circle
krates
could
by
we
was
ancient
know
that he
be behindhand
to
it,and
here. He
1
making
own
lecture
a
invented
side
to
to
down
to
on
anyone
had need
man
a
his
system
of
character,
stillsanguineof
squaring
lunules of HippoThe
Hippias, the universal genius,
belong
appearedat Olympia
Such
history.
serious
more
was
of Chios
not
preparedto
was
to
of
invented
the
curve
stillknown
96
THE
SOPHISTS
would
which
solve the problem
(Ter/xxyoW^oucra),
quadratrix
is
of Keos
described. Prodikos
if it could be mechanically
jejune apologueof the
nowadays for the somewhat
chieflyknown
shall see
We
Choice
of Herakles which
Xenophon has preserved.
of Herakles
at the
was
presentlyhow important the personality
as
the
time. The
chief work
of
Prodikos,however,
to
seems
have
been
the
which
of synonyms,
a business
possiblyhave
may
buted
Protagorastoo contriimportant in the infancyof grammar.
He called attention to the arbitrary
something to grammar.
discrimination
been
character
of the
grammaticalgenders,no
of certain
reign of
into
Law
or
his classificationof
convention, and
wish,
command,
prepared the
etc.
in illustration
doubt
way
for the
tences
sen-
tinction
dis-
of the moods.
GORGIAS
in
of Leontinoi
his native
city in
Sicilycame
427
to
B.C., when
Athens
as
he
already
was
bassador
am-
been
a
Hippias and Prodikos. He had, it seems,
Plato's
from
discipleof Empedokles, and we learn incidentally
doctrine
Meno
(76 c) that he continued to teach that philosopher's
younger
than
of 'effluences'
in
even
Thessaly.He
date
can
in his later
is said
to
he had
days,when
lived
have
to
retired to Larissa
from
no
Plato's
precise
account
like Protagoras,
politics,
is accounted for by the change in the
as a teacher of rhetoric. That
and
situation brought about by the Peloponnesian War
political
the democracy and the
the death of Perikles. The relations between
and more
well-to-do classes were
strained,and the
becoming more
importance of forensic rhetoric was accordinglyincreased. What
Gorgias did was to introduce to Athens the methods of persuasion
had been elaborated during the
of artistic prose which
by means
His influence on Athenian
literature,
struggleof classes in Sicily.
and through it on
the development of European prose stylein
It does
not
us
here, except
concern
enormous.
general,was
of him
that he
was
not
so
much
teacher of
while to note
that the terms
but it is worth
'figure'
incidentally,
which
he applied to the
and
'trope'(rpoTro?),
crx7)|u,a)
(etSos-,
rhetorical devices
he
taught,are
apparentlyderived
from
Pytha-
GORGIAS
97
primarilythe arrangement
mean
" 96.
could
know
else. We
anyone
they agree
that is a mark
Melissos,thus
The
reasoningof
both
ways,
Zeno
that
consider
would
itwhen
In
" 97.
the
up
to
come
ethical
'what
is'.The
tillPlato
introduced
shrinks
him
blood.
well have
Plato's way
from
the
the
The
the
no
natural
to
Varia
drawn
be
by
one
Sophist.We
in this
of
shall
this nihilism
to
not
represent
his ardent
even
of
opposing
Kallikles,who
as
real
form,
as
uses
is shown
of
man
dialogue,and he may
revolutionaryperiod.It
i.
is
know
We
statesman.
fictitiouscharacters,nor
ancient
raised is
in the
the
Socratica,i. p. 206, n.
alternative.
cut
given
argument
consequences
democratic
is stillyoung
introduce
to
distinction between
accounts.
counterpart
extreme
are
disappearedduring
for poems.
2
The
title cannot
an
the later
here
difficulty
wrote
Nothing
those of Zeno
that.
Athenian
an
as
nothing of
Taylor,
with
Gorgias showed.
sphere
legalright.These
to
flesh and
of
Melissos,and
Polos
disciple
natural
and
wrong.
Gorgias as
introduce
we
Zeno
however,
authentic. Isokrates,who
was
rightand
cleared
not
was
Melissos
and
one
from
he
that is what
and
to
obviouslyparaphrases
stillsee,
can
coupleshis name
confirmingin a generalway
and
(10.3),
and
to
later time. We
of their
is in the Helen
as
one
being in substance
of Gorgias,mentions
disciple
knowledge
our
of the
apparentlyindependent accounts
established these positions;but, though
in the main
borrowed
they were
been
two
communicate
not
language of
in the
had
have
by which he
with
generally
arguments
that
could
it, we
very
is not
does he introduce
of efSo? and
by
the
use
of
to
IS
MIGHT
9"
RIGHT
living
contemporaries,
except where,
abundant
that
evidence
Might
is Right,was
it
might
be
at
current
used
in the
considerations.
historical
by
necessary
as
to
In
any
have
we
upheld by Kallikles,namely,
Athens
towards
and the
democracy to its subjectallies,
problem.1 Its theme
study of the same
of
Herakles
Euripidesis a
man' is
'strong
his
sufficient for himself,and is only safe so long as he uses
not
strengthin the service of mankind. This conceptionof the 'strong
the regular
man' (ofwhich Herakles was
type)was not in itself an
ignobleone. It had its ideal side,and Pindar singshow Herakles
took the oxen
of Geryones without
paying for them in virtue of
violent deed with a
the most
that higherlaw, which
even
'justifies
high hand', a passage dulyquoted in Plato's Gorgias(484b).Such
natural reaction againstthat rooted jealousyof
theories are
a
which
is apt to
characterise
everythingabove the common
democracy.In modern times Carlyleand Nietzsche represent the
same
can
point of view.
rise superiorto
'superman' seems
by much the same
The
the strong
or
man
'hero',who
in fact,of the
all petty moral conventions
to have been fostered in the fifth century B.C.
-
"
clear,then, that
worship of
is that the
influences
as
in the nineteenth
the doctrine
even
century
of Kallikles is
not
A.D.
It is
complete
to
note
than
more
of his
once,
day.
own
Thrasymachos was
mentioned
It is well
as
to
dealingwith
remember,
celebrated
teacher
the
troversies
con-
then, that
of Rhetoric
See
earliest comedy
my
paper
of the
'The
of
Ideas of Euripides',in
Religious and Moral
ofScotland,1907-8, pp. 96 sqq.
Classical Association
the
ceedings
Pro-
ARCHELAOS
100
explainedin
goras in
substance
it with
was
Mind
it
this
primary substance
trace
and
is air,and
condensation.
and
of Herakleitos
wisdom
in the
the
close
dryness of
in
all things
deriving
the
to see
possible
It is
he
connexion
the
air
established
breathe.
'Damp
burlesqued in the
thought'was one
(232) accordingly.In one
respect only does Diogenes
and that was
in his medical
to have shown
some
originality,
of his
hinders
Clouds
appear
His
work.
also
may
matter.
rarefaction
by
influence
between
We
another
holdingthat
from
this way.
of the veins
account
dicta,and
we
is
celebrated,and
was
bears
witness
the influence of
Empedokles.
Hippon of Samos is of less importance.He revived the doctrine
the primary substance, and defended
it
of Thales that water
was
know
from
Menon's
latrika
on
grounds. We now
physiological
to
that he
He
was,
writer
therefore,one
of the
Ionia,and that
to
and
medical
was
men
that he
who
native
of Kroton.
broughtWestern
medicine
was
accounts
with
of the arguments
which
defended
Athenian
to
mention
for
his thesis. It is
or
He
philosophy.
deserves
"
considerable
Samos
"
of Archelaos
in the company
as
young
man.
We
know
no
to
occasion.1
same
Sokrates
service
Ion
the
never
left Athens
should
suggested.
have
meant
we
title of Ion's
The
between
Sokrates
his
any
other
be about
the
will
twenty-eight
There
is
('Visits').
'Em8r)(j,iai
of Plato (Crito, 52 b) that
of military
militaryservice. This is a case
to consider
directly. It is most
unlikelythat
Sokrates
in this connexion, as has been
statement
on
except
shall have
would
on
that
work
and
was
that
ARCHELAOS
the
at
and
time.
Aristoxenos,
Sokrates.
have
been
have
We
refers
in
his
early
his
Athenian
discredit
the
practically
1
Aristoxenos,
Phaedo,
by
rise
gave
animals
doctrines
3
Phys.
aloud
fr.
b,
25
97
(F.H.G.
b,
with
considered.
Sokrates
Op.
fr.
(Diels).
my
is
that
of
and
that
quite
was
lasted
it
by
the
Anaxagoras
his
was
he
name,
Sokrates
occupied
that
to
who
man
other
no
was
unjustifiable
follower.
It
rests
accepted
Theophrastos
is
to
on
it.3
280).
ii.
The
notes.
(arjTreBwv)
'putrefaction'
having
is, therefore,
evidence,
contemporary
and
Archelaos
suppose
book
Sokrates
that
nourished,
were
It
as
to
the
disciple.2
statement
96
doctrines
known
that
says
began,
would
they
generally
been
mention
not
natural
it is
reading
as
had
Archelaos
but
them,
association
does
his
to
and
youth,
believe
to
about
scandals
Aristoxenos
this
Plato
IOI
repeats
Sokrates
when
unmistakably
mentioned
than
old
SOKRATES
Archelaos.
Though
years.1
he
unless
with
years
bound
not
pointless
seventeen
usual,
as
are
associated
many
AND
of
to
Archelaos,
that
theory
slime
milky
and
is
the
mentioned
and
warm
(t'AJs), by
the
which
first
the
among
cold
first
the
VIII
The
Lifeof Sokrates
THE
It is
" 99.
possibleto
construct
and
intelligible
an
has
Xenophon
left
but
man,
whom
he
consulted
referred
not
ask
to
he
by
mind.
and
He
that
have
told
to
ensure
his
he
from
are
in, and
elsewhere
expresses
hero
Sokrates
about
Asia.
in
of his
his
own
paedagogic
to
such
of Plato
account
customary
which
bearing
too.
to
the
seem
same
Since
the
make
an
evidence
to
been
and
specially
of
thinks,
ever
'the
Apology
the
he
mouth
the
Complete
The
away
holder
House-
historical
and
the
eighteenth century,
exception
himself.
just those
one
regarding
writings,
have
names,
as
had
would
passed
are
No
in
conversations
was
through
and
If there
had
all;
evasion,
Xenophon
Sokratic
at
he had
for this
him
romance.
was
prayer
journey
in them
or
works
other
two
are
name
step, and
Xenophon
forward
himself
us
talking about
of the
young
joined the
offer
Sokrates
know
expedition
sure
to
record
to
as
intercourse.
averse
put
the
the
to
pretty
Several
for
(the OltcovofjiiKos)
Symposium,
be
us
careful, however,
was
rebuked
their
present
his ways.
he
tells
gods he should
means
the views
There
join
thirty,and
accordingly, of appealing
Sokrates'.
should
subjects we
on
interested
no
known
of that
He
may
under
was
return
the
by
had
just before
issue
the
and
man
(401 B.C.).He
prosperous
tell,we
to
it ; for he is
records
Cyrus,
he
oracle.
of the
us
more
this time
before
he
which
he
franklythat
reallyall we know
is
much
Delphic
from
purporting
the wisdom
on
oracle whether
tells
been
At
as
so
works
last time
volunteer
the
to
only inquired to
sacrifice
for the
Sokrates
him
the
as
four
or
to
seem
of the
account
Sokrates, whom
saw
expedition of Cyrus
how
three
of
he
face of it,they
the
on
of Sokrates
biography
consistent
us
actual conversations
PROBLEM
in favour
however,
of
it has
single work,
with
the
been
the
professed
THE
of
intention
showing that
MEMORABILIA
Sokrates
103
and that,so
irreligious,
a great deal of good by
not
was
far from
for
dialogues;
current
of what
hard
see
to
there is
is far from
Xenophon
much
comes
philosopherought
what
he
to
to
recommend
being
nearer
trustworthy historian,and
the
It is
Cyropaediashows he had a turn for philosophical
romance.
unsound
from
to isolate the Memorabilia
certainly
methodically
Xenophon's other Sokratic writings,unless very strong reasons
indeed can be given for doing so. Above
all,it is quiteimpossible
to
like
anything
get
Memorabilia
with
as
be far better
about
Sokrates,and
Such
procedureis hopelessly
in unverifiable
that
to
say at once
that for us he
is actual
Sokrates
well. If he is
we
hope
can
he is nevertheless
blood. The
and
know
to
only sound
how
when
have
we
the
slightersketch
in what
relation
of
that
learn
we
can
Even
x.
know
to
most
stands
the
to
only
of flesh and
men
his life
describe
to
caricature
in the
source.
consider
to
on
We
so,
fictitiouscharacter,
profitably
go
we
Xenophon.
he
mere
done
method, therefore,is
opinionswithout, in
Only
anything
enough,and he is the
important than
more
know
cannot
we
remain
must
It
speculations.
for
account
consider
to
Clouds
of
Aristophanes.
THE
"
of
Sokrates,son
100.
The
SOKRATES
PLATONIC
of
Sophroniskos,
littlemore,
when
he
the deme
was
Alopeke, was
put to death (399
first writer
Sokrates
of the Memorabilia
to prefer the
(1741). The
apparently Brucker
only reason
had
from
whom
he inherited
Xenophon
only one
master,
but
of
w
hile
Plato
taken
integrity
was
philosophy,
life,
up with
Sokrates
various
was
doctrines.
read, and
But
2
He
quotes
observing, 'Good
Sokrates
dead
also
an
anecdote
heavens!
before
what
the Lysis
In particularthe 'irony'of Sokrates
was
of the Memorabilia
has
no
doubts
or
was
comes
about
lies the
Sokrates
young
man
to
he
not
the
Platonic
gives
is that
only
moral
'syncretism'of
hearing the Lysis
a
tells about
me!'
written.
entirelyfrom
difficulties of any
kind.
Plato. The
Sokrates
LIFE
104
He
B.C.).1
SOKRATES
OF
was
have
must
Sokrates
servingas
by
rete
able
been
It is
husband.
Laches
as
him
the
to
of
man
was
was
the
son
him
to
father
children. The
shrew.
Her
that she
is
There
last
eldest of them,
Sophroniskosand
named, indeed,
of
woman
was
suggest
sons
good
only
was
Xanthippe
that
in Plato
hint
no
two,
three
he had
name
was
other
the
lad; but
Sokrates, and
as
whom
death, the
to
put
was
Menexenos,
arms.
age
Xanthippe, by
in
same
tillthe end.
married
in life Sokrates
fellow-demesman
Another
justthe
Lamprokles, was
baby
midwife, Phaina-
Patrokles,by another
son,
his deme.
deeplyattached
were
shall find
we
in
position
his
Sophroniskos
for
was
the
note
was
When
sons.
glory of
of the
that the great Aristeides was
Lysimachos speaksof Sophroniskosin the
worthy of
some
property;
another
remained
Late
had
familyfriend. He
day of his death.
some
mother
after
years
Daidalos, which
to
and
antiquity,
hoplite.His
she
same
leave
to
and
name,
its descent
some
of
it was
that
apparently
means
ten
some
was
family traced
His
age.
B.C.,
470
we
are
told
inner
in an
time with Sokrates
spent some
she received his final instructions in presence
familyand
of the
women
where
room,
was
protrudingeyes.
strangely
likened
it
Apol.
Phalereus
of
strut
17 d; Crito, 52
and the Marmor
of Plato
passages
found.
the
to
I do
not
on
think
gaitwas
I have
from
said
of his
They
anything which
what
Plato
immediately
mine.
it is Plato's,
not
'construction',
2
It is noteworthy that it is the
says.
second
son
and
nose
from
death
are
is not
If this
stated
in Plato
of
account
to
and
well known
or
the
easily
to
be
is
Sokrates
after the
is called
who
Demetrios
references
given detailed
not
is based.
this account
snub
and Aristophanes
peculiar,
waterfowl. In other places,
date
the
know
Parium.
I have
of
sort
some
We
e.
which
inferred
His
had
He
handsome.
far from
very
father
of
Sokrates.
3
He
The
said he
was
of Aristeides.
as
Aristoxenos
scandal-monger
Sokrates
or
married
Aristeides
older.
the
same
died
in
at
tried to fix
time
to
charge
Xanthippe
and
must
of bigamy
to
Myrto,
have
been
on
the
Sokrates.
daughter
about
as
old
THE
VOICE
105
his appearance
is compared to that of
Satyr.He alwayswent barefoot,save
to
outside
went
never
the Isthmian
He
odd
was
the
town
except
or
a Silenos,
torpedo-fish,
specialoccasions,and he
militaryservice,and once
on
on
games.
well known
in other ways. It was
he called his 'divine
which
'voice',
that,even
too
as
sign',and which
boy, he had a
he regardedas something peculiar
to himself,and probablyunique.
It
him
to
came
often,and sometimes
the
on
trivial occasions.
most
prompted him to
thing about it was that it never
about to
do anything; it only opposed his doing something he was
do.1 Besides this,Sokrates was
subjectto ecstatic trances. He would
stand stillfor hours togetherburied in thought,and quiteforgetful
The
remarkable
of the
better than
he
sunrise
told
stood
on
the
in
motionless
Symposium.
astonished,and
to
open
When
the
would
next
rose
sun
simplyleft him
celebrated occasion
in the
His
not
was
in
comrades
arms
much
were
of them
some
if he
see
was
knew
this and
quitefortyyears old, on
from
earlymorning on one day till
in thought (^povri^wv
TL),as we are
Sokrates
Poteidaia,when
at
to
it happened. They
himself. There
to
came
accustomed
were
when
disturb him
to
alone tillhe
camp
which
His friends
world.
outer
his business.2
A
" 101.
the
by
of this temperament
man
that he
He
was.
was
doctrines which
reservations,in
day. He
Rebirth
and
be
naturally
influenced
of his
the Athenians
to
of his
movement
religious
would
even
were
the soul
immortalityof
believed,though
asked
When
Reminiscence.
without
not
his
only to inspired
who
have been at
and priestesses
poets like Pindar, but to 'priests
the acts
they perform'.3In particularhe
pains to understand
of Mantineia
professedto have been instructed by a wise woman
terested
named
Diotima.
To the very end of his life,he was
deeply inin what he called 'sayingsof yore'or the 'ancient word',
authorityfor
gave
makes
Xenophon
both
Sokrates
these
negative
whether
to
and
go
beliefs,he would
refer,not
military adventure
or
not,
and
He
young
Meno,
a.
the
man
'voice'
asked
'voice' gave
the
says
no
pseudo-Platonic
not
true.
IO6
SOKRATES
OF
LIFE
and
and
itself,
attain such
wisdom
this,Sokrates
was
to
so
to
as
possiblein
be
may
this
world.
all
But, with
no
that
sense
strong vein of shrewd common
himself to the often fantastic details of
and
to
not
easy
that the souls of the
departedfrom
the
would
the
be with
imprisoned in
understand',and though he
'highone
as he often did, he
Orphic style,
they were at best something like the
certain
was
be
used
God
with
to
that
his hearers
warn
truth. No
when
man
of
would
sense
literal accuracy.
Besides this,he had a healthy
for the common
of Orphic and other traffickers in
run
he accused of demoralisingthe
indulgences,whom
of heavenlyjoys.That, however,
by their gross descriptions
and
pardons
nation
in however
dim
religionof
the
state.
fables
or
with
consistent
perfectly
to
body,
their
on
contempt
was
the
they
body, he could not feel equallysure that they
he related eschatological
saints. When
myths in
righteouswould
the
insist
imagination.
his
these mightappealto
powerfully
however
religion,
He
He had a
visionary.
ting
kept him from commitOrphicand Pythagorean
mere
The
not
to
Orphicismcontained,
be found
in the
riddles,of which
not
can
everyone
compared
he
of its expression
manner
ordinary
guess
the
true
sense.
The
" 1 02.
character.
He
of that
sense
was
himself
to
not
his
pose ; it was
and
exaggerated
mere
in
further
depreciateboth
a
Scots
also
was
using
'sly',
in
visionaryor 'enthusiast',
word, but he
sides
well-marked
two
were
word
to
the Greek.
he could
shrewd.
insincere. As
.
400
did
not
His
like
and he was
clearly,
That
other people's.
shrinkingfrom
has been
c.
He
see
and
powers
due to an instinctive
Crat
the Greek
is properly
which
(etpo"v),
'canny'(notalways a term of
own
his
word
meaning
than
uncommonly
to
to
apt
was
everything
indicated,it is only
108
SOKRATES
OF
LIFE
for himself.
method
new
the
this
reached
have
discuss his
him
new
of the time
distinguishedmen
He
about twenty-five.3
most
than
he
Prodikos, and
cheaper courses
other
used
on
hand, did
not
when
Zeno
understand
to
us
means
and
Parmenides
theory with
to
also intimate
was
say
he
when
that he
had
not
was
with
more
Hippias
attended
and
of the
one
old.
It is
more
questionand
answer.
If the Periklean
probably hear
should
we
of
of the middle
Prot.
became
very
Farm.
This
became
that of
man
Phaedrzbi
In his
he
Surely
of argument
would
sixty to
be
not
that is the
a man
by
not
surprised if Sokrates
of
remark
over
did
old
an
man
to
a.
discipleof Archelaos
that
under
130
is
a
not
one,
young
about
more
age had
his work
art
by
at
the
the age
statement
of seventeen
of Aristoxenos
(p. 124,
n.
d.
dialogue entitled
the
Sophist(ap.Diog.
Laert.
ix.
25).
that
z).
Sokrates
DELPHIC
THE
have
books. We
write
he left.We
are
it is recorded
cultivated
Megara,
at
of the
sedulously
philosophywas
where
impression
who had
Athenians
of young
that Perikles himself 'heard'
shall see
("63).We
IOQ
enough, however,
traces
and
been his associates,
him
ORACLE
stillfurther
was
of those put
form
be
we
allowed
is not
it is put. He
to
ask other
to
he learnt it from
doubt
the Phaedo
the
only by
and
was
the
objectof
special
was
for
we
shall
strike
out
Athenian
an
be
not
was
course
there
did
not
set
wiser than
one
busy
of the
youth of
extreme
to
be
little
seriouslywith
see
actuallyasked
wiser
was
no
than
one.
not
fail him
prove
the
himself,and
admirers
of the
then,
these,Chairephon,
the
Sokrates.
That
it
matters,
Delphic oracle
The
Pythia of
proved a turning-point
to
let
us
know
that he
at
god
use
whose
politicians,
him,
to
indeed, in his
opinionand
he does
to
think it necessary to
with the result that he found him wise,
name
such
enthusiastic
of
when
unusual
opening scene
him as a guide even
up to
their studies. One
about
Sokrates
the
looked
of them
unit,which
himself
We
out
the
is also attested
that of the
by
did
(elpoiveia)
once
the
anyone
there
that
was
replied
in the life of
can
was
attention.
line for
men.
him
more,
and
enthusiastic,
particulary
whether
there
influence of Zeno
even
Zeno's
to
surprised
the younger
Protagorashow some
consulted
to
among
and
common
rate, it
for. At any
Sokrates, and
The
in mind
bear
we
most
as
puzzled,
(96 e),where Sokrates is represented
problem of growth,which was that of Anaxagoras
not
" 105. If
he began to
of the
was
to
to
Zeno.
that,however,
Even
nature
be looked
to
appealedmost
that
method
the
to
the
boggle at
procedurewhich can
and in the Euthydemus
directingattention
and this helped in turn
fallacies,
to
is a
Obviously this
him.
of service in
by
questionsor
not
that of other
LIFE
HO
SOKRATES
OF
he had
Sokrates
else knew
than
anyone
in
men
nor
other
ignorantand
other
the
had
did
men
been
anything,but
respect,
one
he
From
mission
as
he
was
this time
his fellow-
to
them
convince
wiser
was
knew
they were.
having a
apart by God to
set
Sokrates
that
namely,
know
not
forward, he regardedhimself
citizens. He
same
of their
ignorance.
Now
of the
his mission
date the
Poteidaia.1 We
from
return
later than
oracle
about
his
therefore,
cannot,
thirty-fifth
year,
and
it is
obvious
of
after his
Plato himself
be based
was
the
on
not
was
yet, and of
born
of Sokrates
statements
what
course
he tells us
himself, and
no
must
doubt
of
that
tact
to
see
Chairephon. It does not requiregreat literary
and that what he did
Sokrates only took the oracle half-seriously,
that he
of interpretation
methods
to
was
apply to it the same
of
use
the like
to
dogmaticof
men
oracles,dreams, and
human
beings.He
and his
own
Voice'
the least
was
and
with
communicate
a case
on
in
such
subjects,
point.What is
to be imposed
swans.
in
intensely
"
06.
of the
earnest
The
about
mission
genuine faith,and
he
was
it.
of Sokrates
War,
Peloponnesian
in which
1
Charm.
interrupted
by
was
he
153
a.
was
called
on
the outbreak
to
do his
duty
BRAVERY
THE
IN
FIELD
III
as
enthusiasm.
Sokrates
In
past. The
he himself
one
his life
saved
by watching
had
incident
same
and
he adds
the
defeat
danger was
tells how
surpassed him
off unhurt.
Laches
dialoguecalled by
in the
have
far
and
that,if everyone
would
then about
else had
turned
been
done
into
Sokrates
in presence
of
is made
to refer
his
(181 b),
name
his
victory.Sokrates
was
forty-six.2
As
" 107.
tillthe
retreat, Alkibiades
to
retired
to
him
over
and
wounded,
was
the Athenians
when
Poteidaia
fought at
we
by
but
(ercupoi),
circle of associates
from
the young
It appears,
public mission.
singularfascination
these
gatheredround
in the first
who
him
tinguishe
carefullydis-
be
must
he influenced
men
those
over
this time
in the
course
of his
place,that he exercised
devoting themselves
were
to
what
then
was
Besides
these
the
new
there
good family,who
of young
of
men
they could be cross-
told,a number
professionon which
examined, and who took great pleasurein hearingthe ignoranceof
others exposed. Some
of them
even
thought they might get a
than any
better preparationfor publiclife by listening
to Sokrates
Sophist could give them. It is certain that Kritias
professional
associated with Sokrates in this way, though he did not do so for
of Sokrates,
long.We hear of others,such as the fellow-demesman
fell away. No doubt they
Aristeides,son of Lysimachos, who soon
wished
learn the
to
necessityof
craftsman.
1
We
no
seen
to
of success,
study
It is important
to
It accounts
Sokrates.
others
at a
whereas
probably
before
notice
for the
was
that
served
at
Samos
the
the time
of most
Sokrates
fought against
of the Phaedo
force
manded
com-
the militaryreputation of
and
by Meno, Xenophon
(Introduction,p. xiv).
Plato insists on
the way
interest taken
in him
edition
insisted on
that he
think
Sokrates
that. It
dialogues. It is interestingto
by Melissos.
2
for
others
were
(" 98)
mention
no
art
serious
There
have
occasion
had
are
we
were,
112
LIFE
notablyAlkibiades
and
it was
and
doubtless
Sokrates.
Even
In the
SOKRATES
Charmides.
Charmides
that Plato
through him
these, however,
or
even
disciples,
phon.
OF
not
are
to
came
be
to
as
Apology he speaks of
them
Plato's uncle,
was
regarded
his
as
like Chaire-
sense
'those
as
associate with
they say
are
my
disciples'.1
" 1 08. In speaking of his relations with these young
men
Sokrates habitually
used the languageof love,tempered, of course,
his usual
by
that
kind
at
slyhumour.
Thebes
To
understand
this,we
remember
must
States attachments
of this
its way
into Athens
both
before
law
by
the time
and
of
by public opinion.5Plato
abundantlyclear,however,
that it
the fashion
was
of Alkibiades
it was
"
and
"
Alkibiades
personalchastityof Sokrates
the whole
story, and
languagein
gross
the matter-of-fact
spoken of.
It will
Megara, only a
at
it.In these
1
quiteclear
Apol.
we
What
sense.
way
therefore
miles
circumstances,we
In his Bousiris
that he invented
as
the epw/jievos
of
only a
pose.
the foundation of
of such
that,if we
from
Athens,
can
hardlylook
(n. 5)
may
into
the
puts
he
no
the abuse
understand
to
we
rightto interprethis
reader is
surprisesa modern
really
in which
help us
few
have
as
it
in aristocratic
that it was
is assumed
demned
con-
makes
others. If
it is surelyincredible
himself
was
Isokrates
no
is
relationships
remember
that
disgraceattached
for the
same
to
reticence
the matter
exactly as
Polykrates (Cf. " 116,
of Sokrates, whereas
infra)for making
disciple(pad^r-fis)
no
one
knew
of him being educated
Sokrates.
ever
(Traiofvopevov)
by
2
See Bethe
in Rhein. Mus,
Ixii. (1907),pp. 438 sqq.
3
Addressing a Spartan and a Cretan,he says : /cat TOVTOJV
ras
v^erepas
Trpcaras av TIS atViaiTO (636 b).
4
Plato,Symp.'iSzb.
6
Plato,Phaedr. 2316: el TOLVW
TOV
KaOear-^KoraoeooiKas,
voftov TOV
fJ.rj
TU"V
ooi
dvOpooTTtuv
oveioos
Against Timor chos,passim.
yevTjTat KT\. Aischines
Plato
33
makes
a.
Sokrates
represent
Alkibiades
a
it himself.
He
represents
criticises
EROS
the
on
Plato's condemnation
The
here
way of
derived
from
day,though
another
on
side,however, and
his accustomed
humour.
He
had
the birth of
incapableof
was
thoughts to
new
Sokrates
more
his mother's
excellent
an
once
speaking of
himself
be
note
may
the present
at
is unequivocal.
thing appealed to
we
observed
is commonly
subjectas
113
matchmakers, he claimed
of
art
bringing
that,justas midwives
peculiargiftfor discerning
would
be. That is all playful,
who the best teacher for a young
man
but we
must
to be sure,
never
forgetthat Sokrates was a mystic as
well as a humorist, and the mysticshave alwaysfound the language
of love more
adequate than any other to express their peculiar
best
The
experience.
something
far
of
love
higher.It
to
fair
have
the
are
leads
is
body
of
the love of
to
on
fair ways
and
life,
at
fair
of
soul, to the
last it bringsus
into
very
thus
When
place.1
to
seen
be
have.
objectsof love,these
the
regarded as
which
be
can
no
the
thingsin
they derive
doubt
such
Plato
'forms'
this world
are
are
but
imperfectbeingas they
means
us
to
believe that
had
was
the
contemplationof
"
he
admirer, and
puts
than
more
had
into
Alkibiades,an
far
one
on
young
the mouth
enthusiastic
It will be
men.
of
one.
Meno,
Meno
well
to
reluctant
says
(Meno,
e):
79
Before
and
1
make
Phaedr.
I met
other
247
you
sqq.
was
cannot
believe
that this is
all
we
know
description of
about
the
yourself
are
just
Plato's
temperament
own
of
LIFE
114
and
bewitchingme
I
think,if I
It benumbs
torpedo-fish.
that is justwhat
may
anyone
have done
you
be allowed
figurebut
in
only
SOKRATES
castingspellsand enchantments
full of confusion.
am
OF
who
to
over
the
in other
comes
Both
me.
jest,
you have
respects,
it and
near
to
the
touches
soul and
my
that
so
me,
it,
lips
my
I
to giveyou.
benumbed, and I don't know what answer
literally
about
and
and
have made
before
over
over
again
goodness,
speeches
I fancied,but now
I can't
as
largecompanies,with complete success
think
what
I
tell
it
is.
it
to
even
extremelyprudent on your part never
are
take
thingsas
for
leave
or
voyage
stranger in
If you were
do these
to
would
probablybe taken up
country.
own
your
foreignland,you
a sorcerer.
And
very dear
to
Sokrates,says this
I shall endeavour
them,
was
(Symp. 2153):
praiseSokrates
to
of
well
as
as
by
can
of
means
him,
we
are
it is
whether
and
one,
all confounced
woman
and
or
or
man
friends,unless
inspired.My
heart
my
leaps even
wildly than
more
those
of
on
was
oath
my
I listen
to
in
people
Korybanticecstasy, and his words make the tears gush from my eyes.
others affected in the same
I used to hear
I see many
And
way. When
Perikles and
I had
of
none
other
in
condition
livingso long as
were
to
should
consent
feel
by
state
this
like
Marsyas
I remained
to
just the
lend
as
the
Sirens,
my
was.
And
ears
now,
thing,I
me
often been
am
quitesure
I couldn't
to
put into
confess
worth
that if I
hold
out, but
that,though I
So I stop my
prevent
I have
here, that I
forces
He
same.
to
as
him
slave's. But
ears
and
from
run
myselfbecoming
away
rooted
to
him
the spot
Il6
"
LIFE
But
in.
Sokrates
Voice' would
duty as
allow
not
him
and
it
of the
representatives
to
act
tribe
the executive
as
seen
that
never
member
that
it
of the Council
the
was
Antiochis,to which
to
failing
fifty
belonged,
his deme
the time
at
the bodies
recover
of Five
of the
turn
of the Council
committee
tried for
generalswere
be
happened
so
have
We
to
to
hand.
at
were
soldier,but he
SOKRATES
difficulttimes
more
did his
OF
the
of the dead
showing
rule
illegal
that he
could
Plato
home.
makes
after. From
of consequence
Athens
with the
phon, did
we
"
Let
us
or
place, we
Sokrates
along with
the
out
that he
four
others arid
might
be put
simply
probably have
him
may infer
that Sokrates
"
democrats,
to
and
we
did
not
shall
see
shortly
that the
point is
so.
confirmed
first
Thirty,he
of Salamis
ARISTOPHANES
" 112.
be
not
for him
Thirty sent
of the
now
consider
otherwise
how
far this
of Sokrates
account
observe
must
XENOPHON
AND
sharplydivided
that
into
Plato
represents
the
In
is
the
life of
as
to
interest,
though in the month
and
busied
his death
his
two
youth.It
he
that
chief, and
elapsedbetween
naturallyrecurred
is further
to
to
be noticed
almost
his sole
his condemnation
the themes
that the
that had
testimony of
THE
SOKRATES
OF
ARISTOPHANES
periods,and that of
produced in 423 B.C.,
the year between the battles of Delion and of Amphipolis, in both
Sokrates fought.His mission, though begun, was
rupted,
interof which
and Aristophaneswould
be thinkingmainly of the earlier
Sokrates. Chronologyis vital in dealingwith this question,and we
that Sokrates was
allow ourselves to forget
must
never
only fortywhen
seven
Aristophanesproduced the Clouds, and that Plato and
the caricababies. We
ture
Xenophon were
must, therefore,compare
of Aristophanesonly with what Plato tells us of the youth of
Sokrates,and
That
" 113.
he tells us
with what
not
the Clouds
is a caricature
There
interpretedaccordingly.
of
comedy
of
very occurrence
that it is not
funny. On
which
funny
not
are
have
must
time
of natural
other
or
thingsbeneath
that
these
as
(TO.VTTO
to
y^?).Plato
of
a
must
been
the heavens
of
real
not
are
have
must
fictions about
have
must
adherent
presumption
of fact
statement
chief studies
an
be
tion
interpreta-
ask,then, is what
periodof
thingsin
the
were
represents Sokrates
some
people
Sokrates
the caricature
have
interested
been
at one
and
(ra juerecopa)
makes
his
Sokrates
the
declare
youth. Aristophanes
system which
is recognisable
that of
we
science,and he
the earth
affords
comedy
have
In
possible.
in the
for the
of fact. Statements
in the earlier
been
of the Clouds
student
either. What
canons
the other
of foundation
sort
in
statement
mere
is
often
are
two
are
statement
Diogenes
the clouds
are
of
one
Sokrates
'what
represents him
we
(the doctrine
of
of air.
studied,among
other
air
(thedoctrine of
phanes
Empedokles),and Aristo-
and
which
he
to
the
also ridicules
as
of the Phrontisterion
ordinaryAthenian would
for going barefoot
them
a
'souls',
unwashed,
and
Il8
LIFE
speaksof
them
has
kind,
OF
SOKRATES
All that,and
'semi-corpses'.
as
sufficient foundation
Sokratic doctrine
thing that
us
strikes
gatherfrom
weaker
the Wicked
of
'practice
inconsistent with
teaches
And
yet, if we
of
indications
Sokrates
Plato
is not
his
tells
same
of the
us
death'. The
only
we
everything
pupilsto
true
of
even
can
make
the
Protagoras
sense
the mark.
the
argument
in the
first as
at
in what
of the
more
to
look
features
for such
account
closer,we
in
the
teachings of
distortion
the
Platonic
the part of
on
cient
suffi-
are
not
too
scrupulouscomic
of Sokrates
the
point of
view
of
and Aristophaneswould
(e'pya),
facts
would
not
seemed
so
that
that
distinguish
dangerous to conservative
to
care,
it
used
was
described
for the
be
not
from
from
than
able, and
the 'art of
certainly
which
Aoyot',
Athenians.
purpose
like that
that discussions
only suppose
the Hippias minor had got talked about, as they certainly
obvious to the plainman
that anyone
It would
seem
in
would.
maintained
the
engaged
in the
subversion
to
be
voluntarywrongdoer to
be
involuntarymust
was
better
of
much
than
what
have
as
'disciples'
(/m"p-ai),
in a
(eVatpot)
his
how
succeed
were
sent
him
to
in life.What
Aristeides1 is enough
and
were
to
But
Pheidippides.
by
his permanent
is
the
quite
most
certain
men
who
associates
frequented
Plato tells us
Plato
Sokrates, of whom
of
societyor
to
calls them,
chief,and who
the
was
he
the
morality.I
ifhe was
intelligible;
not, itis surelypointless.
" 114. But, above all,Aristophanesconfirms Plato in
explicitway by drawing a clear distinction between
Chairephon
that of
need
conclusions, we
who
rather
propositions
(Aoyot)
about
to
learn
Lysimachos and
the burlesquefigures
of Strepsiades
justify
the
machinery
of the Phrontisterion
implies
usuallysaid,
serious. It is
more
something much
indeed, that Aristophanes is taking Sokrates as a type of the
Sophistsof the day, but that view is untenable. In the first place,
and when
the Old Comedy does not deal in types but personalities,
that there
was
Laches, 178
sqq. ; Theaet.
1513.
XENOPHON'S
Aristophanesdoes introduce
fictitious name.
type,
associates.
permanent
SOKRATES
They
in the
as
that,the
here
were
119
Birds,he giveshim
of the
Sophists
of lectures to
they only gave short courses
the
perpetuallychanging.Besides, they were
trouble
to
themselves
a
no
to-dayand
and
world
day had
with
gone to-morrow,
audiences that were
last
scientific
people in the
inquiriessuch as
in
Phrontisterion,
fact,preside
over
Aristophaneshimself
that he knew
them
such
invented
are
society,
the idea of
of those in other
cities
If Sokrates
one.
we
to
that
suppose
scientificschool, or
by hearsayand
transferred
in
with
anyone,
their
confused
Sokrates
or
voluntarily
involuntarily
it is not with Sophists
like Protagorasand Gorgiasor
as
the matter.
for
have
when
come
was
of Archelaos
disciple
he knew
the
judged by
The
writings.
to statements
to
Xenophon,
Sokrates
remember, in the
return
to
never
canons
degree inconsistent
old
alreadyan
was
most
with
such
applicableto
weightis to
be attached
purpose of the
in any
involve admissions
what Xenophon wished
to
not
work; above
must
we
and Sokrates
very young,
him, and that he leftAthens
that Sokrates
of
probableaccount
most
was
about
must
the
me
of years.1
number
seen
to
to
that. Now
great deal of
soundness
himself
it. What
of his
with
good. One of
religiousattitude
Plato
tells
us
of the
1
Seep.
dissuaded
others
from
for the
to
busy
studying
disappointmentof Sokrates
124,
n.
with
a.
B.C.
P.
LIFE
120
Anaxagoras,and
OF
SOKRATES
his renunciation
of
physicalspeculationsat an
early age, is enough to explainwhat Xenophon says, and yet he
that he has gone too far. In fact he gives his point
feels at once
'Yet he himself was
not
completelyby adding twice over:
away
unversed
in these subjects' subjectsof which he givesa list,
and
which
matics
correspond exactlyto the most
highlydeveloped mathe"
and
of the time.1
astronomy
Further, he knew
that what
"
and
like Kebes
Simmias
Thebes
from
to
listen
to
him,
as
Xenophon
this
in
sort
Memorabilia
fact,it
seems
good
admissions
more
many
of
how
far the
Xenophon, but it is not clear to me
be regarded as independent testimony at all. In
can
hardly possibleto doubt that Xenophon got the
about
greater part of his information
of Plato. Otherwise, it would
be very
Sokrates
the
from
that
significant
dialogues
he has heard
of the
not
and
therefore
Memorabilia
admit
make
as
good
no
historical work
he
In
was.
successful.
sort
Those
bound,
are
of
hard
on
have
never
been
who
the
treat
the other
hand,
explain on the
Xenophon wishes us
to
man
would
He
the
was
them.
are
thingsthat
many
that Sokrates
think
of
use
put
to
of Sokrates
death
is
if he had
to
sumption
as-
to
too
been
like that.
" 116.
while
The
conclusion
we
it is
in my opinion,forced to is that,
regard the Sokrates of Aristophanes
are,
to
quiteimpossible
of Xenophon
the same
and the Sokrates
as
person,
both
distorted
in
as
images of the
difficultyregarding
know
from
Plato. The
1
*
Mem.
Mem.
there
Sokrates
firstis legitimately
distorted for comic
iv. 7. 3-5.
iii.n.
17.
Mem.
i. 6. 14.
Mem.
iv. 6. 13.
is
no
we
effect;
THE
PLATONIC
SOKRATES
121
avoid
for apologeticreasons.
To
legitimately,
misunderstanding,I should say that I do not regardthe dialogues
the
latter,not
of Plato
so
records
as
probablethat
there
Sokrates
image
his
martyrdom. The
to
may
such
are
embedded
is Sokrates
be
extent
some
extent
determine, but I do
of course,
Plato
as
that has
of
the memory
happened we
believe it has
not
fully
saw
transfigured
by
which
to
I also admit
in them.
it
cannot,
falsified
seriously
giftof
picture.Like Shakespeare, Plato had a marvellous
when
position.
suppressinghis own
personality
engaged in dramatic comThat is why his personality
is so elusive,and why that of
the
Sokrates
when
we
has
Plato
to
come
of Plato and
are
must
return
to
this
the reader
warn
of the
that of
shall
for it.We
himself,but first I
view
substituted
often been
so
the
writers
recent
the
on
subject1
doubts
there
even
grain of
who
Sophist Polykrates,2
of the
Sokrates
is
before
390
Plato
B.C.
did
truth
wrote
not
pamphlet against
contradict this
to
stoop
simplywrote
theories may
and
have
to
round
romance
it. Now,
embroider
choose
nihilism
Xenophon's
between
the Platonic
of the view
bald tale. It
Sokrates
justindicated.
It is
if he were
Xenophon's Sokrates,even
disbelieve the testimony of Plato
we
points,it is impossibleto assignany reason
preserve
and, if
A. Gercke
incredible such
however
than anythingwe
far sounder
appear, they are really
pickingand choosingwhatever we pleaseout of Plato,
by
using it to
get
can
we
in
vol.
Gercke-Norden, Einleitung,
ii.p.
seems
to me
that
thoroughgoing
to
reallyimpossible
worth
preserving,
and the
the
on
for
366
most
vital
acceptingit
on
sq.
(n. 5),
slightestground for the
that Alkibiades
assertion
a
was
discipleof Sokrates. As I have pointed out (p.
Plato
makes
Sokrates
himself
n.
i)
138
thing. It is nowhere
say exactlythe same
'educated'
Plato
that
Alkibiades
that
in
a
or
was
suggested
fj.a6-r]-rrjs, Sokrates
him.
It may
be added
that the Protagoras is almost
certainly earlier than the
Sokrates
and Alkibiades
pamphlet of Polykrates,and that the relation between
is presupposed in it.
2
This
which
statement
is
supposed
is based
to
mean
on
that
in the
passage
there
was
not
Bousiris
the
of
Isokrates
LIFE
122
The
others.
greatest
Plato
mystification
such
to
in
characters
read
hard
Sokrates
Platonic
fiction,
with
as
SOKRATES
OF
would
but
patience,
this
hypothesis
people
some
if
indeed,
remain,
they
supposed
credits
him
would
him
with.
as
of
one
find
it
capable
the
very
of
PHILOSOPHY
THE
124
lived
Eleatics and
They were
way.
tradition preservedby Cicero
Zeno, and
and
Parmenides
Megara
we
(143 a) that
told
are
trines
told that he 'handled' the doc-
him
that
some
sharing a
lookingup to
common
who
him
both
at
allowed
and
Thebes
body. The
by
the
regard Sokrates
men
he
departureof
most
Philolaos
taken
of
notes
for
as
their
Master, and
of them
it is
attitude
misrepresent their
could
himself. The
with
have
only to
not
of the
attunement
an
of these notes
the accuracy
firmed
conIn fact Plato
when
he visited Athens.
himself
impossibleto suppose
at a time when
seriously
intercourse
had
of Sokrates
had
have
to
Sokrates
not
who
drop, and
is said
Eleatic Eukleides
all these
makes
to
Phleious
men,
exponent. It is Sokrates
instructs them
these
but did
expected,
were
authoritative
its most
as
Pythagoreanshad
Sokratics,including
schools of Hellas.
philosophical
unquestionably
represents the Pythagoreans
as
philosophywith Sokrates, and even
Plato
as
of the
of
of the discourses
death. Besides
Kleombrotos
and
Aristipposof Kyrene
all the
of
notes
took
deeplymoved
" 1 1 8. Now
the Eleatics
Eukleides
with
Sokrates,and it was
of
successor
Sokrates
and
the
Eukleides
Academic
The
Megara.
at
makes
are
we
The
of Parmenides.
SOKRATES
OF
and in close
stillliving
were
suggestionseems
be
to
became
Italy,Sokrates
that, after
all intents
to
remained behind.
who
and purposes the head of the Pythagoreans
On one
point he is made to express surprisethat Simmias and
had not been instructed by Philolaos (61 d),and Echekrates
Kebes
of Phleious is shaken
soon
does
as
doctrine
know
We
of
generation
the
the doctrine
follower
he had
become
he and
his friend
of
he
as
soon
as
what
by
was
of Aristotle. We
made
he
attunement
an
told of
are
we
last
the
that he maintained
attunement
have
as
acquaintedwith
was
Dikaiarchos
seen
even
after
("70) that
denying that
too
great pointof
of the ascetic abstinences
practised
any
attributed
generally
ever
rites
purificatory
source
that
share it
of Philolaos
Pythagoras had
of Sokrates
not
Aristoxenos.
the
to
him.
Now
gossipabout
Aristoxenos
Sokrates
and
is
and
AND
SOKRATES
Plato. He
from
came
Aristoxenos
should
The
goreanism,which
(""7"" 75)-I*
ig at
doctrine
of
very
the
soul
In
119.
the
the
Plato
which
point of view,
Phaedo
he
Philolaos
doctrine
of
mysticalside
got rid of
laid
once
stress
special
be
of
the
Pythafor all
on
Sokrates
represents
would
were
the
as
just another
FORMS1
THE
"
Why
personally.
corruptedtheir
revived
Sokrates
about
of
friends
their
refuting.From
Hippasos.
had
and
soul
of the
him
and
Messene,
blacken
had
Sokrates
because
annoyed
to
known
had
answer
nature
be anxious
Tarentine
from
have
Spintharos,who
his father
from
125
Dikaiarchos
and
Taras
professedto
PYTHAGOREANS
THE
the
Sokrates
doctrine
and
the
Pythagoreans
'intelligible
is that of
as
holding in common
represented
for believingto
have seen
which
reason
we
forms' (vo7?ra
et'Sr]),
as
be Pythagorean in origin("32).Further, Sokrates is described
contribution to the theory which, in
making an important original
this
writers generally
treat
fact,completelytransforms it. Modern
are
as
of forms
to
Plato
under
the
name
in the Phaedo.
its first appearance
That, however, is a
circular argument ; for the sole ground on which certain dialogues
it makes
have
in
been
versations,
drag it into all his confor him to
and in fact it would have been inappropriate
would
be likelyto
refer to it except in talkingwith people who
understand. Nothing, then, can be inferred from his silence on the
that silence is not
of the dialogues,
as
especially
subjectin most
unbroken.
By a curious minor epicyclein the argument we are
for
reason
indeed
warned
in
to
makes
would
the doctrine
does
appear
to
be referred
I have
'forms'
that,when
Sokrates
Sokratic
in the
words
thinkingthat
that the
and
this
I26
OF
PHILOSOPHY
THE
SOKRATES
to the point to
highestdegree.1It is much more
tained
in which
it is mainobserve that the theory of forms in the sense
and Republicis wholly absent from what we
in the Phaedo
Platonic of the dialogues,
regardas the most distinctively
may fairly
those, namely, in which Sokrates is no longer the chief speaker.
the
arbitraryin
In that
it is
sense
(inwhich
the Parmenides
the Timaeus
exceptionof
well be
the other
On
dialoguelater than
with the single
it is apparentlyrefuted),
(51 c),where the speakeris a Pythagorean.
mentioned
even
never
Sokrates.
to
in any
more
the way
it is spoken
than
explicit
In the Phaedo
of
of Eleaticism whether
is made
Simmias
Sokrates
when
is able
to
has
'this time
row',
to-mor-
passedaway,
to
whether
it is at least deliberate,and
can
only ask,as
I have
asked
before,2
ever
propounded a new theoryof his own
philosopher
of distinguished
familiar to a number
it as perfectly
by representing
some
livingcontemporaries
years before he had thought of it
whether
any
himself.
"
1 20.
The
part of the
Echekrates
thought and
the latter
are
also
by
is
reported,
the objectsof
sharp distinction between
the objectsof sense.
Only the former can be said to be;
only becoming.It is made clear that the originof this
There
follows.
as
the conversation
Phleious, to whom
at
is
the first
is
theoryis
have
never
to
be
seen
looked
for in the
equal sticks
or
stones.
The
sensible
thingswe
the
be
we
call
be
demands
that Piety should
Euthyphro, for instance, Sokrates
and
"5
Sma
asks
for
etSo?
i8eav
exelvo
oma
TO
to fiiav
(5 d),
mands
(72 c) he deetrriv (6 c). He also speaks of this as a TrapaSety/^a
(6 e).In the Meno
have
In
the
we
of
Goodness.
the form
b)
Cratylus
(389
to know
(el8os)
Professor
with
I entirely agree
the highly technical
o
eon
phrase avro
KepKis.
that
it
is
futile to
in
Plato's
holding
Chicago,
1903)
Thought,
of
Shorey (Unity
to the
of thought in Plato's dialoguesdown
look for any variation or development
with him, as will be seen.
part company
Republic,though at that point I must
*E.Gr.Ph.*p.35s.
1
In
referred
the
nva
-navra.
ra
THE
to
'tending'
all 'striving'
or
equal are
FORMS
127
be such
as
the
equal,but they
As
have
we
seen,
this
essentially
Pythagorean. Where
reasonablyattribute
inclusion
of what
with
equality
the
to
it differs from
call moral
the mathematical.
We
and
have
side
anythingwe
is in
Pythagoreans
should
we
its mathematical
theory on
the
is
can
systematic
aesthetic forms
on
an
anythingthat
KaXov)or 'justgood'(avro tarw
seen
anything'justequal'(avro
never
seen
o
'justbeautiful' (avro o eari
than we have
TO
ayaQov) any more
This tends to emphasisethat aspect of the forms in which they
iaov).
the 'upper
are
regardedas patterns or exemplars (rrapaoeL-y^ara),
limits' to which the manifold and imperfectthingsof sense
tend to
It may sound
a littlestrange to say
approximate as far as possible.
isosceles right-angled
that an
be a triangular
trianglewould
of speaking becomes
if it could, but such a way
number
quite
is
natural when
Aristotle
Sokrates
and
introduce moral
we
aesthetic forms.
This
is what
when
he makes
the preoccupationof
to mean
appears
with ethical matters
velopmen
playso important a part in the deof the
do
It will be observed
from
distinguishes
the persons
who
quote that
believe that
to
We
number
2
Met.
Met.
Met.
may
not
Plato
on
that very
call themselves
as
ground,4are
everythingAristotle
of
to
yeVecris
of decimal
places.
M. 3. 1078 b, 21 ; A.
A. 6. 987 b, r.
M.4- 1078 b, n.
5.
987
tells us
a,
22.
oiWa
we
about
by
no
other
than
I do not, however,
shall
see
Sokrates
the evaluation
of
reason
comes
IT
to
any
128
PHILOSOPHY
THE
from
"
OF
SOKRATES
and especially
from the Phaedo
dialogues,
account
given by Sokrates in the Phaedo
the Platonic
The
121.
process
which
by
we
appreciatedbecause
in the Meno
reallyis,how
the
is apt
expressed in
of
to
come
we
it is
forms
to
of
the
be
sufficie
in-
the
mythical
we
are
Reminiscence,
expressly
The question
(86 b, 6) not to take too literally.
the
know
to
come
itself.1
thingsof
which
have
standard
which
enables
us
to
be
do not
imperfect.We certainly
in our
such a standard
perience
possession;it is only our exof sensible thingsthat givesrise to our
apprehensionof it.
On the other hand, our
apprehensionof the standard when it does
arise cannot
be produced by the sensible things,
since it is something
that goes beyond any or allof them. Now
when we apprehend
this apprehensiongivesrise at the same
time to the
a thing,and
thought of another thingwhich the firstthingiseither like or unlike,
call that being 'reminded'
or
we
put in mind of the one thingby the
other (73 c).The sticks and stones
call equal are like the equal,
we
and those we
call unequal are unlike it,but both alike give rise to
the thought of what is 'justequal'(avroTO
It follows that,
'iaov).
as we
are
put in mind of it both by thingsthat are like it and things
that are unlike it,our
knowledgeof the equal must be independent
of sense
And
the same
is true of 'the beautiful itself
altogether.
and 'the good itself.
Aristotle expresses this in his own
way by sayingthere are two
be attributed to Sokrates,universal definitions
thingsthat may fairly
and inductive
reasoning.In the Prior Analytics(67 a, 21) he
pronounce
with
start
associates
definitely
Reminiscence
in
with
the
what
to
sense
doctrine
of the
he calls the
Meno
that
of
'recognition'
learningis
the universal
dead
for over
thirtyyears
and
eighteen. His summary
highly ambiguous statements
must, therefore,be interpreted,if possible,in the
of rebutting it appears
lightof the other evidence. To use them for the purpose
indefensible.
That
and
inference
is
to
to me
hearsay
to
methodically
employ
of
have
rules
evidence
in
discredit
first-hand
and
must
we
some
testimony,
allow for Aristotle's
historical as well as in judicialinquiries.I believe that, if we
be interpreted so as not to
can
personal way of looking at things,his statements
the
do violence
to the
concerns
record; but, if not, that is a question which
the interpreter
of Sokrates.
not
interpreter of Aristotle,
when
It must
be
Aristotle
remembered
first
came
that
to
Sokrates
Athens
at
the
had
age
been
of
SENSE
introduction
described
of inductive
in the Phaedo.
it?' (TO TL
of
THOUGHT
129
and
reasonings,
It is also
correct
it is
to
exactlythe
process
say,
in
this
is
recognise
way is 'the What
for in the Phaedo
eo-Tt);
(78 d) Sokrates describes the
universal which
sort
AND
we
to
come
forms
reality
possessedby the
as
'that of the
beingof
which
we
and
in
as
account
his reference
meaning
to
of the
our
the Meno
doctrine
shows
he
of Reminiscence.
be
it may
own
of the real
quiteaware
was
There
is
nothing to
pointis derived
from
any
has
matter.
in
to
was
it in his
express
own
be added
text-books. It should
some
that,when
Aristotle says
Sokrates,he is
be attributed to
thingsmay 'fairly'
(Si/caicos)
as
thinking,as he often does, of earlier philosophers
contributing
and
that
he
is
his own
certain elements
to
contrasting
system,
certain
distinction
of any
the
Sokrates
between
there is no
and
He
Pythagoreans.
evidence
that he
the soul
ever
is
not
thinking
made
such
distinction.
of
reasoning(Aoytcr/zo?)
that we
are
apprehended
apprehend the forms, while particulars
throughthe body by sensation. Indeed, the body and its senses are
of true wisdom, and the more
only a hindrance to the acquisition
"
it is with
Now
122.
by
means
shall
we
independentof them, the nearer
that the
have seen
and truth. We
to the knowledge of reality
come
be said to have being (ovaia)
at all,but
cannot
things of sense
and that they are
merely likenesses or
only becoming (yevecrt?),
ourselves
make
can
we
images
of
the
eternal
we
(TrapaSeiy/zara)
are
and
standards
immutable
forced
to
Of
postulate.
or
these
patterns
alone
be
Rep.
knowledge;
534
a.
There
is
can
is
our
an
untranslatable
but
(from et'/ca"ea0at),
play
on
words
it also suggests
we
apprehension
of
THE
130
PHILOSOPHY
OF
SOKRATES
would
have
true
of the world
severance
"
then, by
But
123.
one
of
the world
from
sense
dramatic
of those
of
thought.
surprisesso
when
have been raised to
we
dialogues,
elevation,we are broughtto the ground once
spiritual
of Plato's
of
made
to
feel
be,
it does
that,however
and
edifyingthe
It is Plato's way
us.
satisfy
really
of the different sections of an argument
not
elaboration of the
case
beautiful
he
uses
coming
resource
every
art
something fundamental. In
ominous
silence (84 c),broken
conversation
between
Simmias
and
make
to
the
to
long and
by
at
Kebes.
this
pitch
and
more,
doctrine
may
the portance
im-
mark
to
teristic
charac-
the
lengthand
In the present
feel that
us
we
are
first
place,there is a
lengthby a whispered
Sokrates sees
they are
Then
seriously.
follows
himself
compares
to
the
dying
swan
in which
who
sings in praiseof
Delphoi and of Delos, who
he
their
had
Apollo,the lord of
played so mysteriousa part in the life of Sokrates himself,and was
also the chief god of the Pythagoreans.
Simmias
replies(85 c) that
common
master
Sokrates
no
doubt
such
on
feels with
him
but
subjects,
that
and, in default of
of the human
some
divine
that certain
must
we
test
to
cannot
theory,of
be
therefore
which
Herakleitean
we
one
body, and
and
possible
im-
doctrine
that approves
he feels is just the theory,of which
the
knowledge is
be
do
an
have
we
attunement
immortal
not
hear
in
seen
the great
of
(ap^ovia.)
(85 e).Kebes
has
origin,namely,
body which it weaves
is the
of the
The
organisingprinciple
as
a garment.
and woven
out
body is alwaysbeing worn
afresh,and thus the soul
bodies. That does not prove,
may properlybe said to outlast many
however, that
one
of these bodies
may
not
be the
THE
132
PHILOSOPHY
OF
SOKRATES
of
by anyone, and he believes it to be capableof showing the cause
coming into being and ceasing to be in the world of sensible
experience,a thing the earlier form of the doctrine could give no
of.
account
intelligible
faction
" 125. Sokrates tells us, then, that when he could find no satisin the science of his time, and in particular
to the
no
answer
of becoming and ceasingto be (yeVecrt?
questionof the cause
/cat
he resolved to adopt a new
method
of inquiry.He would
(f)6opd),
no
longer consider the question from the point of view of the
but from that of the judgements we
make
things (eVrot? e'pyoi?)
about them
and the propositionsin which
these are
expressed
He
is representedboth in the Meno
and in the
(eVTOLS Aoyoi?).
Phaedo
of the mathematicians'
as much
impressed by the efficacy
which
Zeno had made
method
of 'hypothesis',
of common
matter
knowledge at Athens by this time. To understand its meaning, we
leave out
must
of
account
of the
use
special
in Aristotelian
'hypothesis'
Logic, and also the popular
etymologyalluded to by Plato in the Republic(511 b) which regards
term
the
of the word
primary meaning
which
used. If
it is not
fact that
do
we
foundation
as
this,we
or
basis,a
shall be struck
in
sense
by the
at once
the
correspondingverb ({world
eadai)has two chief
that of settingbefore oneself or others a task
significations,
firstly
that of setting
to be done, and secondly
before oneself or others a
subjectto be treated,in a speech,for instance,or a drama. This
is
usage
as
used
freely
old
as
Homer,1 and by
in Ionic of
natural
extension
the verb
is
of action. That
a course
suggesting
way of
and also of
'given',
The
procedure is
stated in the
as
follows. It is assumed
is true
'hypothesis'
done
that the
proposition
(orthat the
requiredconstruction
has been performed),
and then the consequences
(retav^aivovTa)
of that assumption are deduced
till we
to a proposition
come
we
know
to be true
(or a construction we are able to perform). If,
which
is absurd
to a proposition
however, we come
(or to a con1
See
Liddell
of the term
and
Scott, s.v.
inroOems
requirerearrangement.
The
are
ii. 2.
inroTidrnj.i"
also to be found
article should
The
materials
in Liddell
be read
and
in the order
for
correct
count
ac-
HYPOTHESIS
struction
which
is
the hypothesis
impossible),
The
(dvcupemu,tollitur).
is B, what
follow?'
must
133
the
is
'destroyed'
regularterminologyaccordinglyis,'ifA
(rixP^I
^v^aivav;),and that explainswhy
be regarded as the mark
of a
to
come
the
Hippokratean
method
is older. In
the
are
be
to
and
hypotheses,
found
doctrines
the
key
Ancient
on
of
to
in Plato's Parmenides.
is referred
treatise
There
the
doctrine
of Parmenides
the
as
Empedokles regardedtheir
or
That
'merelyhypothetical'.
that their method
only meant
is
as
of
far later
use
of the word.
expositionwas to
We
postulates.
of their fundamental
consequences
ourselves that this is what
Parmenides
theories
trace
out
the
can
see
for
does
it
in his poem.
doubtless
from
was
It is
Zeno
Zeno
rules. We
of
firsttake
and
probability,
that and
answerer
has been
we
set
false whatever
as
which
statement
procedure is subjectto
down
does
not.
appears
true
as
It is
not
have
tillthen. The
quite separate
agrees with
allowable
for the
not
itself tillthis
hypothesis
If that is not
admitted
consequence
of
it only holds
good
then, we
may
go
on
there
is
may
deduction
even
of the
questionit,
be kept
must
answerer
of consequences
the question of the truth of the
from
gree
high de-
whatever
the consequences
If they do not, and
hypothesisinvolve anythingabsurd.
stillany doubt about the hypothesis,
the
but
to
strict
to
hypothesis.
show
that it is a
in the
higherhypothesiswhich we assume
which is adequate
to some
same
hypothesis
way, tillat last we come
that the answerer
in the sense
accepts it (101d).It will be seen that
there is no
question of demonstrating this ultimate hypothesis;
discussion.
partiesto
1
Farm.
The
some
because
whole
it is
fabric
the debate.
128
el 7roAAa e'cmv.
d,
5. The
reading of
and
Proclus
is avrwv
17 i
the
two
THE
134
"
of the sensible
is the distinction
to
hesitation
any
have
beautiful,we
It is
beautiful.
be
true
to
next
makes
say it has
no
is beautiful.' On
'This
which
is of
intelligible,
Pythagoreaninterlocutor without
ask what
to
answer
no
from
starts
the
from
by his
(100 c).Assuming, then, that
allowed
course
hypothesisSokrates
126.
SOKRATES
OF
PHILOSOPHY
call
brightcolour
the
one
of the
form
thing
particular
or
anything
ment,
meaning of the state-
us
lighton
the
there is
the
course,
forms that
independent
anythingparticipates,
are
know
allthe forms in which
reality
; and, if we
it. The
know
about
there is nothing more
to
stated in the Republic(476 a),where
distinctly
each
of the
forms
with
(KOIVCOVLO)
"
each
Sokrates
the
to
seems
different
KOLvtavla
from
by
of
the
be
forms
doctrine
we
of their
reason
one
many.1
are
is
most
told that
communion
another,theyappear
It is in that
sense
with
one
and
another
the
that
Republic does
the world of sensible particulars,2
and
all reality
to the sensible
particulars
of the Phaedo
not
but
everywhere, and
Sokrates
is one,
no
"
is quite
world which
Plato
intelligible
taught. That is just where Plato differs from Sokrates,as we shall see.
2
Ar. Met.
M. 4. 1078 b, 30. dAA' d pfv ZaiKpdrrjs
KaOoXov
ra
^coptardeVot'etow"e
6pt.0fj.ovs.
TOVS
their /coivcuw'awith
one
another
in the
ov
PARTICIPATION
135
himself is
satisfied with
altogether
not
it necessary
to defend
another way. The real result of the Phaedo
found
that
of what
doctrine
attributed
Plato
from
128.
"
But
of
as
the
from
sense
it still remains
manifold
own
though
thingsof
the
his
sense
and
the form.1
nor
to
cease
Such
is the
tinguishe
clearlydisfrom that of the Pythagoreans.
of
Pythagorean separation(^cupto-jLto?)
to
the
that
true
this,but simply
it becomes,
be
not
anythingexcept by partaking
become
particular
thingcan
no
is
Sokrates, and
there
what
it is
is
as
been
overcome,
the
gulf between
confused
(247 c) the
335
gulfthe
This
b,
10.
is how
He
soul is
Aristotle
does
not
ever
its
striving
in Gen. Corr.
the theory of the Phaedo
Phaedo'.
the
'Sokrates
in
it to Plato,but to
formulates
attribute
and
B. 6.
136
THE
PHILOSOPHY
described
OF
SOKRATES
volved
languageof passionatelove. That is inin the very name
of philosophyitself,
and is brought home
to
us
by calling
philosophers'lovers of wisdom'
(epacrral
(frpovrjcreuj
where
the verbal variation is meant
of the original
to remind
us
who
No one
is wholly dull and stupid feels
meaning of the name.
this craving,
does he who is alreadywise, as God
is.Love is the
nor
child of Poverty and Resource. Now
the soul itselfand its strivings
can
only be adquately described in mythicallanguage; for they
belong to the middle region which is not yet wholly intelligible.
The
objectsof its yearning are not mythical at all. The inspired
lover is seeking the intelligible
and more
than the
just as much
in
mathematician, and I can see no ground for holding that even
of
the Phaedrus, the forms are
'things'
regarded as supernatural
region'is clearlyidentified with that
any kind. The 'supercelestial
of pure thought,
and the forms the mind beholds in it
ness
Righteouslend
itself
do
Soberness
not
itself,
itself,Knowledge
themselves
in any way to crude pictorial
fancies. It is true that our
relation to this supreme
guage
can
reality
only be expressedin the lanof feeling,
but it is not by feeling
we
apprehend it when and
in so far as we
do so. It is expresslysaid to be visible to mind
can
alone (povcp
deary va").There is no suggestionof a different way
of knowing to which
telligen
have recourse
when
and inwe
reason
may
fail us. To put the matter
in another way, allegoryand
myth are not employed to express something above reason, but to
only be
can
in the
"
"
adumbrate
It has its
what
is below
reason,
so
far
as
placehalf-wayup
that
not
be done
can
at
at
all.
only the poverty Love inherits from his mother that givesrise to
these passionateyearnings.When
there is no
they are satisfied,
for striving
and longing.I suspect that all true mystimore
room
cism
is of this nature,
of
means
knowing
forms
is due
about
him, such
have
which
to
as
and
not
to
See Professor
reason
as
hand,
we
would
have
seen
Stewart's
know
certain facts
prove him to
know
certain facts
we
the
conceives
that there
safeguard him
mysticism.I entirelyagree with the
1
which
above
feeling
Plato. We
the other
nature
set
Sokrates
to
that
is only a
firmlyconvinced
am
On
and
the
demand1
Myths of Plato,which
another
was
from
mystic love.
side
to
his
spurious kind of
for a psychological
is far
the
best
treatment
of
FORM
THE
explanationof
the
THE
OF
GOOD
two
137
to be found
easily
appears to me to be the soul
in the Symposium
of Sokrates,son
of Sophroniskos.It is certainly
and there
that we
vivid pictureof his personality,
have the most
in which
that is most
the 'enthusiasm'
and the
in
are
'irony'
the
Sokrates
129. Nevertheless
succeed
in reaching the goal he has
unison.
perfect
of
"
turned
show
That
demand.
not
himself. He
had
therefore
is because
cannot
is
all. Sokrates
There
Republic.
; but
experience
of
say
we
lightof
the
there should
why
be
forms
have
not
which
of
world
that
say (505 d sqq.)
of the
of the Form
in the light
to
on
gone
and
higherone,
experience
of this in the
he is made
forms
world
certain
assumed
have
we
of that
the fulfilment
nearer
itself in
hypothesis
this
we
be much
to
in
explained
be have been
beingand ceasingto
be said
explainthe
to
examine
at
into
cannot
we
sense,
to
before
set
does
Phaedo
though coming
serve
the
we
must
look
Good, which
at
is
of knowledge.He
starting-point
and it
confesses,however, that he can only describe it in a parable,
The
referred to againin Plato's dialogues.
is never
passage in the
Republicstands quiteby itself.We can see dimly what the Good
both of growth
liken it to the Sun, which is the cause
be if we
must
and of vision in the sensible world, though it is neither growth nor
no
hypothesis,but
mere
itself.In the
vision
knowledge
the
same
true
Sokrates
some
; it was
Eukleides
this part
in some
as
leftfor thinkers
doctrine.
positive
such
the
of
cause
regardthis purelynegative
marking a failure to apprehend its
is made
in it as
be
must
that
significant
nature
Good
and
of these, but
true
the
way
That
to
of
later age
Sokrates
this appears
to
as
way
of Megara identified the
be
not
find satisfaction
reallydid speak of
proved by the fact
with
Good
that
to
the
Eleatic
it in
that
One.
am
it
the
work.
1
with God, but
of the Good
This
to identifythe form
language has led some
God
(which,
is a soul and not a form, and in the Timaeus
that is certainly wrong.
of Pythagoreanism) the Good
shall see, represents
a highly developed form
we
as
led in later days to the
The
difficulties raised by this doctrine
God.
is above
and a secondary creative God
God
(the
conception of a highest and unknowable
of
times. The
Demiurge
of this tillHellenistic
but there is no
trace
Demiurge),
the Timaeus
is the
highest God
there
is.
138
THE
That
as
an
or
no
'associate' of Sokrates.
If Sokrates
hinted
at
understand
can
we
be
not
little
have
Phaedo, but
of the
doctrine
position
an
of forms.
expected to acquiescein a plurality
the ultimate unityof allthe forms in the Good,
what
Eukleides
with his
Pythagoreanswould
The
in acceptingthe
difficulty
Eleatic could
SOKRATES
OF
be how
to
seems
PHILOSOPHY
shall
we
how
see
it would
otherwise
meant;
be
in the doctrine
important that
came
be-
generation.
next
GOODNESS
we
he
been
led
was
It
considering.
formulate
to
he differed from
the
them.
of Sokrates
name
he
itbecause
and
'Sophists',
of the
must
we
No
possiblychoose
can
resort,
form
of
understand
to
where
exactly
associated
closely
is more
corollarythat
its
what
reallyknows
the
is bad
other
any
tarily
is volun-
one
no
with
identityof
Sokrates
ignorance.That
admitted
universally
more
try
or
who
one
ing
dissatisfiedwith the teach-
was
doctrine
goodnessand knowledge,with
bad. No
is made
about
him.
That
being so,
number
it is not
that,in
littleremarkable
dialogues,Plato represents
of his
considerable
Sokrates
as
arguing
these
fact,goodness appears to be
divine favour (deia/xotpa)
to
Those
what
who
it
have
is,and
it can
are
giveno
therefore
would
statesmen
same
have
had
their
taught ridingand
by
something that comes
them
some
account
people and
of it;
quiteunable
under
to
to
music.
chance
others.
tell
are
of
inspiration
of
interpretation
intelligent
the influence
give an
not
sons
of
THE
140
between
distinction
SOKRATES
OF
PHILOSOPHY
and
knowledge (emorr^)
belief
(Sofa),
how
duties and
belief
and
and
disputations,
are
who
be learnt.
and moralitycan
righteousness
be
It is very difficultto believe that any of these references can
older than
intended for Plato,as is often supposed.Isokrates was
both
dated with
some
probability
opened
his
forward
as
school, and
a
very
the
tract
Againstthe Sophistsare
Isokrates
before 390 B.C., when
time before Plato came
therefore some
time
teacher. It is plaintoo
the educational
not
and
the Helen
Plato, and
and
predecessors,
he
likely
whom
go
he had
contemporary
rival. On the other hand, the
out
no
of his way
to attack
at that date to
reason
with
it is
younger
regardas
rightly
put
know
We
with
to
too
this
attitude
to
to
death
from
pamphlet. He
Sokrates
must,
influence
then, have
quiteclear,while
there
wished
was
no
the
his
for him
reason
trouble about
attribute
make
to
safely
knowledge
may
to Sokrates
himself,and also the doctrine that goodness
(e'mo-TT^T?)
in turn
and that the knowledge of it is one, and that means
is one
that there
is
no
in attributing
to
difficulty
theory of goodnessexpounded
down
to and includingthe Meno, and
forth in the Republic.
whole
" 132.
We
are
left in
no
doubt
as
Sokrates
himself
in Plato's earlier
even,
to
in
the
dialogues
substance, that
set
what
'goodness'
(dpmy)
have seen,
we
Sophists,
in the
To
the
call efficiency.
It was, in fact,what we
rightly.
a habit
; it meant
goodnesswas alwayssomething positive
of soul
that enabled
as
Greeks
BELIEF
AND
GOODNESS
14!
days that
he tellsus
That
(aperTj).
Sophistshad
demanded
The
of
no
That
comes
in
of
could
who
those
pay
of party
arts
if you
way
to
want
there
go
well
as
little
to
naturally
knowledge was
(97 b) that
only sort
intrigue.
says
the
identified with
goodnessSokrates
'true belief
'goodness'
goodness the
other Athenian
the
by
to
in
was,
different
colour.
acquirea peculiar
to
second
was
more
such in those
was
Hundred,
the Four
of Athens
ever
how-
seen,
anywhere else
better than
out
tended
the word
have
We
view.
have
to
Larissa
as
knowledge.
true
of
In the Meno
he
belief about
the
There
is
nothing
have
we
astonishingin such an admission in view of the account
given of his theory of knowledge. As we have seen, he was very
far from
denying the relative value of ordinary experience.Its
those of knowledge, though they are
as
objects are the same
did
of Athens
statesmen
He
confused.
imperfectand
no
good
to
meant
never
at
all,or
to
say
deny
all value
to
the
works
their
impart goodnessto
of its cause
chance.
happy
it has
(98 a),when
Statues
goodness
taught.
have
which
It will be observed
the
exact
Plato
counterpart
ascribes
correctness
been
on
on.
It is
mainly an
only, we are
chained
to
of Daidalos.
is also
of thingsin
(atria)
fast
can
by
be
told
in the
reasoned
sure
Then, and
knowledge
affair of temperament
and
knowledge
of its not
then
can
Meno
running
only,do
therefore
we
be
that this
of the
Sokrates, and
of that
weak
any
It is
that we
Aoyio-jLioi)
(alrias
like the
away
based
therefore be counted
cannot
The
sons.
this is another
Just as we
ascription.
the world of coming
cannot
into
indication
explainthe
of the
cause
being or ceasingto
be
PHILOSOPHY
THE
142
SOKRATES
OF
in
or
participating
ceasingto participate
have true goodness unless each
'form',so we cannot
intelligible
an
to its true
is referred by reasoning (Aoyicr/Mos-)
cause
(atria).
act
world
of
sensible
experiencein
Everyday goodnessis just like the
unless
regardthem
we
as
goodnessmust be constant
guished
and invariable. According to the Phaedo
(82 a) Sokrates distinand
the two
as 'philosophic
aperr?)
goodness'("/"iAoao"/"t/o7
the 'goodness of the
or
aperrj),
'populargoodness'(S^/xori/c^
The
former
citizen' (TroAiri/^
aperr/).
depends on intellect (vovs),
It is the former alone that is teachable;
habit (edos).
the latter on
ledge.
be taughtbut knowfor it alone is knowledge, and nothing can
latter is only good at all in so far as it participates
The
and uncertain
that, it is a shifting
in the former. Apart from
and
that it is inconstant
thing.
" 133.
variable
though goodness in
But
an
knowledge,TtlsTnot
art, that
or
not
; true
the full
of the
sense
is
word
ment
say, an external accomplishhe may
exercise
that may be acquiredby anyone, and which
Plato has given us at full lengthtwo
at his pleasure.
very
is
to
artificersis highlycharacteristic.The
best known
is the
is less likely
which
to
Republic,
of the other,which
in
if read in the light
occurs
be misunderstood
is
the Hippias minor. In the Republic(332 e sqq.)the argument
directed to showing that,if goodness is an art (a view for which
will
the honest man
and not Sokrates is responsible)
Polemarchos
with
argument
be
the
best
much
is better
do wrong
the
same
or
can
make
man
a
to
more
the
to
successful
is that wisdom
Hippias minor
telllies as
most
tell the
is
truth,and that it
The
than involuntarily.
point is
voluntarily
is always 'of
An art or capacity(Swa/nis)
cases.
in both
The
opposites'.
who
of the
argument
requiredas
to
will be
The
murderer.
in the
Polemarchos
bad
who
make
can
one,
good use
therefore
and
of it is also the
something
must
more
man
be
to
blame
the teacher
of his
pupilsthan
we
should
of
IS
GOODNESS
Polemarchos
with
as
is
the
really
same.
ART
AN
NOT
143
Is it possible
to
of this
regardgoodness
kind,
or
is it
something that belongsto the very nature of the soul that possesses
for the good man
to do evil or
to
it,so that it is reallyimpossible
injureany one?
discussed at this time
" 134. Another questionthat was much
that of the unity of goodness,and to Sokrates this question
was
was
teachingof
closelybound up with the other. The professional
branch of it
apt to suggest that you could learn one
and not another. You
might, for instance,learn courage without
honesty,or vice versa. If the different forms of goodness
learning
goodnesswas
'arts' or
many
so
are
necessary
goodnessis
external
from
cases
the
the Charmides
virtue
particular
under
cannot
we
from
say
that
made
is
entirelydirected
particularform of goodness
impossibleto maintain
From
form of goodness.
In both
soberness.
discussion
knowledge, but
in
another, and
in
and
courage,
identifyany
one
stand
Sokrates
one.
with
connexion
no
accomplishments,theywill
is identified
Sokrates.
by
On
with
the
showing that,if we
with knowledge,it is
to
one.
these
Both
refuses
which
identify
goodnesswith
line of argument
another
of this
of which
an
art,
Sokrates
is
that
supportedby
fond. A good example
are
is to be found
in the argument
with Polemarchos
in the Republic(332 c).It is that,if you identify
ness
any form of goodwith
an
too
art, it is
to
impossible
discover
any
use
arts appropriate
to
alreadycovered by the particular
each department,and there is no room
for the Virtue'. One might
that honesty or justice
a virtue useful in partnerships,
was
suppose
but we
should all prefera good playerto an honest man
our
as
singing.If
partner in a game of skill or as an accompanistto our
whole
field is
goodnessis looked
to perform; there
may
case
be
function
in this way, it will have no special
is no room
for it alongsideof the other arts. It
at
and it is in any
harmful, since it is a capacityof opposites,
superfluous.
the
knowledge with
which
true
goodness
is good
PHILOSOPHY
THE
144
for the human
SOKRATES
OF
soul. It is at this
how the
clearly
theoryof conduct taughtby Sokrates,like his theoryof knowledge,
influenced
was
by Pythagorean doctrine. The Pythagoreanshad
alreadyregarded the health of the soul as something analogousto
the health
of the
have
metaphor. We
of
notion
it was
body,
pointwe
for them
and
an
than
more
all medical
It
was
goodness in
work
much
was
mental
("75) how they arrived at their fundaand
attunement
(ap^ovia)or blend (/cpacri?),
Pythagoreaninfluence.
to
preferred
probablyan
this
most
seen
view
see
out
("124),and
attunement
an
the
point of
view
of what
he
was
experienceor
out
in the
routine.
In the
Republicthe
most
theory is worked
same
that there
are
three
or
parts of the soul, the philosophical
(Ou^os),and
Aoy"7TiKoV),
temper
of these
virtues of each
reasoningpart ("/"iAoo-o""o
desire (emQvfila).
The
special
are
wisdom, courage,
and
soberness,while
all in their
represented
ordered.
We
that
see
of these
which
justice,
to
each
each
further how
of
supremacy
soul,and how
to
command,
commands,
and
while
how
be
temper
the desires
to
assignsto
it.It is shown
usurped
be confined
material
polityof
should
wisdom
the inner
of that how
consideration
learn from
there
of these
and
one
are
its proper
or
arisingfrom
the
same
cause.
No
doubt
the
much
Republicowes
to me
to the artistic genius of Plato,but it appears
quite certain
that the leadingidea is Sokratic,and indeed Pythagorean.Plato's
different that he would
not
view of the soul was
naturally
so
own
fallinto this way of expressinghimself,though he might quitewell
elaboration
use
it for purposes
of
more
or
we
less
find in the
As
popularexposition.
we
shall
CONCLUSION
it is
see,
the
by
own
time
master's
and
doctrine
Aristotle
later
years,
about
this
we
in
he
of course,
like
to
worth
while
their
natural
that
are
that
the
to
the
regard
this
is
has
ever
material
for
people
in this
a
for
the
as
of
philosophy
Sokrates,
who
not
am
that
well, and
it
If Plato's
very
hard
to
imagine
he
wrote
use
forward
came
Sokrates
Plato
arranges
made
dialogues
he
that
aware
of course,
before
to
really cogent
Sokrates
the
this
forced
he
well, and
urge
adopt
be
some
in
work
I would
artist, and
himself.
I find
and
so,
surely
consequences
cannot
unless
is
should
this
dramatic
all written
probably
were
to
those
it. We
clearlya
knew
Plato's
dialogues
place,
maintained,
not
Sokrates
knew
doing
than
impossible,
which
come
lie with
fiction
else
is
what
not
he
of
as
meant
can
be
for.
meant
who
real
is
artistically.But
sketch
teacher
It is
He
reporter.
mere
his
done.
as
we
second
deny
for
produced
if
his
hint
place, it
Plato's
taking
the
not
who
Plato
first
the
of
what
seen
'hypothesis' on
In
does
those
of
been
ever
proof
In
if the
no
is
considerations
two
destroyed
untrue.
or
with
be
can
be
only
can
Sokrates
argument
is the
It is
have
to
something
is, there
doctrine.
of
experiment
That
of
but
hypothesis,
Platonic
are
heard
taught anything
ever
there
and
system,
it
As
opinion.
ascribes
ever
have
finallytill we
matter
the
impossible
burden
of
it
should
we
his
whole,
development
that
of
so
consistent
this
only
was
Plato
but
sense.
and
that
genuine
was,
before
urge
him
to
of his
brief
or
years
Aristotle
anything
originallytaught
that
the
fifteen
and
intelligible
an
is in
philosophy
within
sure
the
as
Sokratic
change
decide
to
proceeds,
be
Aristotle
philosophy
own
had
ascribed
may
regards
the
originalphilosophy
written.1
was
from
remarkable
anywhere
what
If Plato
definite
submit,
different
quite
had
currency
It is, I
himself.
Plato
gave
death.
it is
of
account
Plato
which
he
Republic
the
that
improbable
145
I have
there
not
are
so
thought
many
it necessary
excellent
accounts
to
give the
of
argument
it in existence
of
the
Republic
already.
in
detail
The
Trial
and
THE
In
" 137.
democratic
'with
even
an
leader, Meletos,
lanky hair, a
guilty of
brought
was
rhetorician.
trial
to
'youthfuland
beard, and
scanty
obscure
more
of Socrates
CONDEMNATION
Sokrates
B.C.
399
Death
unknown'
hooked
The
by Anytos,
the
tragicpoet,
nose',1 and
indictment
Lykon,
stated
he
that
was
by Sokrates
delivered
here he is
for
adapted
Sokrates
or
writer.
the
general line of
Apology is not
case
not
that
other
hand
do.3 Far
even
actual
Meletos, who
Euthyphro,
The
to
be pure
to
for themselves
should
he
the
court
it all the
more
accusation
import things
conciliate the
the
or
no
the
have
with
into
judges. That
the
does
supposed
to
conduct
of the
got him
to
entrusted
prosecution was
admit
Plato.
that
he
By
skilful
believed
him
to
cross-
to
be
b.
is 'worship'.
vo/u'""v in its legal sense
but
the
observance
not
to
primarily to 'religious opinions',
of certain
'uses'
Plato
Sokrates
take
makes
current
advantage of
(VO^OL),though
the secondary sense
'think' in order
Meletos
confuse
26
c).
to
(Apol.
3
See the Introduction
German
edition
of the Apology with
to Schanz's
notes.
The
world
least
of his way
nature
that
makes
treats
did
to
meant
professionalspeech-
before
that
to
carefully
Plato
either
perfectlytrue,
Sokrates
out
doubt
be
to
even
it.
goes
speeches
by
that
supposed
incredible
all, but
at
be
no
Sokrates
It is
man.
Apology
from
examination
the
for
for them
of
to
persons
it seems
attitude
hardly of
the
done
defence
usual
was
accused
his defence.
of
were
prove
other
had
and
contempt,
It
not
publication,and
often
misrepresented the
characteristic
for
what
more
On
his trial. It is
at
reporter.
mere
and
revised
do
not
does
inadequate
refer
translation
of
148
THE
it was
no
better than
are
in his
fear in the
now
of
is goingto
time
he
for
to
that any
likely
not
OFFENCE
Sokrates
why
death. We
to
the
believing
not
had
good man
his judges farewell.
a
lot,none
ask
put
was
waking days
that,
plainly
die and
ALLEGED
now
few
pretty
he bade
so
to
me
the better
meet
also hinted
life.And
depart,for
to
sleep,and
was
next
THE
It is
SOKRATES
night of that. He
'It is
OF
dreamless
the soul
belief,
own
nothing to
us
evil than
an
more
TRIAL
educated
charged
was
must
put aside
at once
the
gods.
man
with
educated
un-
peopleprobably knew
church
no
and
no
religious
orthodoxydid not exist. So far as mythology was concerned,
No one
you might take any liberty.
appears to have found
fault with Aischylosfor his Prometheus, though,judgedby modern
standards,it is flat blasphemy.He
some
revealing
Eleusinian
instructive. If it had
been
Sokrates is described
as
formula, and
the
for inadvertently
is
contrast
indifferent to
totally
mythology,though he
falsehood
or
has the
the
to
the truth
namely,that it is
thinghe
does indeed
feel
strongly,
dangerous repeat stories that ascribe untruthfulness and wickedness and strife to the gods,and in the Euthyphro
to
(6 a) he
an
as
however, and
1
had
I
It has
no
ask anyone
effect it makes
a
necessary
Arist. Poet.
who
him.
upon
public meeting,
is some
even
fixed belief in
only
can
and
holds
Of
1451
b, 25.
but
this view
course
he knew
reserve,
the
Apology
Sokrates
that few
that is all.
read
was
that
'the historical
used
to
the passage
discredit
aloud
addressing what
of his hearers
held
such
was
himself
Sokrates'
the Phaedo.
and
see
what
practically
so
beliefs,
there
THE
CHARGE
others
149
stranger still.The
truth
is that
belief in narratives
might
anyone
looked
was
on
as
falsehoods'. No
opinions.1
" 141. Nor
anythingto
creation
could be
one
prosecutedfor
the
prosecution.It
what
'poetstell many
call religious
we
'voice' should
is
that
true
have
had
is
Euthyphro
ground
makes
said
charge
in his
eccentric
Sokrates
the
made
he says it
meant
and
of his voice
because
and
nothing about
his trances,
and,
as
and are
misrepresented'4
Euthyphro says, such thingsare 'easily
But the belief in 'possession'
(/caro/car^)
apt to make peoplejealous.
much
too
much
too
was
firmlyestablished,and cases of it were
to allow of a chargeof irreligion
being based on anything
familiar,
accepted view
be treated
could
was
that such
thingswere
sort
ness
mad-
but even
by 'purifications',
(iepos).
epilepsywere supposed to make the sufferer 'holy'
From
the point of view of the ordinaryAthenian, the irreligion
would be on the side of anyone who treated the 'voice' disrespectfully.
and
"
It
142.
must
also be
divinities
new
wras
no
ducing
charge of introit had been definitely
that the
remembered
novelty;for
by Aristophanes a generationearlier. In
formulated
Sokrates
announces
reignedin
that
his stead. He
Zeus
has
offers prayer
been
to
dethroned
the Clouds
the
and
and
Clouds
Vortex
by
swears
Euthyphro, 3 b sq.
ev
817KO.\
Taylor's interpretationof the words
sound
the
i.
to
only
me
seems
14)
eypai/raro(Varia Socratica, p.
rfjypafj
the divine voice when
Sokrates
meant
("17)that Meletos
one.
says he supposes
said nothing
It is clear,then, that Meletos
he spoke of Sai^owa in the indictment.
about it in his speech.
4
The
word
no
more.
means
euSid/Soya
6
doubt
strike the average
ordinary
The
'voice' would
as
an
no
SetatSat^wov
of eyyaarpi.fj.vdia.
case
1
3
Cf. p.
76, n.
Apology, 3 1
.
z.
d. Professor
THE
150
TRIAL
OF
SOKRATES
that Diogenes
Chaos, and Air It will be remembered
Respiration,
That being so, it is surely
of Apolloniaheld Air to be a 'god'.
very
t
hat
the
distant
does
make
most
not
significant
Aristophanes
allusion to the 'voice',
though he must have known all about it,and
lend itself admirably to comic treatment.
is
it would
The omission
the more
there is an allusion to the trances
of Sokrates
as
striking,
instructive. He
more
(150).Xenophon is even
says he got his
information
about the trialfrom Hermogenes, and we
may be sure
the religious
Xenophon would be anxious to discover all he could
about the meaning of this charge.He does not appear, however, to
have got any definite explanationof it; for he only givesit as his
personalopinion that it must have been the 'voice' on which the
most
accusers
chieflyrelied,and it seems
probablethat he is only
repeatingthis from Plato's Apologyand Euthyphro.At any rate, in
his own
Apology, he makes Sokrates speak about the 'voice' very
much
as
Plato
fact,everyone
In
the
are
of
jealous
him
it as
speculatesabout
an
the
say,
justlike Euthyphro,
exceptionaldivine favour.
meaning of the charge,and
the
is that no one
not
even
clearly
it. It surelyfollows that the charge
to know
seems
prosecutor
of introducing
divinities,
new
though stated in the indictment,
neither explainednor justified
at the trial.Such
was
thingswere
in
which
like a public
possible an Athenian
was
more
dikastery,
There
meeting than a court of justice.
was
no
judge to rule the
one
out
"
"
prosecutionirrelevant to
the indictment.
THE
REAL
if that is the
why
Meletos
falls
judges more
votingfor
him,
be
turned
true
OFFENCE
was
pretext. That
mere
easilyinto
the charge of
so
the
atheism
of Sokrates
acquittal
round
and
voted
that
on
the
it follows
would
We
know
intelligible.
the
of the matter,
account
by
the
number
plain
ex-
conduct
of the
of them, after
chargebroughtagainst
sentence.
That
is partly
REAL
HIS
becomes
clear if we
could
not
some
of the
for
he
believe
him
would
account
for their
we
of the
know
it. The
changeof
Thirty,but
we
condemn
also know
mind
in that
to
that he did
of incivisme,but
suspect
for
man
an
though they
had refused
that Sokrates
therefore
was
guiltyof
charged,even
formally
not
was
to
of the accusation
ground
stated in the
might
Now
be
reason
151
suppose
some
OFFENCE
case.
orders
obey the illegal
leave Athens.
not
the
He
made
amnesty
it
offence. Plato
political
impossibleto charge him with a strictly
that Sokrates really
owed
indicates in the clearest possible
manner
his death
he is
to
his
century,
Perikles,in
including
is in the
Gorgias,and
there
very
severe
who
Kallikles,
is
of these
One
manner.
democratic
man,
states-
talk about
to
unauthorised
he frequently
does, and
divinities,
as
" 144.
in the
to
not
be able
death.
There
them, and
F
pointof
Apologyis the
will
him
this
statement
to
view
one
of the
of Sokrates
rid themselves
most
thinghe
would
be
importantthings
(39 d) that
of criticism even
his men
countryif theyput
B.C.
P.
THE
152
TRIAL
OF
SOKRATES
That
is,to all intents and purposes,
younger.
what the hints of Kallikles and Anytos suggest
of the
spiritwhich
that antidemocratic
men
half
revolutions. About
was
had
had
led
the real
fostered
to
later Aischines
century
plea of guiltyto
the
in young
oligarchical
put the
'putthe
says (i.173) that the Athenians
death because he was believed to have educated
He
quitebluntly.
Sokrates
and
to
less than
ten
years
ground
matter
Sophist
Kritias',
Sophist Polykrates
at
the
the
pointwas
is stronglv suggested
by the allusion Sokrates makes in the Apology
Xenophon also in the
(33 a) 'to tnose tneY saY are mY disciples'.
makes a pointof sayingthat Kritias and
Memorabilia (i.
2, 12 sqq.)
Alkibiades
of Sokrates.
reallydisciples
not
were
point of view,
" 145. It is only fair to say that, from his own
Anytos was not altogetherwrong. Xenophon, indeed, attributes
merelypersonalmotives to him. He says in his Apology (29)that
him he ought to givehis son
he was
angry with Sokrates for telling
a
liberal education
instead of
bringinghim
business
up to his own
truth there may be in that,
It is impossible
to say what
other reasons
but in any case there were
Sokrates from Athens. He
to remove
as
tanner.
Periklean
that it denied
was
the need
for
expert
anyone
of
else.
According to Plato,he
to
statesman
Perikles. In
the
democratic
Republicwe
is certainly
meant
the
went
leaders
have
an
far
so
as
of his
account
to
deny
the title
time, including
of the
democratic
of Athens
in the
description
fifth century, not of the humdrum
democracy of Plato's
bourgeois
is by no means
Of course
flattering.
time, and the description
own
State,which
the young
men
who
followed
to
be
Sokrates
about
would
be
far less
cism
impressed by his positive
teachingthan by this destructive critibe prejudiced
of existinginstitutions. They would
against
democracy to start with, and they would relish his attacks on it
ANDOKIDES
keenly.It
not
THE
ON
MYSTERIES
of them
153
vulgaroligarchsand
became
tragedyof
was
Now
responsiblefor it,but it existed all the same.
Anytos and
his friends were
cracy,
busilyengaged in organisingthe restored demoand they could not afford to leave their work at the mercy of
reaction. They had every reason
to believe that the teachingof
Sokrates was
of a kind to imperilthe constitution,
and it is not
that they took steps accordingly.
It must
be remembered
surprising
that they had probably no desire to see Sokrates put to death, but
not
it was
natural
circumstances
of Sokrates
they should
wish
easilyunderstand
thoughtit prudent to leave
death. Even
we
drive him
to
why
can
of the friends
some
Athens
for
after his
time
Plato went,
accusers
ran
fifth of the
votes.
that
be made
might
which
of
that the
assuming,however,
pretext, it
the risk of
mere
PRETEXT
We
statesman
have
must
been
beingheavilyfined
of irreligion
appear
if they did
there
not
If
ask that
we
connexion
with
the mutilation
of service
of the
question,we
time,
but
to
the democratic
come
images of
shall
party. We
and
Hermes
the
find also
revelations
never
under
at
tried
year as Sokrates was
the judges to explainhis
this old
preciousdocument
the
anything
was
secure
Andokides
had
for the
one;
of the charge,
and on
justification
like Anytos might relyto produce the right
kind
to
upon
colourable
ask,then, whether
must
prejudiceagainstSokrates.
once
charge
know
is a
only
the restored
the
democracy.No
probablynothing to
doubt
this
do with
was
the
mistake. The
profanationsof
the
mutilation
had
and
mysteries,
THE
154
the latter
does
TRIAL
OF
SOKRATES
obviouslydistorted
were
credible that
in the
of the
It
popularimagination.
giftedand enlightened
in Athens
should have found it amusing to parody Eleusinian
men
not
ritual,
once
only or in a singleplace,though even that would
be silly
and in a number
of private
enough, but systematically
not
seem
houses. On
took
the other
placewhich
some
most
that certain
proceedings
being representedin that lightis
capableof
far too strong to be rejected,
and conveys
reader the
to a modern
idea that there may
have been something resemblingmeetings of
masonic
into blasphemous
lodges,exaggeratedby public rumour
mummeries
Now
of the
business.
There
have
judgesmust
known
associates of Sokrates
intimate
most
sacred rites.
most
of the
many
of the
were
is
quitewell
Alkmeonides,
Damon
the
three
high-born
same
whom
called
which
Further, if
we
Symposium
is
that is the
remember
supposed
that
take
to
that
occurred, it is suspicious
Akoumenos
We
name.
present
a
was
do
physician,is
name,
of
celebrated
We
one
of the
and
we
are,
however,
one
sure
bore
inculpated.4
an
unusual
it. He
was
not
Eryximachos, who
was
also
Phaidros
is
that Phaidros of
told that he
the
of Akoumenos,
persons
physician,and he has
be
in
the scandals
year
the
son
of the
Sokrates.3
to
described
names
else who
well be
master
Charmides
among
one
of the accused
of the
speakersthere.
cannot
that
find the
we
very
of
authorityon music.
an
banquet
placethe very
know
not
as
may
the
of anyone
the banquet, though his
at
is meant.
Phaidros
This
name
introduced
of
son
the wife of
been
her kinsman.2
Kritias
Eryximachos, and
had
to notice
interesting
Taureas, and
palaistrain
who
of
the wife
by Agariste,
Sokrates refers to
If that is correct, it is
was
dame
this
Axiochos
of Adeimantos
denounced
were
some
in
implicated
were
no
that
was
an
not
an
common
un-
Myrrhinous
'associate'(eralpos)
Eryximachos,5and
The
record
where
of the
his
name
berger,Sylloge2,39,
2Andok.
3
Ib.
Andok.
i.
i.
47;
i.
public sale
is given in
41, 43,
still exists
on
tions,
inscripfull,'A^io\os'^4A/ct/3taSou
(DittenZWa/i/Jcow'Sij?
of his confiscated
goods
45).
6.
Plato,Charm.
15, 1 8, 35.
153
a.
8
Plato,Phaedr.
268
a.
156
to
THE
at
escape
ready
However
-the
and
good
the
to
laws
of
might
and
law,
be,
could
it
was
as
would
he
in
submit.
He
for
him
were
have
we
not
his
been
not
friends
But,
had
it
only
and
country,
his
exception
an
might
citizen
and
needful.
be
of
making
sentence
his
month,
supporter
of
unjust
this
that
firm
inconsistency
the
to
was
SOKRATES
OF
during
expense
any
Sokrates
seen,
time
any
bear
to
DEATH
stoop
own
case.
legally
owed
to
nounced,
pro-
thing
every-
call
them
question.
in
the
In
Sokrates
earth.
on
whole
the
also
last
associate
our
the
wisest
has
words
most
to
literature,
of
it
are:
man,
righteous
'Such,
as
of
of
account
an
difficult
be
European
(eVatpo?),
and
given
would
It
of
range
The
of
Plato
Phaedo
we
his
the
match
and
this
it
time.'
say,
hours
narrative
be
cannot
Echekrates,
should
last
was
the
of
in
phrased.
para-
the
best
end
and
XI
Demokritos
Demokritos.
by
his
like him
conduct, which
had
raised
stillsee
from
was
fragments that
to
a
he
the front
one
was
is because
wrote
Abdera, and
at
faced
Protagoras
problem of
the
the
by
the
Sophists.
author, and
voluminous
of
That
to
made
was
he
his fellow-citizen
by
forced
also been
his
Sokrates
Sokrates, however, he
Unlike
can
he
reconstruction
contemporary
knowledge
difficultiesabout
at
we
do
of Sokrates.
his works
were
never
at Athens, where
they would have had a chance
reallywell known
like those of Anaxagoras and others, in the
of being preserved,
libraryof the Academy. It is not clear that Plato knew anything
in which
by
the
on
the
Ionian
It is
he
to
seems
be
reproducinghim
Pythagoreaninfluences
other
from
hand, knows
are
where
else-
both. Aristotle,
too
was
an
the North.
the
Demokritos)
Abdera
and
easily
explained
well; for he
Demokritos
included
at
in the Timaeus
about
works
of
continued
and
Teos
Leukippos and
to
down
others
as
corpus (which
well as those of
Hellenistic times.
It
was
itself
therefore
possiblefor Thrasyllos in
their
own
" 149.
the
system.
We
know
the
life of Demokritos.
158
DEMOKRITOS
in Thrace, a citywhich
belonged like Protagorasto Abdera
reputationfor dullness,seeing it
hardly deserves its proverbial
have
could produce two such men.1 As to the date of his birth,we
only conjectureto guideus. In one of his chief works he stated that
do not know
it was
written 730 years after the fall of Troy, but we
several
when
he supposed that to have taken place.There were
He
in
eras
been
had
the time
at
use
man
young
inferred that he
it was
he
Anaxagoras,and
B.C.
That
seems
from
this
rather
too
; for it is based
early,however
that he
later. He
and
met
the
on
tried
to
Protagoras.2
" 150. Demokritos
his
answer
was
fact
that, like
distinguishedfellow-citizen
discipleof Leukippos,and
contemporary
the
it obscures
of Sokrates, and
predecessors
the
of
have
we
he also
Rhegion,that
of the school,
Pythagoreans for his teachers. A later member
Apollodoros of Kyzikos, says he learnt from Philolaos,and it
That
for his geometricalknowledge,
accounts
seems
quitelikely.
had
and
also,we
spoke of
Zeno
his
works.
Leukippos. He
to
appears
mentioned
the
he
These
would
though
Pythagorean.
have
the
It has
been
arisen
to
As
has
a
been
visited
fragmentin
satirical remark
be
he
and
seen,
out
Demokritos
of Plato.
that
above
are
(p. 112,
based
on
was
of Demokritos
be
to
for
298 b)
(fr.
the
himself.
it
reason
some
reputation of
the
of Demokritos
know
course,
is
not
goras,
Ionia,to Anaxa-
this is mentioned
which
appears
pointed
discipleof
contemporary
have
some
thing may
philosopher',which
2
would, of
the
same
in
doubt
no
Demokritos
plausibly suggested
from
have
we
through
refer to
may
attributed at Athens, and
generally
that
believing
know
to
come
was
theory of the sun and moon
which
the explanationof eclipses,
have
is said
and
of Parmenides
doctrines
Anaxagoras,as
That
original.
He
know,
Abderites
The
as
other
'the
may
side of
laughing
in Horace.
n.
illusion
that
make
goras
Prota-
Protagoras
was
HIS
is a
forgery.There
Athens
and
that he had
no
of Phaleron
not
been
a
me.'
make
to
spent in
which
If he said
such
Protagorashad
be
159
(fr.1 16)in
he says:
that,he
impressionas
an
done.
said Demokritos
fragmentmay
have
knew
one
failed
fellow-citizen
is another
LIFE
never
On
meant
his
the other
the modern
to
doubt
no
brilliant
more
hand, Demetrios
visited Athens
wandering Sophistof
'I went
at
this
all,so
of his time
Abdera.
must
He
the head
type, but
was
of
school.
regular
The
atoms
he
does
have
to
seems
lie in the
not
much
expounded
he
had
He
than
belongsto another generation
altogether
is not specially
concerned
in finding
answer
an
as
received
theory of
it from
and
these men,
Parmenides.
to
The
day. The
questionhe had to deal with was that of his own
of science had been denied and the whole
possibility
problem of
and that had to be met.
Further,
knowledge raised by Protagoras,
the problem of conduct had become
The originality
a pressing
one.
directions as that of
of Demokritos
in the same
lay,then, precisely
Sokrates.
THEORY
" 151.
mechanical
author
followed
Demokritos
of
account
composed of atoms
in the impact of atoms
the
of sense
organs
which
these atoms
are
not
like
from
must
are
KNOWLEDGE
Leukippos
in
giving
purely
is
vision
OF
doctrine
on
this
As
subject.
everythingelse,sensation
without
be
on
the
atoms
must
of the
the soul
consist
soul,and
through
(-nopoC)
simply 'passages'
introduced.
the thingswe
strictly
It follows
suppose
the 'images'(SeiVeAa,
that bodies are
ei'SajAa)
that the
ourselves
objectsof
to
see,
but
constantlyshedding.
The image in the pupil of the eye was
regarded as the essential
thingin vision. It is not, however, an exact likeness of the body
from which it comes;
vening
for it is subjectto distortion by the interair. That is why we
see
thingsin a blurred and indistinct
cannot
way at a distance,and why, if the distance is very great, we
them
at all. If there were
air,but only the void, between us
see
no
and the objectsof vision,this would
be so; 'we could see an ant
not
crawlingon the sky.'Differences of colour are due to the smooth-
l6o
DEMOKRITOS
ness
in
or
roughness of
similar way.
sounding body
They therefore
that resemble
in the
the
Sound
and
is
them.
the
with
which
flow from
differences of
figures(ei'Sry,
ax^ara)
Hearingis explained
atoms
alongwith
ear
The
of
stream
motion
cause
reach
the touch.
images to
of
those
taste
the
it and
due
are
the
sense
which
atoms
Aristotle says
Demokritos
if we
understand
similarly
was
way, touch,
cold,wet and dry,
shapeand
all the
in
come
size of the
by
'that of
to
senses
touch
atoms
the
sense
perceivessuch
however,
touch
we
the
reduced
differences
to
the
by which we
and the like,
is affected accordingto
impinging upon it.
regardedas
ear.
of that sense,
and smell
organs
detail. In the same
explained,
though not in the same
contact
the
the
must
which
must
go
on
knowledge.
" 152. It is
to
consider
the doctrine
here
that Demokritos
the
Eleatic tradition
of 'trueborn'
and
'bastard'
course
to
Parmenides
rests.
had
said
comes
on
expresslythat
which
the
atomic
theory
use
there
is colour.
But
in sooth
(eVe^)there
void.' In fact,our
sensations
somethingoutside
be
cannot
apprehended by
thing is sometimes
same
the
felt as
said
the
nothing external,though
us,
the
specialsenses.
sweet
and
atoms
and
(fr.9), 'we
true
of which
nature
That
sometimes
in truth
is
as
know
why
bitter.
the
'By
nothing
but
of the
represent
are
TRUEBORN
know
cannot
the
BASTARD
l6l
KNOWLEDGE
this way;
for 'truth is in the depths' (fr.
that this doctrine has much
in common
with
in
reality
will be
117).It
AND
seen
distinction
modern
between
the
primary
and
secondary
of matter.
qualities
sensation as a source
ledge
of know" 153. Demokritos, then, rejects
just as the Pythagoreansand Sokrates did ; but, like them,
the possibility
that there is a
he saves
of science by affirming
of knowledge other than the special
'There are',he
source
senses.
says (fr.n), 'two forms of knowledge (yva)^),the trueborn
and the bastard (aKorirj).
To the bastard belongall these;
(yvrjafy)
smell,taste, touch. The trueborn is quiteapart from
sight,
hearing,
these.' That
is the
of Demokritos
answer
to
Protagoras.He
had
said that
the
At
he had
justas
outside
of the organs
intervention
to
having immediate
them
know
to
after
of
there
direction,and
every
of
atoms
as
all,of the
knowledge
soul
our
atoms
atoms
without
directly
of the soul
were
the
not
of the
nature
same
this trueborn
with
contact
they
was
that Demokritos
The
sense.
particular
parts
any
overlooked
be
of the bastard. He
us
confined
done
not
of
explanation
purelymechanical
gave
time, it must
same
as
the
'bastard',and
Demokritos
absolute separationbetween
an
refused, like Sokrates, to make
and thought.'Poor Mind,' he makes the senses
sense
125),
say (fr.
'itis from
is
thou
us
'true-born'
fall.'1The
a sort
of inner
sense,
and
its objectsare
sensibles'
of Aristotle.
" 154.
As
and
Zeno,
In
continuity.
form:
to
'If
think
unequal ?
cone
Demokritos
busied
remarkable
one
is
cut
by
the
2.
make
reans
Pythago-
problem
states
the
cone
of
it in this
sections? Are
two
p. 113,
with
(fr.155) he
to
plane parallel
1Cp.
of the
follower
himself
passage
are
we
they equal or
uneven
; for
l62
DEMOKRITOS
circles. Which
that Demokritos
appears
cone
absurd.'
most
was
went
remark
to
on
From
of Archimedes1
say
the
cylinderon
height,a propositionfirstdemonstrated by
clear,then, that he was engaged on problemssuch
himself. Once
as
rise
more
important the
how
see
we
as
those which
work
of Zeno
was
intellectual ferment.
an
THEORY
CONDUCT
OF
conduct would
on
" 155. The views of Demokritos
than his theory of knowledgeif we could
more
interesting
It
completely.
them
the
It is
of Archimedes
infinitesimal method
the
to
of the
Eudoxos.
same
ultimatelygave
of the
base and
same
it
moral
precepts
attributed
doubt
however,
difficult,
is very
him
to
to
be
sure
be
recover
which
genuine. There
are
was
Cheerfulness
(TTepi
euflu/^?)
on
even
is
of
no
his. It
important
freelyused by Seneca and Plutarch, and some
fragmentsof ithave survived.
that pleasureand pain
It started (fr.4) from the principle
what determine
This means
and aTepifjir))
are
happiness.
(rcptftis
was
'Happinessdwelleth
of the
dwelling-place
remember
must
man's
and
is based
the Greek
on
to
this usage.
we
On
in
nor
in external
gold; the
understand
soul
goods.
is the
this,we
which
Baffjuov,
come
word
sought for
(fr.171).To
word
had
guardianspirit,
be
herds
daimori1
that the
of 'fortune'. It
rvx^i,
in
not
to
be used
translate
one
a
properly meant
almost as the equivalent
by 'happiness'
(ev8a.ip.ovia
side of
closelyrelated to that of
stress
on
pleasureand pain. 'The
Sokrates,though it lays more
is to pass his life so as to have as much
best thingfor a man
joy and
be' (fr.
189).
as littletrouble as may
The pleasuresof sense
This is not, however, vulgarhedonism.
are
just as littletrue pleasuresas sensations are true knowledge.
but the pleasant
for all men,
'The good and the true are the same
is different for different people'(fr.
69).Further, the pleasuresof
Demokritos
happinesstaught by
Cf.
Diels,Vors?
is
ii.p. 90
".
164
DEMOKRITOS
share
we
of
have
of
coiner
has
him
telling
that
the
now
we
the
regret
main
return.
Demokritos
help
current
loss
of
From
our
is that
he,
of
his
of
his
of
point
too,
saw
it is
it
He
need
the
at
and
only
an
it
all.
is
for
the
literary
stand
apart
that
to
to
the
doubtful
At
important
answer
into
way
very
their
to
seems
of
is
great
was
require
we
for
mainly
view,
the
their
and
philosophy,
Greek
found
thoughts
deepest
works.
he
material
system,
that
feeling
of
sort
What
Epicureans.
because
have
these
the
not
some
cannot
and
the
to
mainly
preserved
philosophic
know
we
we
is
itself
attached
phrases,
of
interpretation
time,
been
That
anthologies.
whether
that
discredit
the
in
we
fact
same
merit
from
must
about
Protagoras.
BOOK
III
PLATO
XII
Plato
and
the
PLATO'S
"
If the
57.
scholars
and
of Plato
than
the
of any
Epistles,
we
the
dialogues,
hold
have
later Lives
they
may
contain
neglect them
Plato's
least the
the
birth.
work
Attic
It would
could
have
successful
We
turn.
of the
of
the
Epistlesmust
skill, or
he
to
not
have
could
from.
start
is conceivable
that
that
it is safer
so
been
in
Academy
character
which
is the
find
Plato's
Even
far
as
man
to
of almost
reproduced
so
at
are
of
use
later who
oldest
that the
say
contemporary.
fiftyyears
the
as
with
him
writer, whose
anyone
does.2
hand,
forgeries,they
been
to
remarkable
more
well-informed
have
sources
other
credited
Epistlesare
to
the
Epistles,on
The
and
the
on
is such
him
indeed, go
may,
resting
older
impossible to
language as he
the
infer from
from
and
proves
from
apart
may
points
life
been
handle
fixed
greatest
of the
of the
Speusippos, already
sober
we
member
certain
of
dialect
was
mythology,
nephew,
miraculous
two
the
more
statements
two
first instance.
this
what
entirelymythical. It
general
in the
own
who
know
we
"
of
some
philosopher.1Even
or
give us
or
their
free from
are
one
and
"
deal. Besides
one
almost
are
lost, but
now
these
are
ancient
authority of Hermodoros,
The
they
good
we
genuine
other
know
LIFE
EARLY
Epistlesare
historians
Academy
at
most
every
supposed forger
unparalleledliterary
of
many
the
little
like Bentley
by scholars
genuineness of the Epistles has been maintained
In practice most
like Grote
and
E. Meyer.
accounts
Cobet, and by historians
of
of Plato
that
is disguised by the
custom
on
them, though
really depend
pendent
dePlutarch's
to
referring instead
Life of Dion. Plutarch, however, is obviously
this is an
if not
he tells us ; so
the
all,of what
on
Epistles for most,
In my
itself.
should
add
stands
I
that
the
First
by
illegitimate evasion.
Epistle
fourthIt
mistake.
is
it
has
into
its
a
genuine
judgement,
place by
present
got
for
he was,
meant
to pass
letter,but I do not think the writer, whoever
century
1
The
and
Plato
2
at
After
all. I do
the
Epistles existed
not
think
either
rise of Atticism
before
that.
it
that
he
might
was
have
Dion
been
or
meant
to
pass
for Dion.
we
know
the
l68
LIFE
the
of difference
we
elaborate
more
Plato's
marked
that
peculiarities
which
I shall therefore
I have
Perikles died
addressed
to
use
of them.
are
not
convinced, I
occasion
428/7 B.C.,
do
to
As,
so.
than
more
year after
for the first
to Athens
justbefore Gorgias came
from a poem
quoted in the Republic(368 a) and
and
learn
time. We
in
born
was
make
scholars who
stilleminent
are
warn
PLATO
OF
his
brothers, Adeimantos
and
Pyrilampes,whose
associate of
of
Pythodoros son
Isolochos,who
Glaukon
and
Adeimantos
of Zeno.
in his
son
must
had
have
been
youth an
a disciple
older
been
than
is based on a misunderstanding
they were
younger
that Plato could not talk as
of the Republic.
It is assumed
he does there except to younger
brothers, and it is forgotten,as
usual,that Sokrates,not Plato,is the speaker.In the Apology(34a)
should have been called to giveevidence
Sokrates says Adeimantos
with him, and
from associating
Plato had got any harm
whether
older as to stand in loco
this impliesthat Adeimantos
much
was
so
parentisto his brother. Further, we learn from the poem quoted
and Adeimantos
had won
tinction
disin the Republicthat both Glaukon
idea that
Plato. The
absence
in the battle of
further
meant,
brothers
distinction
won
differed
in the
same
battle,they
of
424 B.C. is
if both the
cannot
have
widelyin
in accordance
in the
when
that dialogue
was
Republicif they had been stillliving
Glaukon
written. Xenophon (Mem. iii.6, i) tells a story of how
restrained by Sokrates from speakingin the Assembly before
was
he had
him
reached
series of
some
legalage
questionsabout
Athenian
finance and
by asking
the national
defences, and
that
feeling
the
it is
occupationof Dekeleia
was
interested
in 413 B.C.
because
in Glaukon
It is
true
of Char-
PLATO'S
mides
to
before 413
is explicable
enough in a writer
however, if it is one,
and
chronologyas Xenophon,
As
to
of his
mention
Plato's
traced
kinsman
She
of Solon.
sister of Charmides,
he
that
Charmides
that he
married
That
Ariston.
that
would
of the
latter
dialoguebefore
in the
how
the
so
As
son.
she
he
and
with
to
death
usage.
The
in the battle of
for it appears
from
366/5,though her
supposed date
us
with
of the Parmenides
fix the
of
of the
for Thourioi
departureof Polemarchos
That
explainshow Kephalos is still
the
Lysias,though present,
We
of
niece, and
by the
wounded
Adeimantos
also
his
was
sumption
prein the
uncle
maternal
still livingin
was
told
Athenian
great age;
the
further
are
widow
was
importance of
return.
conversation.
we
the
left
was
and
that Periktione
she
highly
of Kritias and
the cousin
Pyrilampeswas
Republic,and
of after his
also
affords
grandfather
reached
Glaukon
those
alive,and
born,
was
presumptions.
his
to
be in accordance
instead
Plato
was
Pyrilampesis that
the
identify
made
Glaukon, and
assume
to
Sokrates
before
the second
her when
hear of
last we
of
son
must
we
other
that
its descent
herself
was
(158 a)
Charmides,
slip,
careless of
so
of his maternal
name
young
The
B.C.
least
is quiteappropriate.
and
distinguished,
the
at
outweigh the
know
we
five years
or
name
family of
The
much
cannot
Charmides,
acquaintance four
bore
slip.Charmides
was
be
too
would, perhaps,
attract
169
FAMILY
shall
see
that
does
take
not
good
deal
any
part
depends
on
this.
but
This
was
has
been
it involves
Megara in
family.See
424
the
no
B.C.
used
as
an
argument
impossibility,even
Athenian
if Adeimantos
girls married
very
in the Appendix.
genealogicaltable
young,
and
it
was
long-lived
LIFE
170
and
in the
PLATO
OF
dialoguecalled by
himself stands in
members
of his
memorial
he
I have
wrote.
by
was
means
no
to
tions
keeps the shadow of the Revolunot
his picture.His dialogues
on
are
only a
falling
to
Sokrates, but also to the happier days of his own
the dramatic
from
contrast
to the way he
striking
as their memory
especially
family,
the time
popular at
about
Plato's reticence
his name.1
skillwith which
he
written
had
Charmides
with
met
dishonoured
end.
The
" 159.
Sokrates
when
have
he
and
Hermodoros,
must
that Plato
statement
known
and
it is
Sokrates
of
acquaintance
the
Sokrates
It
very likely.
that converted him
not
was
one
rather
seems
to
It does
ever
follow,however, that he
not
only made
to
have
That,
philosophy.
vii. There
impression left by Epistle
we
of
the death
been
at
told
are
disciples,
quite distinctly
Kritias and
career.
political
Charmides
for they are no
doubt meant
suggestedthat he
should enter
by
publiclife under the Thirty,but he was disgusted
like gold
their excesses,
which
made
the former constitution seem
he was
shocked by the treatment
by comparison (324d).In particular,
(324b) that
he had
looked
forward
to
"
"
democracy
career,
of Salamis
was
death
("1 1 1).When
of
more
of Sokrates convinced
him
the
political
that this
He
wider
"
60. It has
become
would
on
much
stage.
and connexions
were
later,and
openingin politics
an
rather what
See p. 275,
n.
i.
we
commonplace
incline him
be
more
should
*
See my
from
untrue.
call
The
to
traditions of the
as
'Whiggish',
edition
of the
is shown
family
by the
PLATO
172
acquaintanceat Athens,
he
where
of
the
of
court
then about
was
Dionysios I.
life he had
the luxurious
Pollis,who
ambassador
in
even
danger,but
he
twenty. That
Syracuse,where
at
lead. The
to
speechoffended Dionysios,who
of
was
sold him
ransomed
was
him
to
disgustedby
was
handed
as
he
brought
him
slave
by
at
man
over
the
to
Spartan
mentioned
suggest, is that he
have
must
written
considerable number
very
Without deciding
already.
dialogues
anythingas to the order
in which
composed, we are able to say with some
they were
confidence that the Euthyphro,
Apology,Crito,Charmides, Laches,
and Meno
all
at least were
Lysis,
Euthydemus,Protagoras,Gorgias,
That is about one
composed before Plato was forty.1
dialoguea
of them
before the death of
none
year, assuming that he wrote
that the great tragediansoften brought
Sokrates. If we remember
of his
out
four
playsin
and
production,
littledoubt
I have
also written
were
one
this
by
it
In
have been
completed before
I think
In
may
all these
every
1
by
we
seems
dialoguesthe
ventured
Campbell
to
in
in
assume
1
an
dramatic
the
867. It would
is
portionsof
take too
of the
not
interest
results of the
rate
the
well
must
Academy, and
very
seems
of
Phaedo
Republic at least
the foundation
some
excessive
Symposium and
the
other, except
I have
Lewis
case,
seem
that the
date, and
advanced.
any
not
much
to
later.
outweigh
Republic.Plato's
researches
stylistic
inaugurated
long to discuss them here.
PLATO'S
dramatic
done
had
He
which
is
with
the
who
could
Gorgias,
of
his
speak
inmost
believe
we
Second
Epistle.There
have
turned
be
had
of his
He
own.
intellectual
anything
development
gain the
not
anything
that
I attribute
the
a
far that
so
The
Academy.
of the studies
programme
shall see,
we
of
of them,
one
take
Plato is
astronomy
himself
and
namely,
'There
had
think
rightlybe
called
of those
continued
paramount;
the
the
that
were
his
rather
than
pursued
solid geometry.
at
solid
this has
that
not
yet been
already attributed
were
geometry?
to
age.
At
detect
can
Sokratic, and
open
to
seems
there ;
had
and,
but
he
invented.
to
all
to
which
been
ness
awkwardmind
my
as
corrects
It had
The
be
speak
proposed
dimensions,
Sokrates
to
Sokrates
making
Sokrates
of three
purely
about
was
be
ease
that
Guardians
in
likelythat
philosophy
whose
of the
to
it
purely philosophical
giftdeclined. It is only
education
and
away,
into old
scientific interests
effect in the
men
the Phaedrus
be Platonic
interpolatesgeometry
had
of
no
not
If he
for
much
passed
invented
boggle
learn
is
objects that
instructive.
mask
that
Glaukon
he
or
dialogues,and
to
late and
quite at
not
of these
tillhis artistic
to
higher
any
one
Republic and
exception to
as
possibleto
be. I do
to
been
was
seems
Protagoras
revealing anything
it
statement
that could
hand
parts of the
in certain
main
was
upper
of
Sokrates
generation that
have
to
seems
that the
writing of
What
reallybelong to
go by the name
handsome.'
The
dialogues,in fact,
and
in the
them
posium,
Sym-
simultaneously, either
(314 c):
says
most
in the
imagine
cannot
character
used
think
be.
ever
young
yet
as
the
the
dialogues,but
Alkibiades, without
or
he
pictures of
I believe
Plato
will there
profess to
in
thoughts from
perfectlyserious
own
that
will
at
therefore
not
Plato's
Sokrates
Republic. I
involuntarily,have
I do
Plato, nor
the
earliest
personality,should
own
voluntarily or
himself.
and
words, is seldom
its best
at
seen
of the
one
in
gift of assuming
giftis
certainlynot
Phaedo
173
acknowledged
this
Aristophanes
or
DIALOGUES
marvellous
and
personalities,
diverse
man
often
though
power,
justiceto.
goes
EARLY
manner
should
very
of
he
ACADEMY
THE
174
OF
FOUNDATION
THE
ACADEMY
after his
Academy by Plato soon
not
to Athens
return
was
onlythe most important event in his life,
doubt
but also in the historyof European science. The idea was
no
suggestedto him in the first placeby the school of Eukleides at
Megara, and by what he had seen of the Pythagorean societies in
southern
Academy is derived from a gymnasium
Italy.The name
outside the walls of Athens, which had been laid out as a public
Plato had a house
and garden,and this
Here
park by Kimon.
for
longthe
after the siegeof
remained
town
of the
seat
religious
guild.It
by Sulla
Athens
disestablished
had
and
disendowed
kind, it
was
to
the
continued
to
by Justinianin
organised as a
Muses, and its
members
into the
most
part
life.
common
the firstthe
From
of whom
many
observed
that they came
men,
world. That
is one
from
almost
of young
It is to be
highereducation from
visits from
paid flying
Hellas
Athens
to
came
Isokrates
and
to
youths came
from
colonies in Thrace
and
in
to
some
Plato. Athens
Hellas'. It is of interest
these
in 86 B.C., and
chapel,dedicated
its
from
school,though it moved
Like
A.D.
529
of the
foundation
measure
to
on
the
Kyzikos, of which
Eudoxos
transferred himself
and
had, in fact,become
note
the
Athenian
two
further that
'the school of
goodly number
from
North, and especially
the Black
of
the Greek
Sea. That
existence of
was
citizens,
the head.
At
any
rate, Eudoxos
Teos down
sodoros
come
to
his school
from
Chios,and
Euboulides,the
adversaryof
Diony-
Aristotle,
PHILOSOPHY
was
is all we
Milesian. That
Epicurus of
Samos
Athens, where
once
175
can
more
ithad been
in order
to
fact,which
is often overlooked,
feel
we
difficulty
in
in
passingfrom
different world
of
Plato
Aristotle,and
nor
we
of
for
accounts
This
philosophy.
Aristotle. We
to
be
to
seem
and
altogether,
other schools
to
have
we
things. If we
only had Plato's lecture on The Good and the
of Aristotle,
should get a very different impression.
we
Protreptikos
As
it
is,we
resemblance
Aristotle's than
to
It will
" 164.
the Academy
if
which
curiosity
have
to
his
we
first consider
it had
led
been
appliedalso
to
more
the purpose
of
by the word
understand
what
Plato
used
of
meant
or
more
to
men
been
far
dialogues.
own
help us considerablyto
In Ionia
'philosophy'.
It may
assume
fairly
may
note
the researches
less scientific
their usages.
of the
(iaropirj)
in all probability
Milesians,but there is no
evidence of that. It
Pythagorasthat
with
firstgave itthe
that it
was
to
be
Plato's. Much
two
are
came
men
clear
to
one
enough.
reallynecessary
Plato
is
It will be
to
written
about
understand
Isokrates
if
we
are
to
estimate
aright.
PLATO
thingwas
the
AND
common
ISOKRATES
to
only remedy
both
men,
for the
and
that
was
ills of Hellas
an
was
176
AND
PLATO
ISOKRATES
Sokrates
Phaedrus, where
to
at
the kind
of
the end
of
Isokrates with
contrast
like Lysias.He
advocates
professional
mere
is made
to
says
but I am
is stillyoung,
ready to tell you what I presage
think
far
natural
I
as
that,so
gifts
go, he is capableof higher
Isokrates
for him
important not
overlook
to
Sokrates,not Plato,who
and, of
of
anything but
afterwards
been
ashamed.
some
forensic
On
the
speeches of which
been
measure
of Sokrates
fulfilled. I take
sincere compliment,and
perfectly
Plato and
than
Isokrates
about
speculations
modern
differed,indeed,
opinions in
on
Isokrates
prophecythat
about
especially
sents
repre-
be
to
likely
between
common,
had
more
feud
was
have
not
friends is much
as
It is
compliment,
prophetically
other
to put
likely
in
not
the
settinghere.
Sokrates
course,
the dramatic
them.
a
Plato
politics.
good
must
right
They
many
have
that both
and
Isokrates
and
Plato
Hellas
the
" 1 66.
Where
of education.
Plato and
Isokrates differed
Isokrates
between
him
rivalry
between
longstruggle
and
was
Plato
humanism
what
was
convinced
were
we
was
call a
reallythe
and
conviction which
in their tion
concephumanist, and the
science. It
be
bered,
remem-
necessitya far
shallower thing than what we
In the firstplace,
call by the name.
modern
humanism
has gainedimmeasurablyfrom having to deal
however, that Greek
humanism
was
of
must
SCIENCE
with the
with
language
of classical antiquity.
An
those
is
HUMANISM
why
instance, is
far
humanism,
any
the fifthcentury
The
real content,
shallowness.
it in
Cicero, for
Greek
contemporary
Roman
as
behind
it,and
centuries,while Greek
methods.
the
to
science,and
preparedthe way
Sophistsof
know
we
well
as
antiquity
The
humanism
strength.
seventeenth
as
with
preoccupation
always tends
peoples,and especially
exclusive
country
own
Roman
even
177
literature of other
and
AND
of Isokrates
tended
to
the
tific
scien-
had, therefore,hardly
littlemore
become
and
inherited from
rooted
humanism
and
humanism
so
than
the
art
of
expressingcommonplaces in a perfectform.
time, the form invented by Isokrates really
" 167. At the same
influenced
or
was
perfectin its way, and he has, directly
indirectly,
to the present day. Even
commonplace
every writer of prose down
thinkingmay have its value, and it is a very good test of that to
has to utter one's thoughts in
express it in an artistic way. If one
accordance with a prescribed
scheme, they will at least gain in
and coherence, so far as theyare reasonable at all.Thoughts
lucidity
do not admit of artisticexpression.
that are wholly unreasonable
In this way Isokrates was
quiteentitled to claim that his teaching
did a great deal to
of service to his pupils,and he certainly
was
Hellenism
in spiteof the fact that his own
make
a
possibility,
thinkingis unduly coloured by the rhetorical antithesis of
political
Hellenes
and
regardedas
barbarians, a
unscientific
division
of
mankind
which
Plato
we
any rate, whatever
doubt that Plato recognised
262 d). At
(Polit.
there
may think of Isokrates,
his merits, and it is curious
can
to
be
no
note
how, the
more
he
came
to
he
importance,the more
logues
It is just in these later diafellunder the fascination of his style.
dominant
that the influence
where the scientificspirit
is most
divergefrom
him
work
as
Isokrates
very
and
seems
to
matters
be traced
of Isokrates may
such
on
the
was
of greater
most
Sophistis wide
capableof understanding,and yet
it is in that
he
fail,
was
gladto
178
"
68.
different
Plato
To
from
philosophy
what
ISOKRATES
AND
PLATO
it was
to
of
was,
Isokrates.
something quite
look at the dialogues
the Academy, and
course,
If
we
was
clear. No
made
has insisted
one
than
more
he has
on
first and
was
foremost, then,
and
legislators,
fact, made
true
It also
science. We
for
and
most
much
to
of his
trainingrulers
in its task.
produced
trainingwas
pupilsturned
in
tyrants, which
is
Plato
are
mated.
rightlyesti-
tyrannicides.
than
more
practical
out
trained
rhetorical
statesmen
Academy
was
and
It was,
that his
see
it
tragedians,while
shall
for
extremely successful
was
produced
boasts
his rivals,but
rhetorical
institution
enough,
Isokrates
it
an
that of
historians
and
men
or
of
often
appliedto
the slightest
There
communities.
is not
legislators
by new
improbabilityin the story that Epameinondas, who had been an
associate of the Pythagorean Lysis,asked Plato himself to frame a
code
of laws for Megalopolis, though we
told that Plato
are
declined.
180
PLATO'S
TEACHING
We
each step elaborately.
justify
to
when
we
As
" 171.
Academy
there
is
at
be
can
the
plan of teachingand
and
trustworthy
once
no
Aristotle 'was
about
his hearers
subject
study adopted
in the
notes.
They
came
of the
and
recognisedgood things,
Arithmetic
and Astronomy and
some
of
nothingbut
One, they thought it all very strange. We
and Xenokrates
that Aristotle,
Speusippos,
of this very discourse. We
may
his lectures,and that is confirmed
notes
said that
Aristoxenos
of those who
most
affected.
were
regularlectures (owouo-uu,
took
how
alwaystelling'
the Good
on
this
doubt
and that
dKpodcreis),
lecture
to
we
have
we
to
return
the Philebus.
to
come
shall
know
had
heard
expectingto hear
when
they heard
the Limit
and
the
Simplicius
all published
their
from
not
write
by Aristotle's reference to
dogmas' (aypa"f"a
Soy^ara).As we know, Plato
'unwritten
the
his
did
published accounts
The
he repudiates.
There
is worth
He
quoting.
says
reached
the
soul,it thenceforward
finds nutriment
to
be written
down
or
stated
myself than
by others,and I
be the person to suffer most
from their being
too that I should
down
in
If
I
could
be adequately
set
badly
writing.
thought they
written down
and stated to the world, what finer occupationcould I
know
have
had
in life than
and
few
very
can
be enabled
would
lightof
a
good thingfor
discover
to
rest
it would
by no means
pleasingor with a
had
learnt
though they
somethinggrand (341 c-e).
statement
not
mystery-mongering,as has
of the true
philosophymust
if it is
also
in the
a manner
This is
use,
who
of
means
as
reveal Nature
even
in
to
write what
to
theoryof
be
merely an
warning
salutory
been
said ; it is
all highereducation.
man's
To
simply a
be of any
be philosophy
it ceases
to
very own;
echo of another's thought.The passage is
of Plato. He may, in a
to the interpreter
a
l8l
PROBLEMS
of it is less easy
We
" 172.
are
they could.
the
means
But
held
to
in the Academy
think,then, of Plato lecturing
of his
the
attentive hearers
more
no
is
to
the
see
soul, to
the
rouse
lightfor
It
turn
itself.The
it
to
the
to
Academy
libraryof
that the
the school
his
at
of the
movements
was
what
by
the real
no
thing.Its
but
light,
the soul
lecture-
mere
who
Simplicius,
tells us
disposal,
heavenlybodies
no
better than
was
was
an
takingdown
discourse,though necessary,
set
most
hall ; it was
the
of his
function
must
to
notes, and
without
book,
dry bones
reproduce.
the
recover
measure,
had
that Plato,who
be
must
regular,
of the
Academy
problem'to the mathematicians
their apparent
find on
what hypothesis(TIVCDV
to
vTroredevrcov)
could be explainedso as to 'save the appearances'.1
irregularity
The
word
'problem'calls for specialattention in this connexion.
Both it and 'protasis',
the verb corresponding
to which
(Trporeiveiv)
rendered
has been
'propound'(proponere)in the passage just
'propoundedit as
referred to,
originatein the
Greek
of
custom
asking riddles
banquets,and
to the
idea of scientificresearch
as
at
bear witness
common
in
turn
for
in the
directed to
largely
this side of the Academy's activity.
Epikrates(fr.
5)laughsat Plato,
of
for investigating
by the method
Speusippos and Menedemos
enthusiasm.
The
what
the
division
to
nephew
and
successor,
animals
and
and
vegetables,
1
genus
Simpl.
wrote
de
poets
was
pumpkin belongs.Speusippos,Plato's
books on the classificationof
many
the few fragments that remain
deal,
Caelo,pp. 488. 21
; 492.
(Heiberg).
182
THE
ACADEMY
for
and
to
well
we
must
of
assumed
outlined
to
course
the Clouds
PROGRAMME
that
scientificschool
a
of
matter
be
certainly
OF
STUDIES
We
Academy.
course
We
told
expressly
are
is to occupy
the
Republicrepresents
was
in the fourth.
" 173.
It
and it is
life,
THE
the
his
and
astronomical
models
as
possess maps
and, if that was so in the fifthcentury, it may
course,
of the
earlyperiod of
into connexion
provided with
takes it for granted in
would
in the
the
belongsto
bringthat
be said that
which
is almost on a
consequences
discussions of the kind. The biological
modern
most
of Aristotle
natural
as
its economic
the
ten
that what
is said about
thoughtof
mature
the
ever,
It would, how-
regularprogramme.
theories
most
Plato
of the
to
part
and
thirty,
the sciences in
on
the
Academy
characteristic of
subject.
or
very
Plato's
yet been
not
carried
out.
That
is what
he
by the 'longer
way',which has yet to be travelled (435 d,
be prepared to find,then, that in some
must
important
504 b).We
respects the philosophyof the exact sciences given in the Republic
means
is completely
transformed
at a
later date.
programme
education
is the
in
order,we
shall see
is based
the
on
pointof
the
view from
which
Plato started.
OF
PROGRAMME
183
STUDIES
the
nature
of numbers
by thought alone. It
of sense
ambiguityand relativity
the
senses
as
appear
also appears
and one
one
as
many
as
two,
arises from
the
What
perception.
from
so
another
to
appears one
point of view. Two
it is the function of
thoughtto
visible
or
"
science
intermediate
yet.'Sokrates
between
answers
it is,their
make
some
extreme
progress
If the
director,
theywould
soon
state
be
were
director
to
second
Even
perfected.
elegance(^a/at?, em^a/st)causes
(528d).
TO
state
them
to
has
B.C.
P.
184
THE
of the cube
(990 d).
" 174.
remaining studies
The
be
than the
more
deal with
metry
Stereo-
term
here ; it appears
used
is not
not
was
ACADEMY
Epinomis
mentioned.
two
related
his
to
motions
must
We
must
regarded merely as illustrations (TrapaSeiy/xaTa).'
solutions.
them
not
treat
as
as
xpto/nevoi),
'problems'
(Trpo/SA^acrtv
be
What
have
we
them'
and
numbers
true
is 'the
velocityand
the
study
to
the
true
motions
true
in relation
move
one
is
sentence
easilymisunderstood
we
and
one
to
the real
which
another, in
with
contents
(529d).
This
what
with
at
time from
to west
of the
requireselucidation.
heavenly bodies are
motions, which
are
The
quiteirregular.
first sightseem
east
and
of great
planetsmove
at
from
to
among
plexity
com-
west
That
is the
stationaryaltogether.
(TO 6V raxos) is
'problem'we have to solve. The 'real velocity'
We
should
spoken of simply as opposed to the apparent velocity.
think it necessary to add 'the real slowness',but that is only an
not
and has no
instance of the Greek
tendency to 'polarexpression',
ness'
serious importance.We
as a 'slowspeak of a lesser velocity
may
if we
is spoken of as carryingits
please.Then this velocity
east, and
sometimes
'contents'
eVoVra)with
(TO.
they
are
it. That
is because
the Greeks
were
in
the habit
of
orbital revolution
which
can
be
as
similar
to
adequatelystudied
alwayspresents
the
same
face
to
without
the earth
the
only case
The
moon
telescope.
(ornearlyso),and, in the
a
unreasonable
of any indication to the contrary, it was
not
the other planets
did the same.
We
to suppose
say the rotation of
the moon
time as its revolution round
upon its axis takes the same
absence
expressedthe
same
fact
by sayingthe
moon
OF
PROGRAMME
does
revolve
not
all relatively
to its orbit. That
at
can
us
To
Aristotle
but
which
sphere)to
the
does revolve
(or rather,in
moon
to
What
trace.
its
his
case,
axis,
the
it was
things 'in
'true numbers'
the motions
not
of the
is meant,
which
science
and
on
the
the
are
the
they
to
rotate.
explainswhy
the
as
face
of
number
are
is why Aristotle
the same
alwayspresenting
of the heavenlybodies
none
that is justwhat
us
185
STUDIES
they appear
heavenlybodies no more
than the diagramsof
motion
of the
motions
true
have
must
we
heavenlybodies
have. The
to
express
apparent motions
the laws of solid bodies in
the geometer
the truths
embody
of
geometry.
It is
time' has
to
that such
observe
amusing to
take
but
an
is shown
annual
course
was
set,
are
not
then
watches
of this. Our
account
by
utilitarianthingas 'Greenwich
the visible
That
four times
sun
this illustration is
by
sun',
year, and
not
too
fetched
far-
shortcomingsof the
the
5. Harmonics.
regard as
with
here. Not
study is Harmonics,
the counterpart
of
which
Astronomy.
so
the
one
deals
will apply
principles
determine
the harmonic
Adam's
by
ear,
even
the
interpretation of this
passage
is
refuted
sufficiently
by
the
account
goreans
Pytha-
same
to
As
the
intervals
next
sun.
motions
motions
them
The
visible
Aristoxenos
represents
(Diels).
us
and
Archytas
the second.
fantastic
86
THE
and
such
interval is
an
consider
ought to
and which
Here,
in the
as
case
science of
succession
of 'beats'
to
of
numbers
are
ask the
reason
of the
intervals in
So
lengthof strings.
would
that the
seem
In
be due
must
have
we
far
the
as
those which
some
intervals
questionand
answer,
the
art
of
such an account
receiving
\6yov).Even Xenophon knew
problem
while
of number
nature
but
are
and
the
not
itself.
prelude to the
that is Dialectic. We
know
It is the
sense.
rational
than
the
art
others
that
Sokrates
the
or
reasoning,
Euthydemus(290c) we
of
account
/cat
made
those
who
of
of the method
an
is
at
hand
must
geometers, and astronomers
the dialectician for examination.
of
things
(SiSoVcu Se^ea^ai
from
of
art
others
'dialectical',
though he attributes to him
etymology of the word.1 But here something more
erroneous
weakness
him
with
associated
In
special.
cases.
consonant,
are
givinga
of
meant
another
of the
anticipation
hear are produced by a
(we should say, of waves),
in the Sokratic
means
one
Pythagoreansystem goes, it
might be expressed by any
have been experimentally
covered.
dis-
reallyto learn,and
Dialectic
with
ratio;we
studies,however,
alreadywhat
and
air
somethingin the
to
All these
" J75strain
fact that
an
solution. The
not,
as
have
we
consonances
are
terms
such
of this in both
sounds
of the
(rrX^yai)
and
consonant
Astronomy,we
of the musical
such
expressedby
which
not, and
are
ACADEMY
Here
over
their discoveries
learn
we
(533 b) that
described
as
hypothesis,
to
the
for instance
itselfis
by Sokrates in the Phaedo, is justthis,that the hypothesis
of its consequences
; it has not
onlyestablished by the consistency
in the light
We are
of any higherprinciple.
itselfbeen examined
told, accordingly,
that,though geometers and the rest do in part
attain reality,
they only see it 'in a dream'. So long as they use
hypothesesand refuse to let them be moved, because theycan give
of them,
account
no
take for
waking vision. If we
know, and
Mem.
"yevTj
TO.
end
our
iy.5.
Trpay/Ltara.
and
He
makes
That
is
12.
in Prot.
{= emar/iiuav)
implied in Rep.
foundation',
reallyhave
our
said it.
to
behold
derive
312
511
b.
or
The
true
what
starting-point
steps
are
Being with
we
do
only a
not
con-
from StaAe'yetv
Kara
SiaAeyeaflai
from
of cro^tcm??
o
TWV
ao"f"a"v
that of imodeais from
'lay a
vTrorid-rjui,
rates
Cratylw is full of such things,so Sokthe verb
iaTT)s
may
be said
they cannot
l88
ACADEMY
THE
for
necessary
to
us
learn all we
Eukleides. It is not
about
can
much,
Eleatic,and
an
the doctrines
of the
Megaric school
in
best
was
later
know
from Aristokles,1
them
stillbear traces
as we
generation,
their Eleatic origin.
though we are not entitled
Accordingly,
ascribe allthese doctrines
himself without
Eukleides
to
of
to
ado,
more
far wrong
in crediting
him
with those that are
Eleatic in character. To begin with, we are told that the
definitely
cannot
we
go
it their business
Megarics considered
sensations and
appearances
(KaraftaXXeiv)2
and to trust to reasoning
alone. That
Eleatic. We
also told that they held
are
thingas coming
such
into
is not, and
Eleatic doctrine,and
Eukleides.
It is
then, to
impossible,
in the
Sokrates
to
the other
interested in the
stillhave
We
certain
which
hand, he appears
teachingof Sokrates
about
doctrines
have
have
becoming.
part in the
have been deeply
to
subjectof
the
on
of
to
doctrine
we
curious document
Sokratic
could
the
originated,
of forms which
into the world
enter
plurality
Eukleides
accordingly,
though present, takes no
discussion. On
no
motion. That is
that he
suppose
Plato attributes
or
was
attributed
confidently
be
may
that there
be
to
being or ceasing
also sound
and
accepted,
'throw'
to
goodness
the Good.
dialect,in
clearly
are
dialect,
strongly
suggest Megara
rate, we
know
that Eukleides
is also called
One, which
by
as
conjunction
origin.
its placeof
such
other names,
as
God
or
with
the
Wisdom.
to
onlypossible
Sokrates
plain.As
seems
is shown
unreal, is
1
Aristokles
referred
pp.
to
to
Seep.
The
are
show
was
the
there
nothingelse
thingas evil.The
and the things that
such
senses
that there
teacher
preserved in
is
Euseb.
of
are
method
appear
statements'
'two
Alexander
Pr. Ev.
of
Aphrodisias.
by which it
to
them
are
(Sicrcroi
Adyot)
The
statements
xiv. 17.
113, n. 2.
It is
Siaooi Aoyoi (formerlyknown
as Dialexeis).
334 sqq. See Taylor, Varia Socratica,i. pp. 91 sqq.
ii.
THE
which
be made
may
That
is what
them.
with
the
matter,
quibblingabout
a
had
method
words.
serious doctrine
189
GOOD
we
degenerated by
It does
in the hands
this time
of Eukleides
of the
into
not
their
Aristotle's account
trust
may
all of
mere
anythingbut
; for Plato
had
not
yet
of Dialectic in the
account
and
do
to
in that
case
we
understand
easily
positionof
the
justiceto
Eukleides
which
Republic
said
According
the
to
but the
In
such
some
valuable
The
theory
which
Good
would
would
could
He
such
when
as
he
in any
is neither
the
Being
nor
shall
from
hand
one
ledge,
Know-
this way
of 'emanation',and
one
with
it when
extent
developmentof
the
of
that is in
the doctrine
was
Neoplatonismmay
thought that was in
Republic.We
have
no
have
case
of the
are
considerable
wrote
historical verisimilitude
does.
be
knowing how
not
Being on
naturallyfollow
associated
was
described
fairly
of
doctrine
how
some-
might be preserved.
means
is also
in
Plato's mind
followinghim
of both. It
in his system
regardingthe
be
with
Good
effort to do
an
of Good
the
Republic,
this influence,
some
other,and these
cause
side' of
other
the
on
are
be Plato's own,
to
seem
without
One, which
intelligible
("129) that I regardthe
Sokratic,but there
as
it as
the
to
I have
written under
Republicwas
most
can
It is highlyprobable,
then, that the
so.
never
been
to
know
made
some
extent
more
on
speaks in
in
saying as much
the subject,for he
again,and Aristotle
as
he
never
have
now
himself from
to
the
consider
the steps
Megaric
by which
doctrine.
he
finally
emancipated
XIII
Criticism
"
have
to
seems
in
work
his
that
published any
he
that
appear
period.
when
however,
hands
His
circle than
wider
Phaedrus, but
it
Plato
began
write
from
those
to
of the very
Some
in
sketches
direct
Plato's purpose,
give a picture of
as
to
by
has
to
action
supply
Narrated
it makes
mise
the
en
great
and
scene
picture live,and
interest
therefore
are
begins
cumbrous.
very
We
see
it
the formula
of which
is
'Antiphon
Parmenides
said'. In
the
Theaetetus
question of
dialogue
up,
also
not
opens
to
with
narrated
dramatic
troublesome
assented', 'He
Like
form.
in form.
the
dialogue as
That,
repetitionof
agreed'.It
is
we
such
true
its
Phaedo
however,
case,
told
an
express
the
that the
as
said
that
reference
Parmenides, that
but
but
to
(143 c), is
phrases
the
Parmenides,
Pythodoros
introduction;
in their
are
and
himself.
artistic of
most
in the
worst
is
reader, who
artistic,this form
the
said that
preted
inter-
descriptionsand
When,
there
dramatic
short
at
mainly
was
the
of
soon
Unless
all the
narrated.
prevail over
to
that
as
directions
hand, allows
the
form
this
on
stage
make
dialogues
this
demand
the
character
ficant
by a signidialogueshad been
moved.
and
other
Plato's
to
different
the
When
years.
but
long
so
the
which
becomes
too
earliest
lived
he
interval
first of all
dialogue,on
comments
scientific
Sokrates
speech,
other
to
the
many
had
is marked
came,
Republic and
the
good
time
estimate
from
of
one
of
the end
his attitude
cannot
dialoguesagain they
in form.
dramatic
We
Theaetetus
probably
was
of his
change
simple
school.
the
not
by writings addressed
done
be
on
.it does
full. A
too
define
to
only
separates the
which
of time
probably
could
carried
he
years
dialogues tilltowards
more
were
that
twenty
Eukleides
of
interruption,and
felt it necessary
he
philosophers,and
to
about
without
Academy
the
influence
the
from
emancipation
been
gradual.For
Plato's
177.
'And
Parmenides
one
to
this leads
which
avoid
is
the
said', 'He
is
probably
CRITICAL
THE
DIALOGUES
been
engaged on
easilyunderstand
the
one
his
same
when
he
conceiving
made
of
a distaste for the narrative form. At any rate, he never
use
it again,and his latest dialoguesare simply dramatic, just as his
earliesthad been.
the
feature
of these
" 178. Philosophically,
distinguishing
dialoguesis Plato's preoccupation with the Megarics. The
is dedicated
Theaetetus
it is
not
livingcharacters
doctrine
that
he
that
likely
if he
Eukleides,or rather
to
Plato
stillliving.
was
help
can
it. He
but he stillcherished,we
criticism,
the
Nor
man.
is there
about
was
the Theaetetus
of Eukleides, and
regardfor
his memory
; for
does not introduce
to
is
criticise the
to
meant
lead up
to
to
of
suppose, a feeling
in the dialoguethat
may
anything
before
death
the
within
of Sokrates, but
the school.
in making
difficulty
Sokrates
For
the
was
the chief
same
regardedas
there
reason,
And
speaker.
yet the
is
a
no
point
much
as
longer strictlySokratic. Plato is now
impressedby the dangersof a one-sided intellectualism as by those
of
view
of
is
no
one-sided
in
altogether
where
we
sensationalism.
this
should
He
avoids
though there
dialogue,
are
expect it to be discussed.
by this time, and he could
the
doctrine of forms
make
Sokrates the
not
shape in his mind
mouthpiece of that.
" 179. This brings us face to face with the very important
questionof the place assigned to Sokrates in the dialoguesof
narrated
in the Theaetetus
is
Plato's maturity. The
discussion
supposed to have been taken down by Eukleides and revised and
corrected by Sokrates himself (143 a).Further, it is supposed to
be read aloud at Megara years after the death of Sokrates. The
informal
statement
discussion
of
of the earlier
intended
doctrine
to
be
problem which
read
had
become
and
deliberate
criticised. As,
been
really
raised
by
in
difficulty
does
has
dialogues
not
is
CRITICAL
THE
192
have
supposed to
a
learnt
been
would
fiction which
DIALOGUES
wards,
by heart and repeatedlong after-
seem
credible then
more
than
in this
the introduction
and
as
the chief
speaker suggests
that it was
Plato
to
seek for
formulation
of it. He was
bound
his
to make
satisfactory
positionclear ; for,whether he himself had ever held the doctrine
done a great deal to propagate it
criticised or not, he had certainly
be the chief
by his Sokratic writings.ClearlySokrates cannot
a
more
it would
but
speaker here,
have
been
unseemly
to
introduce
to
school
to
and
Zeno
to
Athens
almost
century
of the founder
put the criticism into the mouth
which Eukleides belonged.It would have been too
of the
much,
of 'not
as
assertingthe reality
represent Parmenides
which is the theme of the Sophist,
so the leading
being',
part in that
however,
to
dialogueand
its
stranger, who
Plato seems
sequel,the Statesman,
his
we
Eleatic
own
of Eukleides, was
disciples
the Philebus
an
mean
certainly
expresses
by
unorthodox
is a very
to
is taken
to
seem
the
come
true
nearer
of Parmenides.
successor
Plato's
In
philosophythan
own
do
the chief
more
anywhere else,and yet Sokrates is once
speaker.That is a problem we shall have to face later. In the
Timaeus
and Critias Sokrates is only a listener,
and in the Laws he
we
does
the Timaeus
contains
such
an
attempt. As
to
the works
which
deal
with human
we
He
the
instance,represent his
with
other states;
traininghave
to
state
as
do that
for existence
engagedin the struggle
are
men
requiredwho by nature and
as well
giftfor practical
politics
as
for
philosophy.
This
The
impliedcriticism
also be noted.
Plato knew
of his master's
very
political
teachingshould
well that,on
its constructive
side,
THE
it was
uncompromising and
too
That
is
THEAETETUS
partlywhy
so
The
Sokrates
negative.
turned
out
THEAETETUS
of the Theaetetus
purpose
of
too
statesmen.
THE
" 1 80.
its criticalside
on
followers
many
193
is
clear the
to
ground by
that
sensation
knowledge cannot
the dialogueis named,
with thought.Theaitetos, after whom
or
of the Academy and one
members
of the
of the original
was
one
and we
and
most
gather that he died of wounds
distinguished,
dysentery after a battle at Corinth, which was
probablythat of
before this dialogue
written; for the
was
369 B.C. It was certainly
of his character in the introduction
beautiful description
can
only
showing
be read
as
tribute
as
to
is
mathematician
when
death
and
lad,he discovered
mere
the
which
was
when
stillrecent
it is
reasons
later,when
Plato
the
for numbers
was
dialogue
sixtyyears
of
probable that
seems
composed,and
probably dated in 368 B.C. or
most
about
was
generalformula
is irrational. It
root
square
other
old. The
other
his
for that
a
little
speakersare
the
friend
of Sokrates.
the
than
therefore
He
lads whose
two
belongsto
earlier
an
teacher he is,and
had
generation
certainlypassed
written. The
long before this dialoguewas
dialogueis
supposed to take placejust before the trial of Sokrates (210 d),
than thirty
that is to say, more
composed.
years before it was
the
to
given by Theaitetos
" 181. The first serious answer
away
question,'What
is
knowledge?'is
That
is that it is,and
what
as
thing appears
it is
to
of what
me,
so
is
is the
me,
and
not.
as
fofm
of all things,
of
measure
that it is
(CUO-^CTI?).
in another
Protagorassaid
not
it is to
that it is sensation
This
means
it appears
to
that
you,
so
may
you. Instead of saying 'as a thingappears to me', we
'A
wind
well
for
'as
sensible
I am
of it',
instance,
equally
say
cold' is the same
thing as 'I am sensible that a wind
appears to me
to
is cold'. In
the
same
word, appearance
thing in
the
case
(^avraaia)and
of hot and
cold and
sense
are
(aiaO-rjatsi)
the like.
Sensation,
THE
IQ4
CRITICAL
DIALOGUES
is this. It is
not
; to the
true
to
is becoming,
is,everything
is the
Motion
is is
(152 a-c).
addressed
only a dark sayingof Protagoras
was
vulgarcrowd
the
; for what
err
sensible
am
That, however,
to
cannot
of
cause
nothing
appears is.In reality
Herakleitos and others have taught.
as
of
decay and
cannot
ceasingto be. Motion
rightly
the
'
such
terms
if
'one','is';
a thing',
'something',
for, you say
use
it will appear small from another point of
'Something is great',
view, and
In the
we
with the
so
of
light
this
the words
use
let us consider
principle
'white
words
these
by
mean
(152d).
rest
colour',we
is either
the
of
case
When
sight.
that what we
not
suppose
outside
the
thing
something
eyes or someit
be
in
to
We
at
all.
place
suppose
any
in the eyes. We
must
not
from
rather
it
results
that
say
must
the
of the eye
impact (-rrpoafioXri)
side
outappropriate
(npos TTJI" -npoa^Kovaav"f)opdv)
it,being neither what impinges nor what is impinged upon, but a
for
something between the two having a proper character of its own
knows
whether
what appears to
each individual (154 a).Thus
no
one
must
on
the
him
movement
is the
what
same
to
appears
at
differently
which
what
as
himself
appears
in one
another. And
so
another,and
knows
everyone
time
at one
to
way
appears
with other objects;for instance
to
that
him
that
and
after measurement
considered
taller
Theaitetos
from
me,
us
go
to
nor
before' (154 d
Let
hot, become
in direct contradiction
are
now
call
year,
growing lad),though
become, though
155 c).
deeperinto
spoke,takingcare
as
that
this
"
I shall be
the
none
I shall
of those
mysteries
wise
we
'I,Sokrates,am
smaller
nothingwill have
shall I have
"
case
be, what
men
been
I
was
of whom
us, the
(for
taken
not
we
'hammer-
196
THE
CRITICAL
DIALOGUES
Accordingly,
asleep.
any
acts
will be
on
itself,
nor
only,but
becomes
different. Now
the resultant
sensible
in
is,not
the person is or
to that thing,and so with the
relatively
becomes, he is or becomes
thing.The
and
to someone,
what
then, of
being or reality
(oucrta),
"
it
sensible,it becomes
person,
of what
is what
the
bound
is
sensible)
sensation,the momentary
state, is true
the
(i.e.
moment
to
both
for it is a* sensation
of sensation. We
are
not
plainthat
it was
not
to
There
are
certain
about
the
we
do
once.
even
pointsin
Herakleitean
sayingthat
so
theory
told whose it was, though it is made quite
be found in the book of Protagoras("92).
remind
Kratylos,who
yet, if the
we
should
On
surelyhear
of what
us
master
river. We
same
theoryjustexpounded
great deal
more
are
we
criticised his
cannot
And
it which
about
him
told
for
cannot
were
than
we
his,
do.
to
there
is
sensation,that he need
I assume,
doctrine is discussed.
to
have
ever
then,
wished
to
and
zest
with
which
he
this doctrine
an
retract.
account
of
In fact,a
is the
of
foundation
necessary
that the doctrine is that of Kratylos,
hold
certainly
nothingin it,as
thorough-goingsensationalism
Platonism.
Herakleitean
expounds it,and
will
his
for the
account
equallyobvious
from
the
Cratylus
THE
the
at
annoyance
it.
These
THEAETETUS
197
cheap objectionswhich
easilybe
so
may
made
to
objectionsare
of them
some
school, and
circle of Eukleides. To
reader's
attention
discuss them
from
the
here would
merely divert
the
main
Sokrates
As
argument.
says
the attacks which might be made
the
on
" 183. As
restated
follows. However
to
it may
true
be used
and
able
at
unwise.
change
to
differs from
from
false
intended
and
consider
examine
as
they have
no
existence
and
The
Sokratic
this. We
shall
see
will be
even
who
one
to
appears
another, not
is
one
true
as
is,and is therefore
bad, healthy from
words
state
what
can
make
and
dual
the indivi-
bearing of it best if we
advantageous(TOox^e'Atjuoi/
the
the
admitted
those
by
is
that
one
man
maintain
who
is
better
that
such
wrong
maintain, except
as
advantageous for
reference
school
by his
rightand
fact,would
thinks
from
good
as
is he who
man
another,
than
distinctions
state
to
appears
questionsit
adviser
in
of each individual
man
what
appears to
the individual
questionsof expediencyor
such
In
and
appear,
alike.
us
good. Belief,or
only truth),but
good
Let
as
belief,or what
(forwhat
the
deny
to
beliefs to
Protagorasis
would
He
bad
man,
true
of
alone, Protagorasnever
wise
doctrine
are
is
by Sokrates,the
is
the Megarics is
to
evidentlywidening.
mere
form
it is therefore
unmistakable
of
advantageous for
here.
The
rift within
it.
the
198
CRITICAL
THE
This
stillmore
will be
to which
(etSos-)
the
maintained
we
advantageousmust
which
we
be referred. The
of the
judge
can
individual
what
of what
test
weight than
it is not
be the
be the
to
man
regardto
that what
is
who
man
to
appears
It is no
better beliefs
by
the doctrine of
of
to
Protagoras
state
we
takes
us
accordingto him,
even
and what
noted (179b) as
specially
to
will
others,who
this;for he holds
worse
replace
longertrue,
is to me,
me
be
not
is wiser than
can
only test
beyond sensationalism.
This
who
is the
regard to
specialist
always carries
layman.Where
man
may
we
is,but it will
doctrine
the
but the
everyone,
the wise
with
that of the
general
is to be. With
the
that,the belief of the professional
or
more
'form'
to
sensation
present
by
(xpiTripiov)
if
obvious
DIALOGUES
be
why
the
it stands.
as
the
kind. The
of every
will strive
world
to
this likeness is
wisdom, and
the
doctrine
hardlybe
an
the
he
time
to
be
and
attained
unto
by
God,
far
so
and
of
This
is the argument
also used
was
tables'. It
which
what
is
in
Theaetetus. He
came
to
be known
own
was
as
That
is
Sokrates, but it
to
attitude
shortlyto
of a decidedly
practical
politics
nature, as
Academy was as much a school for statesmen
the
discussion
as
involved in
and
judge of
astronomy.
attributes
consistently
the
yet it describes
of his
adequate representation
wrote
Gorgias
of geometry
especially
Plato
in the
glowing
the philosopher
from practical
concerns
is of necessity
evil,and the philosopher
all speed from itto a better. The onlyway
escape with
do this is to become
likened
to
middle
is the best
man
community,
bound
are
in the
comes
show
advantageousfor
Still,
we
magnificent
it was
as
summarise
impossibleto
it is inserted here. It
to
for them.1
true
conceived
life,
philosophic
It is
be read
intended
it is not
the Phaedo.
it must
Therefore
true.
the TrepirpoTn?
to
can
life at
become
shall see,
we
and
or
just
legis-
'turning the
(Sext.Emp.
vii
389).
THEAETETUS
THE
199
I believe that
be true, but it is
to
the whole
not
truth.
I believe that
descend
to
described
of action
and
highest.It is not
of
the superiority
feel intensely
in truth the
was
to
unnatural
it is not
for such
the
man
contemplativelife;
if he is also
man,
for
uncommon
to
great artist,
farewell
that it is
dialogue,and
" 185. We must
motion
forgetthat
theoretic
life.At
digressionunconnected
he
the
the
to
give
Melissos
account
an
some
of
Parmenides
and
all is one
oppositetheory,namely,that
motive
for
it.
inserting
versal
theoryof uninot
knowledge.We must
have
asserted an
exactly
examine
now
to
have had
must
and
at rest
in
itself,
having
shall
see
that,on
When
There
we
are
their
theory,knowledge is impossible
(179 d
by 'moves'?
placeto place
In
(dAXota"ais). other words,
moves', what do we
say 'everything
of
forms (etSij) motion:
two
(i)motion
from
("/"opa);
(2) motion
state
motion
is either locomotion
it must
include
or
to
state
"
and,
alteration;
mean
from
if motion
is
universal,
its place,
only moves
but also alters its state, we
ascribe any quality
to what
cannot
moves;
for what we
call qualities
are
nothing but perpetualpro(TrotdrTyre?)
cesses
and
and what
is acted upon,
what
acts
going on between
of being named, the qualityis gone.
in the very moment
accordingly,
not
not
so
as
we
we
Similarly,
speak of sensible qualities,
may
may
be
for
and
of
each
sensation
is
in
cannot
sensations;
speak
process,
called sight,
than not-sight,
not-hearing,
hearing,or the like,any more
and the like. And, if we cannot
speak of
speak of sensation,we cannot
of
knowledge, which we identified with sensation, and the answer
Theaitetos
and the attempt to prove it by the theory
was
no
answer,
of universal motion
has only resulted in proving that all answers
are
1
Rep.
520
c:
eV
Ka.Taj3a.Tfov
THE
200
CRITICAL
equallyright.In fact,we
(181 b
motion
as
'thus' and
one
answer
distinguish
not
imply fixity,
'not thus'
183 b).
"
declines
Sokrates
entitled to
not
are
from
DIALOGUES
examine
to
of
'partisans
the
the Whole'
(01 rov
Melissos
and Parmenides, for the present; we
o-Tao-icDTcu),1
of Theaitetos.
back to the original
must
come
answer
" 1 86. In ordinarylanguagewe speak of 'seeingwith the eyes',
we
ought to say, not
'hearingwith the ears',and so on, but strictly
that the eyes are that with which we see (a"6pa"p."v),
but that they
the instruments
or
are
(opyava)through which (Sia"v),
by means
oXov
of
which,
we
Wooden
many
inside ; we must
in
(eloos)
us
which
to
follows.
The
instruments
sweet
hard, light,
one
do
has
another
cannot;
sight,nor of colour by
thought of anything which
have
colour,this
and
hearing,
common
are
(184b
To
"
to
the
objectsof
we
have
such
sound
to
we
and
than
Let
senses.
us
thoughtsas 'colour
by
by
see
what
these
185 a).
begin with, we
acts,
which
seeingor
thoughtsof thingswhich
do have
different
of
body. Each
both
common
as
hot,
hearing.If,then,
other instrument
some
it is certain that
to
are
be due
must
of
means
is
of
sensible of sound
be
cannot
we
clear
sensible
are
we
identical
one
and that
(ovvafjus),
specific
power
we
tions
sensa-
when
be made
parts of the
various
of
means
which
through
the
it may
employed by
sitting
all these
instruments
as
distinction between
things are
instruments
can
they serve
This
objects.
element
these
in which
so
element
constituent
one
"
"
like
ourselves to be
suppose
with a number
of sensations
cannot
we
Horses, each
converge,
sensible of
are
For
see.
we
like
or
unlike
same
one
as
another',and
what
are
enabled
to
find this
so
are',
sound
itself,'both
is the instrument
and
and
are
on.
two',
What,
through which
common
element
it
to
which
Not
one
givesuch
we
of these
by
which
names
common
it is
1
as
ment
instruhas any specific
properties
(KOIVO)
apprehended,as was the case with such
Cf. E. Gr. Ph.2 p. 140,
n.
i.
THEAETETUS
THE
as
properties
sweetness,
that in those
cases
2OI
hardness, and
and acts by
"7Ticr/co77"t),
forth; it
so
instrument
rather
seems
81 avTfjs
(avrrj
itself(/co.0'
avrrfv).
The
of things
simplesensation,then, of the sensible qualities
takes placethrough the affections of the body (TO.
adt^aros
sensation begins with birth and is common
to
Tra^/xara)
; such
TOV
and
beasts. On
man
degreein
with
future,which
the
bringingof
past and
i86c).
It is at this
learnt
have
we
pointthat
introduce
know
to
part of the
were
certain
from
the doctrine of
nothingwhatever
what
should
we
expect Sokrates
the Phaedo
the
Republic
to
and intelligible
forms;
incorporeal
but
is said about
them
either here
or
"
in any
other
of a theoryof
dialogue.Instead,we have the beginnings
and these are regarded as
afterwards called Categories,
which
predicates
of sense, and by
instrumentality
the soul
common
manifold
and
the Sokrates
"
of
It is also
sense.
to
apprehendswithout the
of which it organises
the
means
be
observed
that these
common
common
if there
the
are
predicatesof
this kind
which
are
and are
of sense,
organs
it follows that we
cannot
activity,
apprehendedby a purelymental
identify
knowledge with sensation. The
essential to knowledge.Being and truth
apprehensionof being is
be apprehendedin
cannot
them.
We
which
describes
with
what
must,
only in
the
name
definition of
convenient
but
the proper
is. That name
identified with
The
body,
to
state
alone
that
(StaAoyo?)
course
DIALOGUES
CRITICAL
THE
202
itself.When
with
it
has
to
come
and this
determination,whether
the
seems
here in the
term
it bears
the Sokratic
the
in that which
not
Platonic
characteristically
of the word.
use
understand
must
it is defined,and
in which
sense
take. We
to
It is the
in earlier dialogues.
distinct from
It
as
in the later
recurs
have
passages of Aristotle. We
knowledgeis to be found within this activity
in certain Academic
and
dialogues,
to
natural
most
ask,then, whether
simplejudgement contain
in itselfthe guarantee
of truth?
"
88. The
devoted
showing
to
that
no
is
Theaetetus
the
of
representation
accordingly
the
undoubted
It is shown
of the soul
alone, nor
sensation
be made
independent
explainthe
and false judgement.
fact of the distinction between
true
ledge
knowthat thought alone is as incapable
of yielding
/ca#' avrtjv)
action
(avrrj
as
of
section
second
can
is it clear how
to
of
combination
any
sensation and
thoughtcan yieldknowledge.
In the firstplace,
can
only say that true judgement (dXrjdris
we
So|a)is knowledge.True judgementor thoughtis to judgesomething
it is; falsejudgement or thought is to judgesomething to
to be what
be
other than
thought as
it is. But
such
be
this at
other
than
impossibleas
of it
accounts
have
we
are
They
to
know
the
same
seen
true? How
How
difficulty.
can
there
confine ourselves
seem
are
imply that
thingat the same
be
to
can
false
the
pendent
inde-
false sensation
examined, and
either
raises
once
to
all found
it is
be. Three
o
to
possible
time,
or
as
that
be
possible
satisfactory
equallyun-
know
we
and
can
not
judge
without
to
be
therefore,open
the
same
THE
204
knowledge with
There
are
persons
who
heard
theory he has
elaborate
an
some
DIALOGUES
CRITICAL
'in
dream'.
maintain
which
produced by simpleelements (o-rot^eta)
unknowable
are
just because they are simple.They can only be
named
and cannot
be defined, nor
anything of
we
can
predicate
mon
them, not even
'being'or 'this'.Such propertiesas these are comof
of thingsand cannot
be regardedas properties
to all sorts
the simplereals.These can, however, be apprehendedby sense, and
with
we
can
give them names
They can also combine
(wo/Mara).
form a syllable
another justas letters (crrot^eta)
one
can
(cruAAa/?^).
Our
sensations
are
(Adyo?),
proposition
knowable
and that makes their combinations
(201a
203 b).
of
" 190. The 'dream' of Socrates reminds us of the 'mystery'
and we feel that they are both devices for going beyond
Protagoras,
If we
their names,
combine
we
get
statement
or
"
is also the
same
about
difficulty
sationalist
authorship of this theory,as there is about that of the senIn the
theory described in the earlypart of the dialogue.
be observed
that it is a thoroughlyidealist
first place,it must
of that word. The
simple reals are
sense
theory in the modern
the
themselves
knowledge is the
work
of the
mind.
In
appears
of which
such
find here
the elaboration of it we
allude
he
to
makes
uncultivated
from.
Aristotle
in the
passage of the Metaphysics,
remark
about the view of Antisthenes
it in
a
comes
people'that
it is
to
impossible
course
'and
'longenumeration'
(/jiaKpos
of
whole
has
been
the
theory
Adyo?),and on the strength this
But all Aristotle says is that the theory
attributed to Antisthenes.
of Antisthenes,
in question
to the view
appears to give plausibility
and, whatever we may think of it,it is not a theory likelyto have
Antisthenes denied the
been set up by 'uncultivated persons'.1
is
because
it?',
1
Met.
B,
passing manner
Aristotle
was
3.
1043
definition would
b,
in which
be
5 sqq. Antisthenes
he is alluded
to
thinking of him
at
all when
he
is not
seems
began
mentioned
to
me
the
to
exclude
chapter.
the
that
THE
THEAETETUS
205
of predication,
whereas, according
possibility
consists of
knowledge
Sokrates
should
long
by
ago
nothing else.
to
this
Nor
theory,
why
'dream'
Lewis
is much
Pythagorean'
and
is
((jroi^eia)
syllables(cruAAa/Sat)
characteristic
of
the
is
oppositeof the sensationalism Protagoras
revealed 'in a mystery',and that it is rejectedas
have
to
exact
equallyunsatisfactory.
to examine
we
come
191. For, when
leads to very great difficulties.
How
are
the prime elements
between
and the
it,we
"
we
to
the relation
simple
mean
thing.Rather,
must
we
mean
that which
(Sta^opoTT??),
however,
to
as
the
have
we
definition
of
resultant
been
we
able
Introduction
enough
with
what
no
the
of the
nor
make
up
differentia
thing's
all other
things.If,
merelya judgement (So|a)
definition will
our
differentia,
knowledge of the differential
the work
of the mind.
Sensation
can
is merely
motion, and
alone
Thought
have
which
of the
it off from
judgement with
of knowledge.
neither be sensation
a
marks
knowledgeof
conclusion
The
elements
statement
mean
be circular. 'True
is not
by this that we
that bringsus
differentia,
we
that
mean
of the
to
to
we
Theaetetus,p.
xxxix.
The
of
theory
Ekphantos
would
of
harmonise
Syracuse.
well
206
THE
be due
can
to
other
hand,
nature
of
DIALOGUES
CRITICAL
we
knowledge.We
'common'
impliescertain
have
or
apprehension
of it at all.
would
be an apprehension
of its common
not
properties
deals with the same
The
next
dialoguewe have to consider really
difficulties,
though from another pointof view.
to
know
thingwe
A mere
itsdifferentia.
know
must
PARMENIDES
THE
Parmenides
The
" 192.
is
as
of Eleatic
are
busy
with
remarkable
and
We
origin.
about
Eukleides
pieceof
telling
argument
man', which
we
to
the
to
come
introduced
known
have
We
presently.
was
effect. The
same
in
as
was
have
that, we
is that
againstparticipation
shall
that Plato
the Theaetetus
external evidence
evidence
from
know
most
'the third
unimpeachable
work
some
the
or
other
'Sophist'
along with
Eukleides,and with him had founded the 'Eristic'of Megara. He
kind with the Academy.2 Now
also stood in close relations of some
detractors
the
of Plato
asserted that he
of Bryson, and
(SiaTpijSai)3
that
is
most
the lectures
plagiarised
easilyexplainedif we
that
Bryson was
the
have
the
world of
sense.
The
arguments
been
the
absurd
to
make
all
of the Parmenides
are
that
Parmenides
know
of the
realityto
not
the
directed,
of
Polyxenos from Phanias
in
See
Baiimker
Theophrastos.
Eresos, a
Phanias
does
not
used
The
word
Mus.
Rhein.
xxxiv.
by
64 sqq.
eiodyeiv
pp.
'to bring
necessarilyimply that Polyxenos invented the argument. Cp. eladyeiv,
the
on
stage'.
2
clear
It is not
the comic
from
This
poet Ephippos, fr. 14 Kock.
appears
have been. It makes
of the Academy, but he may
whether
a member
Bryson was
associate of Sokrates.
difference. What
is important is that he was
an
no
8
Theopompos, ap. Athen. 509 c.
1
Met.
990 b, 17. He
discipleof Aristotle and friend
Alexander
on
Ar.
quotes
of
THE
PARMENIDES
of
2OJ
forms
againstthe
such, but
as
Sokratic
of particular
Plato was, of course,
men.
unreality
far too interested in the world of experience
to accept the acosmism
of Eukleides, but he was
clearly
impressedby the force of the
of the relation
account
as
an
arguments against 'participation'
of that
the sensible and the intelligible.
His own
between
account
is not, however, givenin the Parmenides.
" 193. The subject of the dialogueis introduced as follows.
One of Zeno's arguments
the opponents of Eleaticism was
against
that 'ifthingsare a many,
they must be both like and unlike'. The
here ; what we have to
us
meaning of this does not concern
precise
deal with is the solution of the difficulty
proposedby Sokrates,who
in the Theaetetus,but 'extremely
is not an old man,
as
young'
(127c).He asks Zeno whether he does not believe in 'forms' which
are
'apartfrom' the thingsof sense, but in which these things
If that is the truth, there is no reason
'participate'.
why sensible
in the form of likeness and in
at once
thingsshould not participate
demonstrate
the form
the
of unlikeness. A man,
for
he has many
parts, but he is
not
a sensible
thingbe at once
in both
thus partaking
forms?
both
one
like
are
is
Many
set
and
many
What
one.
would
separate forms
up
one
man
like
To
is
be
such
thing and
one
show
not
others.
among
show
Likeness
as
another,
sticks,and the
that One
would
surprising
be if a
is many
or
should
man
and
Unlikeness, One
and
one
should
Why
unlike
that stones,
to
and
of the
the common
Many, Motion and Rest (i.e.
predicates
(KOLVO)
and should then show that these can
Theaetetus),
mingle with and
be separatedagain from each other. It would
be still more
prising
surif he could
been
shown
forms
to
that the
exist in the
theory
Phaedo, where
here
thingsof
we
Sokrates
and
Smallness
exclude
that,even
in the
term
stated
are
smaller
one
by
told
than
another
Phaedo,
contradictions which
same
sense
The
of the
show
"
Sokrates
that
130
is
Simmias
Phaidon,
(102 b).It
doubt
for the
'participation',
is
also
were
to
have
be found
in
a).
that
precisely
of the
be
though
greater than
and
Greatness
is to be
noted, however,
may
expressedas
relation between
to
the
a
adequacy
subjectand
208
THE
CRITICAL
DIALOGUES
himself
should
those
as
before
have
who
here he
he
meant
begun
his
callow Academic
some
to no
Sokrates
the view
who
one.
as
only
he made
while
personality,
own
historical,
is just Sokrates
own
should be credible
convinced
to
for his
crude form
had
meant
can
mask
is in the substance
be
use
That
Plato
credible
to
of Sokrates
that
by Sokrates
held his own
theoryin a
We might be reluctantly
it would
immature
surelyhave been impious to represent his own
under
the revered name
of his master.
The
fact that it
disciples
has to make
assumptions of that kind ought to be fatal to this line
of interpretation.
heard of 'forms' before
" 194. Parmenides, who has evidently
(130 a), and who is delightedby the philosophicaptitudeof
Sokrates, as shown
begins by
by his theory of 'participation',
askinghim whether, in addition to the mathematical forms, which
have
the
mentioned
been
Beautiful and
from
the
Phaedo, Sokrates
he
whether
at
believes in forms
confesses that he is in
once
assents.
of Man,
The
next
questionis
Sokrates
about these. We
have seen
what
difficulty
this means
("73).As to thingslike mud, hair,and dirt,though he
has sometimes
been troubled by the thoughtthat they must
have
forms too, he had finally
the idea. That, says Parmenides,
renounced
is because Sokrates is stillyoung, and philosophy
has not yet
laid hold
of him
of Parmenides
mean
sense
real,they
are
certain
be
ironical. He
From
entitled
to
have
in any
'forms' as the
limits. It is
because
originated,
of
much
quiteas
mathematics.
must
must
objectsof
this remark
in that
THE
hand, it is
PARMENIDES
serious weakness
2OQ
If, now,
Theaetetus
the
on
the
the soul
which
(KOIVO)
several
senses,
the way
for
the doctrine
inconsistencyin
and
categories,
to the whole
categories
be attached
to
seen
to
us
of the
operation of these
sensible world. Nor is any weight to
to
on
discuss
most
whole
questionfor
the many
sensibles
'partakein'
the
form,
one
of the form
will
are
covered
by
forms
by
particular
thing,which
in each
placesthan
more
divided.
come,
will be
so
Sokrates
each
sailcloth,
same
and
one,
placesand
part of it. We
are
in
the
is present in many
not
the
onlya
present
itselfand
day, which
Parmenides
each of them
it will be
separate from
like the
or
will be
form
that
means
or
one
whole
the
the
of the forms.
use
form is 'present
to' or 'in' the many sensibles.
either all contain
In the first place,these sensibles must
that the
we
this
the
conception that
we
made
elements that the later Pythagoreans
no
lectual
purelyintel-
to
speakeris a Pythagorean,and
believe that it was justin the construction of
to
reason
is
of the
extension
the
There
manifestations.
preparing
the
is
in its humblest
experience,even
the
predicates
objectsof the
time
same
unclean.
insists in the
that he
the
to
and
'common'
think
to
that it breaks
Plato
and
apprehendsby itself,
shall be inclined
we
the
at
in which
way
distinction between
the
remember
we
only be
one
yet
number
of them
one,
of
be
but
people
is covered
only
that the
then, to the other alternative,
sensibles. In that
case,
however, the
forms
will
and many
1
not
to
other absurd
the
details
(N.S.),vol.
xii. No.
For
serve
of these
45.
would
consequences
I must
refer
to
Professor
follow.1
Taylor's
article in Mind
CRITICAL
THE
210
DIALOGUES
of the
would
reallycompel
him
forms. If
innumerable
innumerable
in which
form
one
to
sensible
things partake
assume
requirea
we
which
form
of
equally
explainthe
participation
also require
to
we
things in a common
predicate,
particular
of the form itselfand the parthe participation
to explain
a form
ticular
and
ad
infinitum
(132a).
predicate, so on
thingsin a common
Sokrates hereupon suggests that perhaps the forms are
really
and that theymay onlyexist in souls,to which
thoughts(voij[jLaTa),
be a thought of something
Parmenides
that a thoughtmust
replies
real,and further that, if the forms are thoughts,the thingsthat
partakein them must be thoughts too. It would also follow either
that all thingsthink or that there are unthought thoughts.1
made
The next suggestion
by Sokrates is that the forms may be
of the parand that the true account
'patterns'
(Tra/aaSety/Ltara),
ticipation
of sensible things
in them may be that they are 'likenesses'
of them.2 But, says Parmenides, if the thingsare like
(ofjiOLco/jLara)
shall require
and we
the forms, the forms will be like the things,
their likeness. We
another pattern which both resemble to explain
of
confronted
are
But there
very hard
such as we
are
once
far more
are
infinite regress.
an
refute anyone
describe them,
to
who
We
unknowable.
are
be
have
said that
they
fore,
by themselves' and not in our world (eVi^uv),and theretheyare relative by nature, they can only be relative to one
On the other hand, their 'likenesses'in our world can only
'alone
as
another.
be relative to
master
another
one
slave of
or
another
and
not
the forms.
to
itself
'mastership
while,
man;
on
the
other
or
of
is
man
the
not
of
itself,but
'slavery
hand, 'mastershipitself is
relative
way
to
is relative
forms
must
that God
be
has
to
the truth in
The
last
Observe
how
world.
rejected.
2
According to Aristotle this was
therefore,draw no inference from
speaker is a Pythagorean, least of
this view
our
If we
unknown.
entirely
try to avoid this by saying
'knowledgeitself,and therefore knows the forms,
by
more
in later life.
know
how
us
or
argument.
deliberatelyit
is
the
its
all
cannot
THE
212
that from
CRITICAL
consideration
and
altogether,
Megaric ground;
of forms and
At the
could
how
form
the
be both
It is easy
things can
arises when
is stillon
argument
rejectedthe
how
with
and
one
tude
multi-
dialogue(129 e sq.)Sokrates
forms
the
like and
many,
themselves
another, and
one
clared
de-
still more
unlike,at
and
rest
apply this
we
itself.The
understand
to
to
that Eukleides
them
reduced
unable
can
in motion.
sensible
know
we
into combinations
enter
a
of forms
beginningof
himself
DIALOGUES
to
to
way
is the method
deal with
of hypothesis,
problem of this kind, says Parmenides,
and that both in its positiveand negativeapplication.
We
must
trace
out
it is and
the
hypothesisZeno
should go
on
not
many
are
next
examined, 'Ifthingsare
the consequences
.',and in both cases
the
themselves
and
be followed
subjectof
in relation
in the
case
case
the
to
.',we
hypothesis'//things
ask what
should
we
many
the
are
but
itself,
subjectof the hypothesis
of the
to
should
we
hypothesisand
of all the
forms, such
the
to
another. The
one
the
consider
in
both
method
same
as
rest
sequences
con-
likeness and
must
un-
the
hypothesisto
this,as
we
his argument
of
reduced
The
whole
he could
"
reasons
for
do that without
not
his
destroying
own
tion
expresslydeclares that the result of his examinafirst hypothesis is impossible (142 a). Sokrates is
and
the
to
own
Parmenides
Parmenides
system
be examined.
he
silence,but
thing is
we
treated
cannot
suppose
mental
him
to
be
convinced.
a
gymnastic (yv^vaaia),
itgivesin method.
for the training
'laborious game',valuable chiefly
Plato means
than that,however, and he givesus the hint in
more
the
dialogueitself.We
forms alone,and
we
must
are
as
remember
warned
expressly
againstthe
PARMENIDES
THE
rest' of which
he
justthe
forms.
other
would
be
forms
were
speaksare
213
thingsof
the
Sokrates had
Now
(135 e).They
(129 d sqq.)that
sense
said
are
he
if anyone
could show
that the
with one
another. That form
capable of combination
astonished
much
very
of
excluded
adds, if anyone
and
could show
does
show.
If you
another
They
are
and
to
bad
any
take
other
forms
One
to
one
their
hand
thingswhich
fact,Parmenides
proves
Par-
and
begin to
forms, including
even
of the sensible
be in continual flux. In
as
Being
pass into
opposites.
and
hot
have
we
fusion
con-
sensible
exactlywhat
partakeof and
is cold
of
sort
is in the
that is
such
astonished,he
same
there
as
and
water, which
as
the
was
forms
once
justas
the other, or
at
be stillmore
that there
in them,
participate
abstractly
(^cupi?),
they
one
would
He
uncertaintyin the
things which
menides
another.
one
seen
that,if we
it is quite as unsatisfactory
world by itself,
as
intelligible
refutes
sensible,and by takingthe One as his example, he really
the
themselves.
to
with
that
the
humour
the
weapon
of the
of the
situation
to
take
the
the
Megarics
that
this
Zeno
says
is
carried
ruthlessly
out
Just so
we
may
of his master,
hypothesisof
Megarics
has
does
even
" 199.
It is from
modern
reader
this
point of
idea of
no
show
that the
to
propose
absurd
more
consequences
out.
view
we
must
judge
what
strikes
as
THE
214
CRITICAL
means
and
DIALOGUES
whatever
"
"
would
demus
that
find
friends
however,
not
were
years later to
Isokrates,and Bryson, he says,1'And
Helikon
I suspect,
pleased.In introducing
of Eudoxos,
DionysiosII. as a disciple
his
Bryson and
enjoyment here.
subtler
some
what
is
rare
on
strike me
to deal with, and he does not
as
this,he is not unpleasant
malicious,but rather as easy-goingand simple.I say this with fear
and
man,
trembling,seeing that
and
is
man
not
We
of Plato
are
bad
am
to note
the
from
hypotheses.2
" 200. There
so
other
traces
Megarics.
Let
of the
us
growing estrangement
consider
now
the
be nine.
foritself?
have parts,
Many, and therefore it cannot
Not having parts, it
and cannot
be a whole
(forthat impliesparts).
end ; it has therefore no limits and
have beginning,middle
cannot
or
will
have
for figureimpliesparts.
it
is infinite. Further,
no
figure;
either be
Further, it will be nowhere; for what is anywhere must
be contained in
contained in something else or in itself.It cannot
If it is
Ep.
I have
One,
xiii. 360
omit
them
cannot
be
c.
thought
of the Parmenides.
it
it
From
if he likes.
fullyas
guide
to
students
may
PARMENIDES
THE
anythingelse ; for
contained
it,and
for then
itself;
it would
what
not
then
it would
that
215
be in contact
impliesparts. Nor
be both
pointswith
it be contained
can
and
container
different
at
contained,and
in
two,
so
one.
It
be
cannot
in
Motion
which
is
(aAAoi'ojCTt?),
form
one
If it suffered
Rest.
at
or
of motion, it would
alteration
longerbe
no
one.
which
is the other form
of
("f"opd),
for
that
motion
of
rotation
motion, either
impliesa centre
(-n^pi^opa),
of translation,
axis of rotation,and so figureand parts, or motion
or
in the same
since it has no place.
Further, it would have to be at once
Nor
and
in
the
which
it be at
not
can
same
impliesparts.
place,
place
in space, neither in itself nor in anythingelse,
rest, since it is nowhere
therefore
where
it is (evravra)).
and cannot
be
Other than itself or anythingelse. It
Nor can
it be the Same
as or
It
have
cannot
be other than
cannot
the
same
other
for
itself,
for
anythingelse,
as
other than
were
spatialmotion
that
be
can
has
is to be
an
it be
can
If it were
same.
It
as
and
measures,
as
or
age, since
therefore,be in time
than
it is
than
at
not
not
therefore
and
becoming
itis alwaysthe
the
at
one
no
age
as
same
become
and
has
not
not
been, it will
time
same
lasts
in time, it does
participate
longeror
itself.
participate
not
become
not
this result
form.
seems
Let
us
let
impossible,
consider
One,
being(TOoV ei").
HypothesisII.
If One is,what
(142b, i --1556,3).
us
be
put the
merely as
not
named, spoken
hypothesisin
one
(TO eV),
ev
as
"
If One
and
the consequences
are
same).Therefore
H
is
anythingelse,or the
inequalityor equality.It cannot,
what is in time is always becoming
but
like is
itself or
if it cannot
another
for if same
itself,
one.
than
also,since this
becomes,
it does
be
given moment,
it is,and
Further,since
and will
all;for
at
younger
shorter time than what
As
it is onlythe
itselfor
to
not
younger
all these imply
same
in
would
so
be older
cannot
older
same
is
anythingelse. If it were
but it does not participate
in
the same
measures,
it would
have as many
or
less),
unequal (greater
Equal or Unequal
have
equal,it would
parts
as
as
the
same
be
what
many?
anythingelse,for the
only property of what
same
itselfor
Unlike
or
; it cannot
one
be the
anythingelse,for
be the
anythingbe the
be
not
one.
Nor
the
it would
other; it cannot
what
it would
then
be other than
; it cannot
one
then
being are
One
as
being (evov)
and
must
one
be
of these
do
not
whole
parts
for itself?
signifythe
of which
partakesin
B.C.
one
turn
P.
2l6
THE
CRITICAL
DIALOGUES
both
and
one
thrice,so that
thrice
in
And
two.
numbers,
we
and
have
thus
that
Being, so
we
so
an
twice
as
is
Being
divided
infinitely
is divided
and
two
beingbut
into
One
parts
are
each
of
parts as Being,and
many
is an infinite multitude.
one
as
as
whole,
that which
in the whole. Now
contains is
the parts are contained
a limit. But, if it is limited,it will have
extremes, and, if it is a whole,
and end. But, as the middle
is equally
it will have beginning,middle
and
it will have
extremes,
mixed, and will be finite.
from
distant
circular
or
figure,either rectilinear,or
the
contained
Further, since
Further, it will
than
be the Same
as
itselfand
contained
fore
something else. There-
everythingelse,and
Other
itself and
in itself and
these
are
property
one.
But
of otherness, nor
be other because
cannot
they be
can
be
cannot
than
One,
in themselves.
so
they stand in the relation of whole and parts; for what is not
Therefore
One does not partakein number.
they are the same.
be
Like
Unlike
itself and everything
it
and
must
Consequently,
else,for One is other than everythingelse in the same
thing
way as everyfar
and
therefore
alike
in
else than One,
as they are
so
they are
be unlike in so far as they are the
other. On the other hand, they must
have oppositeconsequences.
for oppositeantecedents
must
same;
Nor
can
Further, it will
be in
with
contact
itself and
with
what
is other than
always
something other. But, as contact
of pointsof contact
is always
impliesat least two, since the number
of
the
in
it
be
in
than
that
contact
less
cannot
one
things
contact,
either with itselfor anythingelse.
Further, it will be Equal and Unequal to itself and everythingelse.
since it is contained
itself,
smaller, Small
If it were
of it. If it were
in which
it. The
would
be in it,either
whole, it would either
be
the
equal to it,or
same
appliesmutatis
same
Small
it would
be greater.And
would
and
case
in it as
in
are
relative
to
one
mutandis
to
and
the
not
whole
or
in
part
pervade it completely,
exceed
contradiction
another
as
it,in
which
to
One.
it
part of
Besides, Great
arises if it is in
Great.
case
a
Therefore
One
THE
is
equal
and
itself and
to
therefore
place,what
is other
what
is other
will
contains
is other
and
than
itself. But
One
is in
itself,
by itself,and is therefore
smaller
than
itself. And, since there is nothing besides
what
is other than One, and, since everything that is is in a
and
than
what
to
2iy
is contained
and
greater
One
PARMENIDES
than
is other
than
One
than
and
One,
is in
One.
One,
and
therefore
One
same
smaller
is therefore
One
reason,
than
it. The
greater
is in what
reasoning
same
apply to
Further,
be is justparticipation
to
in
the
being along with present time. But as time (of which
present is a part)is always advancing, One, as sharing in this advance,
is always becoming older, and
therefore
time
at the
same
younger,
than itself. But it cannot
advance
from
passing
past to future without
the
and
when
it comes
is
to the present, advance
through
present ;
so,
the
that
older
and
arrested, so
are
growing
alreadycomplete
younger
in the present. But the present lasts for the One
as
long as it is; for it
is always now
whenever
it is. Therefore
the present lasts as long as
time for the One, and its being older and younger
coincides
with its
Further, since it is not and does not
becoming older and younger.
for a longer time than it is and becomes, it is always the same
become
age as itself.
In the same
other
than
partake
One
in
numbers.
must
be
number,
and
existence
the
and
the other
end
So
what
One,
and
into
comes
than
On the
younger.
than what
is other
the addition
between
One
of
equal
them.
younger;
for, if
equal
unequal
the
to
On
One
unequal
difference
times
and
does
being older
all other
One
; for it has
first into
does
two
alter
has
come
and
either
not
One.
of
older
two
alter the
it does
or
ages
younger
is given,
(arithmetical)
become
older
and
ages
the
than
than
younger
its becoming older and
difference
hand,
other
must
subsequent part,
every
is other
become
not
times
of
before
than
One
so
with
what
for,if the
the
and
still to consider
it does
;
existence
is
into existence
one,
age as
become
and
have
multitude
beginning comes
the end
only is when
same
One; we
hand,
one
being
is other
only comes
beginning
having
itself.What
than
the
part is itself
the
than
what
One
last,and
be the
for its
is other
to
than
One
hand, each
therefore
much
ratio
is other
more
Therefore
simultaneously with
must
what
it is also younger
than
middle, and end, and
into existence.
and
than
But
beginning,
On
it is older
way
is
them.
One
it
is,
be the
and
2l8
CRITICAL
THE
DIALOGUES
COROLLARY
have
from
or
time
that One
seen
motion
which
at
be either
cannot
rest
to
is
thingis neither
transition must
be
of time
out
at
rest
rest
or
in motion.
nor
Therefore
the
be in that strange
altogether
; it must
which
has
(TO egauftvirjs),
TOVTO),the instantaneous
The
as
must
others
as
this multitude
be
whole
and
have
must
whole
other than
and
a
for the
are
and
whole
the consequences
are
be
must
For, if a
one.
whole
were
not
one
Then
absurd.
of them
Therefore
they are
others. Therefore
both
as
whole, that is
part is also
a
whole
complete one
made
one
and
as
up
the
One.
it will be
other
both
same
So
As
more
an
infinite multitude.
On
the
they will
be both
like and
all infinite
unlike each
they are
at
On
place,cannot
round
from
move
Nor
centre.
being and
to
ceases
VI.
Hypothesis
"
"
far
so
be ; in
so
being
into
it is unmoved
as
// there is no One,
164 b, 4).
it comes
altered,
and unaltered,
be.
to
ceases
nor
and
it is moved
as
what
is
partakenor
into being nor
for
the consequences
are
If there
unalterable.
and
it is immovable
far
which
be the One
ceasingto
it alter without
can
comes
itself?
(163 b, 7
as
placeto
far
so
is distinct from
into
DIALOGUES
CRITICAL
THE
220
it
neither
can
neither
come
neither
be ; it can
at rest ; it
noj
stand in any relation to what is,for that would be to partakein
cannot
Being.Therefore it has neither greatness or smallness or likeness or
be in motion
to
cease
itself
to
or
VII.
If One is not, what
Hypothesis
others? (164b, 5
165 e, i).
"
place or
of
sensation
it;
for the
the consequences
are
in
"
than.
must
Since
be so,
be broken
each
parts,
that
what
so
can
we
seemed
appears
it is the sum.
to
we
something before
but
multitudes
as
great compared
masses,
and
smallest
or
they
of similar
number
innumerable
an
reach
each
with
come
never
ones,
as
into
never
small
of which
Further,
can
not
other
the
of the middle.
The
is that, if One
conclusion
finite and
one
infinite,
HypothesisVIII.
for the
"
others?
They will be
have they even
and
"
one
nor
is
One, what
no
166 c,
appear
both
or
will be the
quences
conse-
i).
for many
many;
of one
an
appearance
with what is not, nor can
to anythingelse ; for what is not has no
communion
thingswill
many.
If there
(165e, 2
neither
is not, other
many
Nor
impliesones.
have
for they can
no
anythingwhich
is not
be present
parts.
the
but even
deny of them not only the reality,
of all the predicates
which were
formerlyappliedto them
appearances
and otherness,
likeness and unlikeness,sameness
or
really
apparently,
and separation,
etc.
contact
Therefore
we
must
THE
The
conclusion
that
assume
than
all
of the
One
is
it, regarded
and
are
"
And
202.
of the
course
the
doctrine
No
do
Megarics
did),
Megarics
also
If
we
can
did)
of it all
(SiacrotAoyoi)
of
sorts
be
made
about
another,
first
the
'Two
well
as
the
(as
one
if
shall
we
the
Megaric
it. Or
Being,
One
the
only
about
in
in drawing
wrong
is
this
given
place,
predicates.
about
say
far
which
with
incompatible
is other
one
hints
be
whatever
One
identify
the
One
to
to
the
to
hardly
it. In
nothing
say
we
can
from
postulate
we
word
attend
shall
what
we
appear.
has
we
and
in relation
not
one
conclusions
it itself
and
and
dialogue itself,we
is refuted.
predicate
is not,
If, however,
following
in themselves
it ends.
so
221
matter
One
all appear
result.
portentous
whole
that
or
both
not,
are
PARMENIDES
(as the
have
to
statements'
everything
as
else.
the
On
other
of
early part
the
things
may
exclude
one
other
in
impossibility
'The
of
them
abstractly,
while,
if
regard
sense
to
done.
had
understand
another;
assumption
for
we
them
It is
these
forms
must
we
they
as
to
as
hard
say
difficulties
to
we
grasp
as
hands
our
the
of
that
forms
the
forms
'the
just
must
we
can
Parmenides
some
a"
all
the
from
one
One'.
If
about
compelled
fact, the
sensible
for
whatever
are
In
them.
sense
the
from
find
to
once
of
in
themselves
try
shown
nothing
being,
under
cannot.
has
isolation
clearly shown
what
all the
that
taken
that, though
forms,
the
can
vanish
in
view
dialogue
just
predicates
forms
incorporeal
the
are
regard
contradictory
the
refuted
been
by arguments
untenable,
is
maintaining
others'
we
that
also
part
of
and
on
that
has
theory
opposite
As
which
second
another.
based
was
partake
in
Sokratic
dialogue,
another.
way
The
the
It
Megarics.
the
the
hand,
to
we
them;
ascribe
intelligibleand
the
as
now
endeavour
participate
arise
of
things
in
from
one
the
XIV
Logic
SOPHIST
THE
"
is all the
interval of time
distinct
was
and
the
and
Theaetetus
Isokrates
Parmenides
of hiatus.
In
on
for
the
Sophist on
the
other.
the
The
especiallyin
supposed
to
discussion
reported
read
the work
the
Sokratics
of the
Isokrates
Philosopher and
stranger
from
growing
also draws
the
Sophist.
too
good
answers
it is hard
that
asks
by
the
anonymous
mouth
; and
of
is
to
whether
the
the
have
it seems,
between
the
at
outset.
represented as
Sokrates
him,
and
sonal
per-
at
he
says
once
giftfor
superhuman
speaking
is far
philosopher.Sokrates
Sophists and
distinguishedthem. The
Philosophers from
Eleatics
did.
speak
this
line
clear
and
Zeno,
of
this way
is made
reassures
tell
to
seems
and
Plato
hard-and-fast
That
prove
to
eristic ; he is,indeed,
an
title of
very
between
adopts
and
Theodoros
for
man
Statesmen, and
Now
coolness
introduced, who
is
discipleof Parmenides
professesalarm that he may
cross-examination.
The
quietlydropped.
he
Elea
the
continue
to
had
Isokrates, and
the
is
Megara
at
are
in the
but
generally,
mainly the Megarics. Plato
means
from
aloud
younger
Academy,
the
following day
the
on
of
member
the
dialogue
the
with
Theaitetos,
later
again
meet
is evidence
Megarics.
he
and
friend
Sokrates, his
being
and
Theodoros,
of
shall be
we
between
in looking for some
real connexion
justified
and that of which
it professesto be the sequel.
Sokrates,
hand
one
influence
of time,
interval
there
style.shows
first time,
the
of this
view
of
evidence
the
between
strongly marked
is
avoidance
that
remarkable
more
Theaetetus, which
the
externallyto
linked
Sophist is
The
203.
to
us
more
Stranger, who,
too,
as
if
we
directly than
for
were
that
meant
very
to
ever
before
reason,
understand
is
THE
that he claims
more
once
to
SOPHIST
be the
223
true
of
successor
Parmenides,
even
'not
We
few
facts
and
is One
is
Other
the
Other', and
of the
one
the
about
know
we
'the
appliedto
implication
the
deals in his
fanciful
to
at
of the
differ from
doctrine
on
course
his
(241 d) is a
with
Parmenides
master
hint of Plato's
Strangerto
his
regard to
attitude towards
own
think it
not
central
Sokrates
this time.
Like
of two
shell
a shell. The
as has been said,of a kernel and
way. It consists,
of
is the attempt to find a definition of the Sophistby the method
division;the kernel is
criticism of
that
especially
categories,
the existence
also that the
reason
link
ostensible
6v).The
being'(TO ^
'not
being',but
why those who
that is
between
Sophistis found
by
insist on
no
the
to
all.We
means
mere
the
abstract
of
two
imply
find
unity
beyond contradictory
argument
is
that
of
the
like
that
Parmenides,
by so doing they
just
(aVriAoyia)
have put it out of their power to divide any subjectunder discussion
is
yeVr?,
'accordingto its forms' or 'kinds' (/caret
253 c-d). That
of division aims at doing;but it requiresto be
what the method
againstthose who deny that forms are a many, and that
justified
defence can
only take the shape of a proofthat 'not being'(TO^
is left
ov) is. Here, as in other cases, the real unity of the dialogue
advance
for
us
to
" 204.
which
are
discover if we
It would
be tedious
to
by
reached. They
examine
not, of
other
can.
hand,
course,
are
to
be taken
too
they whollywithout
Aristokles
The
(ap.Eus. P.E.
fX
Ilepiao"j"iarriKwv
Sophist are
the
seriously
; but neither, on
purpose. They are marked, in
xiv. 17,
; R.P.
" 289).
LOGIC
224
fact,by
will
certain
be hard
not
to
is firstselected for
be followed.
to
that the
after what
guess
has
definition,
merelyas
That
innocent
seems
is a
Sophisttoo
as
it
ill-humoured
not
said. The
justbeen
an
enough
fisher,a fisher of
Angler
it soon
appears
this leads up to
and
men,
of rich and
distinguished
point of view of
and
on
answers;
as
or,
disposeof
his
in the home
goods
them
manufactures
even
occasionally
be looked
and
sometimes
himself.
market,
Again, he
whose
are
fighting
man,
weapons
again,he may fall under the art
short
of
may
Questions
siftingand
then, to conclude
doubt
an
they practised
always in the true
doubtful
who
these
imitation
Sokratic
of the
are
is
an
insinuation
that
method, though
Sokratic
Once
spirit.
Sokratics,and the
more
it
can
not
hardly be
are.
" 205. The next section brings us to the real problem of the
that produces
art is one
dialogue.We shall find that the Sophist's
deceptiveimages and so gives rise to false judgements. On the
other hand, the distinction of an image from the objectimitated,
of false judgement to true, imply that 'what
and also the opposition
is not' in
The
argument
sense
proceedsas
follows
forbade
us
to
assume.
We
is
some
name,
accounts
have
which
all these
element
must, therefore, be some
lead
all
and
which
of it have in common,
to
they
up. Now
and
there
THE
the
seemed
which
account
of it
the
as
art
to
of
SOPHIST
225
to this is the description
clearly
The
Sophist
(dvTiAoyiKTj).
pointmost
Contradiction
to disputeon
invisible,in heaven and
professes
allthese
to understand
earth,but it is impossiblefor one man
on
really
of the Art of Appearance.
things.Therefore the Sophistis a master
of solidity
who producesthe appearance
He is like the painter
by lines
and
colours
on
flat surface,and
we
may
therefore
call his
art
the
Art of
which
"
modern
writingfor
another
reader
us,
he would
no
doubt
have
formulated
the
inherited
problem in
from
menides
Par-
(a doctrine which,
in
226
LOGIC
of its
the mouth
author,had
purelycosmological
significance),
baldest form
to
they will
that
ensure
not
be evaded. The
modern
reader would
combine
to
saying of
no
is shown
said
two,
If all thingsare
impliesrelated
or
way,
two
to
it must
other would
same
one
who
Pythagoreans,
said theywere
one.
them,
no
not
and
the two?
Either
it
be identified with
be. Or,
they will be
If all thingsare
thingswere
by
one
if
we
and
one
say that
not
two
of
mean
by
criticism of the
of the Eleatics,
who
is the
be
must
we
which this
'being'
thingbesides
third
them,
in which
case
the
'being'is true
(243 d
244 a).
of both in the
"
then
for the
such is
as
parts and is therefore other than one, which
it
other
'what
is'is
On
the
isa many.
indivisible.If,then,
hand,
a whole,
whole
It is
which
has
will be found
228
LOGIC
for the
imaginethem
we
get them
may
hard
are
corporealists
to
moment
that
admit
to
be
to
deal
but, if
with ;
reasonable than
more
we
they are,
or
theyin
being(ovaia.}
by reality
fact mean
They
therefore
admit
must
an
as
body,
animate
and
thingas
therefore
as
animal, and
mortal
soul.
They
must
admit
further
(thoughit is
admit that
be feared
to
they
thingis,they must
singleincorporeal
accept
definition
of
will
being which
"
It is to be observed
forward
that
we
If
turn
we
to
now
to
may
to
admit
of
fact,however, we
expressly
says
those
expect them
that what is is what
forms',we
this definition
that the
can
be
act
and
tractable,
more
more
As
lessamenable
to
of the
ready
a matter
argument
reformed
our
The
corporealists.
They
from becoming
distinguish
being(ovaia)
souls
our
remain
in the
in
participate
constant
bodies in variable
becoming by
surelyimpliesthat beinghas a
participation
our
being by
means
of
of
power
for
the
that
knows
acted
being
being must,
thought
upon;
in so doing,either act or be acted upon
both, and the being that
or
either act or be acted upon or both.
thoughtknows must accordingly
sense.
But
this
actingand
must
soul
this
admit
that
we
know
being,and
referred
true,
we
to
becoming,there
however,
variable
and
in
that
being
motion;
impliesrest (248 a
"
249
If these
can
be
would
for
d).
no
be
and
they
excluded
knowledgeat
unknowable
being and
all. It is equally
if it were
only
from
knowledge impliesconstancy,
and
that
SOPHIST
THE
have
We
forms'; but
the
able
been
not
to
get any
discussion
our
229
suggestedthat
has
them
with
of the 'friends of
out
answer
knowledge
is neither
can
rest
What
in motion.
nor
are
of this? We
make
to
we
what is meant
by is as
any rate, that it is justas hard to say
by is not, and this givesus a ray of hope. If we
say what is meant
be got
the other difficulty
only discover what is means,
may
at
see,
to
at
rid of
the
at
We
" 209.
thing,we
When
from
start
thenes?)who
say
have
we
good
is good ; but, if we
One
and
the
'the
say
are
of A's
say that A is B in virtue
affected by'1 B (252b) have themselves to
forbid
to
us
must
another, or
another, or
another
and
we
others
not.
are
cannot
so
considered
have
to
left,namely, that
others
who
in being
'participation
such
use
terms
as
'is',
with
carry about
in one
(i)that all thingsare incapableof participating
in one
(2) that all things are capable of participating
in one
thingsare capableof participating
(3)that some
possiblefor motion
is
and
say
in being,and
participate
theories
(Antis-
is man,
are
the
course
contradiction. Those
be stated without
they cannot
it.
confusingthe
refuted by the
sufficiently
is good',
we
man
theories
Many. Such
forth. Of
this. Man
do
rightto
no
him
applyto
so
to
names
elderlyamateurs
and
youthfullogic-choppers
are
fact that
other
for instance, we
man,
speakabout
we
only name
speak about
of
there
must
not
we
names
time.
same
rest
some
and
rest
makes
motion
havoc
of all the
case,
it will be
for
Only
in one
participate
rest
thingscan
to
cannot
move.
the third
another
case
and
(252e).
We
is
not
The
express
new.
phrase
In
the
KOIVWVIOL
the relation of
Phaedo
Plato
made
formulate
Sokrates
is derived
from
ira8ijfj.aTos
erepov
subjectto a predicate. Cf. Farm.
the
139
use
e.
the
of TreirovOevaito
230
LOGIC
method
of
the
subject 'is
affected
the predicate.1
by' (ntTrovBev)
What
is new
here is that,whereas in the Phaedo
it is the particular
thingsof sense that 'partakein' the forms, we are now
discussing
to
the
of the
participation
The
need
for such
(""194, 199). It
'kinds' of which
forms
'kinds'
or
is
to
be
observed
(yeV^)with
shown
another.
one
in the Parmenides
or
these
we
are
now
the Sokratic.
"210. We
in
another
one
another
one
have found
and
and
all combinations
any
combination
concordant
are
which
and
of
at
and
will show
what
justas
The
not.
all.In the
same
others
not.
us
are
Music
what
to
forms
will not,
kinds will
or
participate
letterswill go with
some
vowels, in particular,
pervade
letters,
so that without
and
forms
forms
some
others will
of Grammar
arts
that
vowel
there
in the
notes
way, some
In these two
cases
direct
us,
and
so
will harmonise
we
cannot
be
octave
have
the
requirean
art
we
with
one
another
and
man
can
enter
who
what
possesses that will be able to distinguish
into combination
and what will not.
forms
In
This passage
givesus
the foundation
of Plato's
Logic. The
ing
follow-
(b)The
kinds'
singleforms described under (3)are the 'highest
),such as Being, Rest, and Motion. These are all of
1
Phaed.
1043.
SOPHIST
THE
231
'manners
them
thingsadmit
(c)In the Phaedo the questionwas what particular
of the
here the questionis one
their predicate;
a given form
as
of the 'highestkinds' or forms
or
incompatibility
compatibility
with one
another. Is it possiblefor any of these to be predicated
of
another
one
be
can
and
predicated
so
which
not
can
of the
categories,
though the most
meaning except as entering into a
nothing; it is only the
judgement.By itselfthe word 'is'means
bond
that unites a subjectto a predicate.We
put this by
may
sayingthat Plato for the firsttime discovered 'the ambiguityof the
which will appear, he would certainly
copula',though,for reasons
(d) As Being is only one
pervasive of all,it has no
have
not
" 21
1.
kinds'
and
(/ne'yiCTTa
yeVr?)
with which
combine
able
to
discover
reallyis
Motion
such
exclude
combine
with
us
fourth
and
these
identify
sense
three
and
two
the
and
are,
therefore
of the
same
and
we
itself.That
as
Other; for
gives
cannot
we
For
(i) if we identifyeither
predicateof both, then it will
Motion
extent.
gives us
the other
a
In this way
'highest
(2)which
and
nature,
Being. That
few of the
be
may
in which we
may safely
say that there
'not being'.To
begin with, Rest and
to
thing as
one
what
onlya
(i)their
consider
and
some
select
will rest
predicatesof
or
Rest
Rest will
and
be identified with
Rest
be
Same
Motion, therefore
Same
with
predicableof
But
move.
Motion
or
and
the
any
other, so
Other
neither
common
Rest
are
that
common
nor
Motion
Other.
Again,(2)if we identify
Being
will
the
be
Same, then, as
same.
are, they
and
is
for
Other
Other;
Lastly,(3)we cannot
identify
Being
essentially
(TOUTO oTrep eortV)relative (-rrpos
erepov)and Being is absolute (/co.0
aurd).Therefore Other is a fifth kind (255 a-d).
can
and
Rest
Now
each
Other
of them
amounts
to
and
or
Motion
same
sayingthat
as
each
both
itself and
other than
of them
is itselfand
others.
1
Cf. Theaet.
185
sq.
(above, p. 247).
and
Being;
any
for
this
of the
LOGIC
232
Thus
that
must
mind
not
and
Motion
than
than
If
the apparent contradiction.
Rest exclude
one
another, we
we
had
not
might even
rest.)
Again, Motion, being other than
and is not Other in a sense.
Lastly,Motion,
but
it
is
because
other
than
is
not
being
Being,
Being,
Being
they all
partakein Being. Motion, then, is reallyboth Not being and Being,
and the same
thingwill apply to all the other kinds,since each of them
is other than Being and each of them is (255 e
256 e).
say that Motion
is
Other, Other in a sense
have
to
at
was
"
We
" 212. But this Not being which we have discovered is not the
the Not being Parmenides
oppositeof Being (like
spoke of).The
negativeterm
(diroffxicris)
produced by prefixing'not' to a word
only signifies
something other than the word which follows the
ness
othernegative,or rather than the thing that word denotes. Now
is subdivided
into as many
parts as knowledge,so, justas there
are
many
otherness
opposed
is
sciences
and
will have
arts
with
of their
names
of their
own
the parts of
part of otherness
which
to the beautiful is the not-beautiful,
(avTm0e/ievoj")
other than
names
either be
with
one
("ta-yap
259 e).
What
or
not
anythingelse
The
own.
be.
another, and
TTJV
has
two
forms
this is what
bound
inseparably
are
makes
etSaiv Kowatviav
been
so
proved
are
an
is also
far is
up
rational
dAA^Aa"vra"v
determined
positively
negativeterms
The
but
speech possible
Adyo? yeyovev TJ/JLLV
is
THE
It has
been
shown
is
negativeterm
term,
SOPHIST
233
not
of the
contrary
the other
correspondingpositive
hand, it has been shown
that
out
found
have
we
the Not
beingwhich
was
necessary
of the Sophist.
This is not explainedfurther,
account
our
justify
but the pointis quitesimple.We
called him an image-maker, and
he replied
that there was
such thingas an image, since an image
no
is really
that there is nothing in this objection;
not real.We
now
see
for the art of image-making, like all other arts, includes a part of
Being and a part of Not being. The image is not the reality,
indeed, and the realityis not the image, but that involves no
We
are
difficulty.
dealingwith a particularart, that of Imagemaking, and in it 'not real' has a perfectlydefinite and positive
The
'not real' is not the unreal, but just the image,
signification.
it is the image.
which is quiteas much
as that of which
Even admittingthis,however, the Sophistmay stillsay that it is
impossibleto say or think what is false. Though we have shown
with Being,
that Not being is,or in other words that it combines
that it combines with speech.But, unless it does
have not shown
we
to
falsehood
whether
or
is
Not
can
into them
enter
not.
We
begin, as
must
whether
will and
all words
of
in the
There
another,
one
two
are
of letters,by
case
with
with
combine
will not.
some
did
we
kinds
(SrjXwfj,aTa
rfjsoucrt'a?)
reality
nouns
considering
whether
or
of words
that
some
are
and
(dvd/zara)
pressions
ex-
verbs
express
cannot
(Adyos-)
simplestmust
have
be
must
statement
must
have
something
one
is
or
alone
is not
or
so-and-so.
of verbs
learns'.
statement
Further,
every
and it
something'(TWOS eivat),
i.e. it must
TWO.
efvcu),
quality(rrotov
express
future
in
the
becomes
or
(ra"v
or
present, past
'of
certain
which
is
some
one
or
234
LOGIC
Now
let US make
7} yiyvo/zevojv 77 yeyovoTcov
?}/zeAAovroiv).1
If I say 'Theaitetos is sitting',
that is a statement
a simpleexperiment.
which
is 'of Theaitetos',and it has the qualityof expressingsomething
which really
is at the present moment.
if
I
But,
say 'Theaitetos,
I am
to whom
i
s
that is also
at the present moment
talking
(vvv], flying',
which
is 'of Theaitetos',but it has the qualityof saying
a statement
of
him
which, though expressinga real action,is something
something
other than what is real with regardto Theaitetos at the present moment.
It is,therefore,possible
is not as being,and that is
to speak of what
what we mean
falsehood
d
by
(261
263 d).
OVTOJV
"
In
fact,what
terms,
which
call truth
and
falsehood
not
to
the
we
are
whether
is a
be found
in
proposition,
existent
or
for
case,
instance,
'is
excludes
of Rest, and therefore 'is
sitting'
every other form
'is not
implies the negativejudgements 'is not lying',
sitting'
and whatever
other forms of Rest there may be. In the
standing',
second
excludes
place,'is sitting'
cannot
have
any
communion
negativejudgements
should
the system
call
with
of
Motion, which
The
flying'.
fact,on
'is
not
of kinds
'universe
and
forms
to
which
of discourse'. Plato
definite number
perfectly
of such
forms
it refers,what
held
that there
in each
is
why
was
kind, which
we
it is
he insists
that 'not
who
is
is not
flying'
1
of the kind
true
the
tense
on
follows.
to
seems
'to whom
am
'Theaitetos is
statement
'quality'reallymeans
especiallyfrom the emphasis
which
why
reason
That
in the illustration
follow
from
talkingat
Theai(vvv),
the
context,
the present
and
moment'
XV
Politics
THE
"
6. The
21
form
sequel to
leading part is
to
reason
still taken
by
connexion
of this with
case
the
King
There
Homer.
is
that
however,
only
point
of the
age.
There
on
if God
are
God
by
ship
to
itself. At
opposite direction
processes
reversed
are
Empedokles).
be
no
We
retires
livingin
of
us
need
may
to
not
take
1
See
E.
be
the
thought
for the
Campbell's
Gr.
Ph.2
p.
This
are
not
of
the
flock
the
men
or
to the
fed
who
Statesman,
leaves
in
the
suggested by
there
by
hint
found
xxv
can
that,
the hand
days, who
p.
that
all natural
curious
of those
and
morrow,
been
is the
and
periods, and
herd
and
man,
round
goes
is
out,
world-ship (a
have
as
upon
livingin
may
ruler. There
God
of the world
which
of these
in
the
ruler. That
given it,and
one
sents
repre-
was
and
course
world
it
is,in fact,the
had
Introduction
342.
this
conning-tower
the
the
trace
already called
God
divine
highest. If
we
his
to
is
our
captain
times
idea
the
of the
reach
we
God
between
Stranger.The
which
(an
are
question for
any
Stranger points
in person
the
those
that
to
world.1
Eleatic
were
to
'image'of
an
himself, but
Pythagorean conception)2
the
of the
The
when
seasons
he
as
was
confusion
myth related by
directed
once
no
dialogue than
believing that
them
to
kingship.
rests
it is easier
of the
Men,
for
shepherd
realised
be
could
was
of
it
is
to
first definition
of
reason
King
the
ideal
theocratic
in
the
separated by
are
principal theme
Shepherd
The
was
and
same
Stranger. There
division, and
Sophist. The
good
view.
Pythagorean
the
the
as
Eleatic
attempt
an
of
method
of the
in the
the
are
dialogues
two
begins by
Statesman
was
is
(/7oAtrt/cd?)
of time.
interval
the
Statesman
characters
the
by
the
that
discussion
the
Sophist. The
the
suppose
considerable
The
entitled
dialogue
STATESMAN
had
of
no
everything
sg.
THE
bountifully
providedfor
spent their time
to
communicate
indeed
STATESMAN
them
without
happier than we
in telling
fables
to
handed
tradition
own
they were
down
237
by
to
our
But
are.
each
if they and
other
such
the beasts
have been
as
days,it is not
hard
form
to
He
will
He
will have
and
not
complete knowledge
will
he
it for them
secure
of what
with
law
; it can
cases
take
can
certain
laws. If he had
with
doubt
make
laws
doctor
might
leave behind
But, when
insist
the doctor
keeping to
on
alter the
him
will have
go away
we
frame
must
try
to
what
he
would
laws
do
for
time, he would
written
approve,
observed.
If
scrupulously
by
the
of
practitioners
the
well
as
and
men
of
no
would
we
found
must
to
feel
quitefree to
way, ifthe philosopher
have done in the past),
same
as
patient.
we
no
appearance
without
him. We
can
nearlyas possiblein
as
need
particular
rough and ready
no
cure
fit.In the
must
will
earth
of his return,
body
to
these instructions. He
saw
subjects,
their consent,
for the
He
back, it would
came
if he
treatment
to
his
guide
to
good
in
principles
able to attend
way. If the ruler were
he could always be present, it would
himself
without
or
not.
for his
good
account
only laydown
is
is
(275e).
accordance
insist upon
they were
of medicine
their
with
being
beingbadlytreated
and
navigation,
they
would insist upon a code of rules for these arts being drawn up, and
all transgressions
of these being punished, and that is the
upon
true
placeof law in the state. It is only a makeshift (Scvrepos
nXovs);
It is in this way that Plato
but, as thingsare, it is indispensable.
deals with the philosopher
king of the Republic.His rule is stillthe
ideal,but there is no immediate
prospect of it being realised. The
of such an ideal is nevertheless very great. In the first place,it
use
arts
238
POLITICS
gives us
standard
by
which
we
can
itwill
place,
save
us
from
the mistake
in consequence
attachingtoo high a value to these,and refusing
true
to contemplateany alteration of them. The
pointof view from
which to regardexistinglaws and institutions is to look on them
less tolerable expedients.
They are all alike open to
more
or
as
criticism when
compared with something higher,and ultimately
of
with
philosopherking.We
may
is
say,
then, if
we
determine
the
to
please,that the purpose of the Statesman
We
must
not
provincesof realism and idealism in politics.
put
ideal
but
make
the ideal too high, as the theocratic
did,
we
may
'of human
it as high as we
please,so long as we take account
The
to
nature.
analogyof the beasts of the field is inapplicable
mankind.
that of the
The
rulers may
be one,
few,
or
Of the legal
theymay rule accordingto law or lawlessly.
first,aristocracysecond, and
constitutions,kingship comes
of political
democracy third; for the possibility
knowledge is
of rulers. But, when
to the number
we
come
inversely
proportional
the order is reversed. There is onlyone
to the lawless constitutions,
many,
name
and
for
constitutional and
quitedifferent in
can
lawless
so
that,while
tutional
consti-
to
democracy is inferior to aristocracyand still more
constitutional monarchy, even
a lawless democracy is far superior
and stillmore
is
to a lawless tyranny. Such
to a lawless oligarchy,
the view of Plato,but it would
be very hard to imagine Sokrates
accepting
any such doctrine. Even the Periklean democracy is not
harshlytreated. It is,of course, a lawless democracy,but it is not
in the Gorgiasand the Republic.
condemned
it was
so
as
bitterly
If it cannot
do much
littlemischief. The
good, it does relatively
less the Athenian
or
democracy of Plato's
legaldemocracy is more
All this is
time, and is placedjust below true aristocracy.
own
quitein keepingwith what we have learnt as to Plato's political
upbringingand experience("158),and it agrees very well with
vii. It was
what he says about his political
attitude in Epistle
THE
after the
which
events
of all democracy
marked
that is not
But
239
maintain
to
impossible
STATESMAN
insist in
not
doctrinaire fashion
of the chief
rigid classification of constitutions. One
functions of the true ruler is justto unite the various elements in
on
any
the state,
and
the
as
there is
for the
weaver
for
room
already described.
six types
conclusion is that,as
thingsare,
and
In
the
final
Plato's
Laws
of the
in the absence
philosopher
of legal
is where
abatingone
been
unmixed
an
blessingto
PLATO
not,
he
have
we
goes
beyond
seen
("145),
his country.
DIONYSIOS
AND
political
teaching in the Academy had
influence through his pupils;for the foundations
civilisation were
mainly laid by them. His
Plato's
" 219.
mous
enor-
an
of Hellenistic
personal
in the
he felt unable
so
been
have
to
treason
succeeded, the
altered,and
decline would
To
to
course
shall
we
him.
to
see
due
was
to
had
been
beyond
causes
his control.
In
367
B.C.
three, after
great
1
man,
but he had
Laws
In the
Athenian
best
democracy
the British
is
mean
Plato
purpose
weaving
Constitution.
democracy
is
common
to
with
Perikles
the Statesman
left out.
The
and the Laws
monarchy
Persian
between
have
would
been
an
might
of
imply
course,
illustration
(734
sqq.).
from
admirer
very
and
of
unlike
expected
approval of
be
the
art
of
POLITICS
240
drive the
to
was
had been
from Sicily.
He
Carthaginians
defeated
concluded
the year before his death,and a peace was
now
the basis of the status quo ante bellum. His successor,
Dionysios
on
quite unfit to take up
II.,was nearlythirty
years old,but he was
His father had always been jealousof
the reins of government.
by Hanno
sharing his
with
power
had
and
anyone,
mouth
at a
son
in such
amusement
The
man
young
seemed
to
admirer
the
was
Dion
so
pursuitsas
was
amateur
told,without
natural
we
was
are
the
near
purposelykept his
encouraged him to find
carpentry and turning.
not,
Dion, who
of
late to
too
and
all publicaffairs,
distance from
Adria,
he had
reason
same
at
his ablest
sent
even
and
gifts,
and
it
a'devoted
There
old, to Syracuse.
and
project,
the
was
maintain
could
how
itself
Hellenism
once
more
day was
the pressure of Persia on the one
side and Carthage on the
against
that the onlyhope lay
statesmen
other,and far-sighted
saw
clearly
in takingthe offensive. We hear most, as is natural,of Persia. The
conditions imposed by the King's Peace of 387 B.C., which leftthe
Persian
Greek
cities of Asia under
rule, were
humiliatingand
dealt with
intolerable. That side of the problem was
successfully
later by Alexander, and it was
from the Academy that he derived
his inspiration;1
but the situation in Sicilywas
quite as serious.
The Carthaginian
questionwas only another aspect of the Persian
the
question,and
it is
least
at
" 220.
Plato refused,however,
great deal of
to go
1
through a
Plut.
adv.
Col.
was
sent
to Alexander
him
and
stir him
It is
also been
played
of
Himera
as
the
day.2
same
had
and
an
course.
up
ground
serious
1126
by
to
to
course
d. Delios
in
war
Dionysios
make
the Hellenes
engage
to
of
up, and
Ephesos,
who
with
an
lived in
it was
associate
Asia, and
(eVaipos)of Plato,
did most
to
enflame
the barbarians.
had
and Semites
Hellenes
interestingto note that the strugglebetween
going on in Cyprus, the other great 'meeting-placeof races'. Isokrates
in his own
similar part there to that which
Plato played in Sicily,
way,
"
DIONYSIOS
trusted
make
to
even
of twenty,
age
had
it
so
natural
was
passed,he
of reform
schemes
was
he ought to
principles,
own
241
beginning with
he
liberation.1 Unfortunately
Plato's
II.
should
and
Accordingto
have
feel them
irksome.
That
was
the
had been
exile,and he
himself
set
at once
somewhat
to
mine
under-
masterful and
more
himself
Dion
now
expectedthat Plato
pressedhis claim in
would
give up
season
and
of
out
was
out
season.
situation which
Plato
to
would
become
On
return.
his way
home
visited
he
Archytas at
Taras.
"221. It is not
promise to become
get Plato back
studies in his
reconciled
all
he
was
sincere in his
costs.
to
to
urgentlyentreated
Dion, but he
tried
At firstPlato declined
court.
but
at
very
to
the
return
to
do
carry
determined
was
on
his mathematical
subjectquitefashionable
unless Dion
so
by
Dion
to
was
at
reinstated,
himself
and
by
not
Grote
to
any
sort
of evidence.
POLITICS
242
Archytas,the
to
certainly
successful
most
have
been
of the
statesman
good judge of
the
day. He
ought
and he assured
situation,
Plato that
circumstances,and he had
quarrelbroke
revolt. Dionysiosmade
for
out
Herakleides,one
of his
in the work
under
of reform
rule.
Carthaginian
geometry ! Plato
and
been
until,on
prisoner,
year.
military
officers,
responsible
off.1Dionysioscould
shamed
Plato with
into
act
an
of
having hindered
Instead
excluded
was
whole
the occasion of
on
not
wait
to
of that he had
from
the
the intercession
made
and
court
him
learn
kept
practically
of
and
difficultpoints,
much
to
Plato answered
Plato's annoyance,
He
him.
in which
he
wrote
even
professedto
book,
disclose the
Platonic
adherents
by
all
force of
the young
1
We
Hellas. He
over
Plato would
arms.
hotbloods
gather
from
the
troops. These
their
way
2
This
day
may
v"n
of the
determined
take
Keltic
no
Plato
warriors
assert
to
part in the
Academy
Epistlesthat
wild
were
was
eager
well
very
rights
adventure, but
in the
unpopular
very
knew
his
that
cause
with
the
of
cenary
mer-
if Plato
had
his
for the
sons
of
lover.
partvhy
DionysiosI. by
had
Dion
istomache.
had
tried
They
were
to
secure
much
the
succession
younger.
POLITICS
244
wonder
marry
overthrow
asked
for advice
him
and
of
with
this gave
letters to which
open
The
him
knowledge of
defence of his
dignified
we
all
owe
confidence in his
Dion, if they
whom
men
are
of the
stitution,
con-
opportunity of writingthe
the
is a
vii.)
(Epistle
throughoutlife,and
in
settlement
the
regardto
first
attitude
man.
do
to
been
another
compelledto
been
had
it.His property
at
these
our
it bears
witness
at
affairs.
political
own
to
once
trusted,and
he had
two
appointme
his dis-
his unshaken
to
He is willing
of
to advise the partisans
principles.
reallysincere in their desire to realise Dion's
Carthaginiansor
have
We
how
seen
At the
to succeeding.
very nearlyPlato came
have done for Dionysioswhat the Pythagorean
of
prosperity
And
Thebes
he
this date
at
might
have
done
said
was
due
was
even
been
an
deal with
of
Dionysios,a Greek
instead
Romans
naturallyto
the
between
division
wrfAis(Ar. Rhet.
The
Eastern
II. from
restoration
of
that
Dionysios
lived
him,
and
him
one
want
and
to
been
it was
fall
the
Western
: "-nft-naw
0.0,0.
1398 b, 18).
brief
by
had
philosophers.2
promising
said
First Punic
Dionysios
no
years
the
more
of Macedon
the
viii. 3536.
Alkidamas
many
with
that
to
will be the
1Ep.
Alexander
time
to
entirely
more
material. If it had
the
at
asked
tells
a tyrant
of frankness
War
broke
ol Trpoararai
out
Syracuse by
Dionysios (345 B.C.) or
Timoleon.
the
the
life of
AiXoao"oi
dilettante
Plato
eyevovro
after the
did
not
Corinth,
final
live to
xal ev^aiu.6vr"aev
where
expulsion
see
either
17
of
the
(344 B.C.).After
Aristoxenos
saw
" 224.
to
the
make
time.
LAWS
THE
LAWS
245
It
a
THE
It
be
not
must
was
the
immedate
occasion
of his
undertakinghis
most
treatise which
for considerable
goes
into great
detail,and which
must
have
called
246
POLITICS
the results of
of human
life.
longand varied experience
It is,of course,
impossibleto summarise it here; all that can be
done is to suggest certain pointswhich may
help the reader to a
justerview of what Plato himself probablyconsidered his most
embodies
importantwork.
He
that
stillbelieved,in
with Dionysios,
spiteof his disappointment
would
result
the co-operationof a tyrant with a philosopher
and
be
from
hoped
unworthy
in Greek
the influence
of constitutions. He
framers
reasserts
of
did
law-givers
philosophy on
not,
therefore,think
an
understand
this
the
at
it
use
of his
Athens, supplementingit with legislative
proposals
world
much
(709 e).Failingthat,however,
emphatically
this conviction
might
nation, and he
must
we
time.
We
try
to
are
not
To
own.
of the Greek
in this country
accustomed
to
systematiclegislation
though
(what the Greeks called vo/jiodeaia},
such thingsas the Code Napoleon may give us a notion of what is
meant, but it was
very familiar to the Greeks. Every colony had a
written constitution and a code of laws, and the task of framing
these was
entrusted to a singleindividual or a small
regularly
commission.
The situation presupposed in the Laws was
of almost
and there is nothingextravagant in the idea
everyday occurrence,
that a man
like the Athenian Stranger
who is more
or less Plato
himself
should be able to give valuable assistance in such
"
"
circumstances.
gave
laws
to
It is
the Greek
States
at
this time
were
purpose
and the work
" 226.
No
Plato should
of the Laws
is,therefore,an
is designedto
doubt
it may
devote so much
meet
seem
attention
as
men
who
members
of the
Academy
for
an
their constitutions.1
eminently practical
one,
real need
strange
the
of the
to
of the time.
a
modern
he does
to
reader that
minute
police
ripe fruits by
Plut. Adv.
Col.
26
'
e'^aWaretAev
'ApKaaifj.ev
Se
Se Ilvppaiois.
'//Aet'oij
EvSo"os Se
TroXiTetav,
SiaKOOfir/aov-ra
0opp.lva,
MeveSijp.ov
TTJV
KviSlois Kal ApioTOTfXj)?
eypoujiav'
ErayeipLroisnXdraivos ovres avvrfOeis,
irapa.
vopovs
Se SevoKpdrovs'A\e"avtpos
imoOTJKas
-jjrrjae
irepl
fiaatXeias.
1 1
nXanav
Se
TU"V
eraipcav
'
THE
immensity
of the
LAWS
247
of the
events
day
only an
are
he
God, and
that human
it is serious
whether
it is absurd
choose
not,
or
one
have
we
got
take
to
it
there is much
to
suppose
of it and another
in point of
to
department
dignity.Nothing is too
and
worth
times
through countless ages. Someis perhaps no
than a plaything
of
more
life is not
after all a serious thing. Unfortunate
humble,
is
nothing
as
too
attention.
exalted,for the philosopher's
Closelyconnected
often the best
are
to
with
illustrate
He
important principles.
that from
This
is
the
particularly
in
case
their business, do
presumably know
homely examples
had
learnt
in the Statesman.
matter
Jurists,who
jurisprudence.
much
too
That
to
juristslike
present day, that many
the older
Law
has
hardlybeen
done
well
perfectly
Cujas,though it is often
features of Roman
to.
justice
follows. When
of Hellenistic Law.
known
was
of Greek
The
way
the Romans
are
of
some
at
derived
philosophyon
the
from
Roman
in which
came
to
overlooked
Law
probablybeen overestimated,but
has
as
was
is the foundation
direct influence
not
this
about
came
with
of the
announcement
Cuiacii
See
muha
.
vationum
I
Comm.
auctores
lib. xxiv.
nostri
c.
on
principles
ex
Platone
mutuati
ad
which
he
intended
Edictum, ad "
Examples
sunt.
to
ad Namusam
are
given
decide
et seq.:
in Obser-
24.
B.C.
P.
248
POLITICS
certain
with
such
edict
The
cases.
modifications
that
inevitable
the
laws
of the
and
contact,
down
from
praetor
to
praetor
ultimatelybecame
was
handed
was
as
Hellenic
in
these
were
with
states
turn
which
the
Romans
profoundly influenced
were
in
came
by
the
that Hellenistic
law
is
jurisprudence of the Academy. Now
from
the papyri, we
becoming better known
confidently
may
valuable discoveries in this field.
some
anticipate
EDUCATION
A
In
" 227.
the
abstract aspect of
a
brief sketch
This
will
of the educational
keep
hand
went
chapter we shall
Plato's philosophy,so
next
us
in mind
in hand
with
system
that these
the
useful
most
from
are
be
dealingwith
it will be well
recommended
to
the
most
givehere
in the Laws.
chieflyknown
interest
point
from
in
concrete
of view.
the
The
Republic,
it is often
well
or
Pleasure
education
ill,
and
pain are
must
start
from
this
THE
LAWS
249
might
we
and
save
wish
we
removed
from
must
take
advantageof
take
pleasurein
we
children
therefore
years of
transform
and
be
tune
time.
chief educational
our
order
the very
These
two
instrument
do
to
first three
gradually
can
into song,
and
the kicks
three
There
nurses.
the
head
of
six children
visit
once
nurses.
year,
to
see
grandparents to
to
visit them.
should
be
taken
the
religious
and this at once
raises the thorny problem
village,
of twelve ladies appointed
be a committee
must
the Education
Department to supervise all the
to
services of their
by
should
so.
From
of
Punishment
shouts
things must
into dance.
and
screams
do this
earliest age
for the
to
the country
into districts,and
celebrations
in her
that the
live
at
nurses
behave.
distance
some
In that way
to
and
at least
district,
own
It is
have
it is possible
to make
will
each
sure
the
sent
they really
do get the
chief instruments
gymnastics,for
we
have
at
music
which
of education
THE
250
LAWS
and
more
question of games
toys becomes
gods. The
importantat this age. The main thingis that each generationshould
and have the same
toys as the last,for only so
play the same
games
The
of the constitution be preserved.
the spirit
can
greatest of all
of
the
revolutionaries is the
who
man
invents
new
boy who
has
interest of the
is a fundamental
games
take it as our
guiding principlethat
of
anything
instance
far
"
but
"
what
constitution.
competing
is
imitate
and
Tragedy
choruses
blaspheme
melodies
are
there is
sculpture,for
painting and
the outward
not
appearance
be preservedunaltered
must
will be excluded, of
to
and
old
must
we
direct imitation
most
will
rhythms
music,
to
rhythms
than
melodies
New
too.
they
the
are
direct
more
of
disposition
but
They
of character.
imitations
As
state.
the
We
course.
in the immediate
the
allow
cannot
neighbourhood
of the altars.
difficult task of
The
jury consistingof
ones,
men
and
selecting
songs
who
over
fifty,
if necessary,
call in expert
and rhythm. If the children
will accept
or
assistance
to
or,
melody
ordered
and
sober
music, the
other
when
Muse,
will be left to
dances
are
they
the
cold
music
true
to
and
the
oppositekind
sweet
harsh.
the
to
sweet
Muse
There
old
their
correct
accustomed
once
hear
rejectthe
in
must
of
the
early
be
separate songs
what
they can.
militaryservice
be made
be
relieved
might
At
at
any
be
for
A
is
the
same
to
some
boys
state
that
much
not
extent
the
race
in which
makes
more
no
than
its
call upon
half as strong
for
women
as
it
might
they should
from
household
occupations,which
of co-operativemethods.
introduction
should be freed from the disgraceof
of defending
the females are incapable
expense.
simplifiedby
and
It would
be better that
252
awkward
LAWS
handle.
That
not
The
of beasts
THE
to
be confused
to
with the
is
sciences,which
come
later.
who
is to be a good citizen
question arises how far a man
A boy should begin readingand writing
must
go in these subjects.
and spend three years on them ; music need not be
at the age of ten
begun tillhe is thirteen,and should be continued for three years.
These
times should
be made
compulsory whether the boy or his
father has any taste for the subjectsor not. It will be enough if the
it is only in cases
of special
boys can read and write intelligibly;
talent that we
should encourage
The
a higher degree of excellence.
time and trouble ittakes are better spared for the higherstudies.
That
the boys will read poetry of the rightsort is a matter
of
but prose seems
a very
dangerous thing.Even as to poetry
course,
there is the questionwhether
it should be read in masses
and whole
should use
books of extracts
we
poets learnt by heart,or whether
and make
these to memory.
our
But, as has been
pupils commit
of prose. Books
is the educational
use
suggested,the real difficulty
about the principles
of legislation
certainlybe read, but the
may
of philosophersand scientific men
works
safe at this stage.
not
are
All these things will be regulatedby the head
of the Education
Department, but he will have expert advice on technical questions.
He will not allow the experts to dictate to him on generalprinciples,
but will consult them as to the methods
of carryingthem out.
the higher studies, beginning with
to
now
come
" 229. We
Mathematics, in its three chief divisions of Arithmetic, Geometry,
and Astronomy. Only a small number
will pursue these studies to
the end, those, namely, who
show
themselves
fit to become
members
of the Nocturnal
Council, but the prevailingignorance
of them
can
only be described as 'swinish' (819 d).And that is not
the worst.
Most
teachers treat mathematical
subjectsin the most
and the greatest evil is not total ignorance,but
manner,
perverse
much
learningand knowledge misdirected. Most people take it
for granted that all lengths,breadths
and depths are
surable,
commenwhereas
it is reallythe problem of incommensurability
EDUCATION
should
that
hold
of
study
The
We
of
remember
of
lessons
and
this
is
education.
far
better
The
than
game
reformed
be
must
astronomy
all
had
the
invented
be
the
In
on
of
afford
to
to
It
despise
if
turn
to
very
be
wish
different
seen
to
such
Romans
that
the
understand
side
of
Laws
by
of
is
Plato's
his
single
Academy
the
everywhere
it
and
idea
invented
schools
school
the
has
o-^oA^
term
no
under
adopted
grammar
will
we
find
Greek
he
music-
was
founding
now
young
for
there
building
By
and
the
the
and
must
for
teacher
one
single
we
medieval
it since.
to
We
schools
the
to
as
onwards.
regular
teachers.
and
translating
out
of
consequence
quaintly
the
in
proposals
ten
Homer,
university,
period,
of
taught
staff
of
no
taken
things
Plato's
age
were
were
Hellenistic
origin
it is time
these
of
the
there
to
regular
school.
things,
the
from
They
age.
with
secondary
can
mathematical
significance
day
another
to
coordinating
direction
come
of
girls
his
in
that
the
and
boys
that
people
is
of
out
teaching
miss
easily
may
education
in
in
place
lines.
similar
Plato
first
arising
questions
backgammon.
of
the
253
activity.
not
with
other
Indus.
That
all
that
work
influence,
has
we
but
XVI
Philosophyof Numbers
The
"
It is
230.
the
central
he
did
by
no
means
of Plato's
doctrine
choose
not
Aristotle
is that
teaching,
and
results
which
to
shall have
distinctions.
Pythagoreans
could
was
known
he
that
is
the
describes
mind
except
often
that
he
from
be
Met.
A.
certain
In
day.
had
one
replaced
him
to
as
it. We
responsible for
than
knows
himself.
origin of
of
years
a, 32:
could
things he
hearsay.
or
yeyovt
to
These
the
before
it
On
know
Above
know
obvious
to
what
Aristotle
another
he
bear
must
born
are
Plato
on
are
in
about
nothing
distinctions
was
vvv
ber
remem-
all, when
exercised
influence
ra.fj.adrni.ara.
rots
we
and
hand,
other
have
him.
true
was
the
doctrine,
any
believe
to
unless
always
and
by this,we
who
to
as
knowledge
bound
contemporaries.
must
statements
tells us,
are
may
We
Academy.
statement
people
speaking
9, 992
we
which
speaking
Aristotle's
he
doctrines
and
name
of
way
reallymeant
he
Kratylos
by
within
his
by
Plato
inference
unaddible,
such
historical
and
light of
(olvvv)
contemporary
well
of those
one
'some',
ignored. Speculations as
Sokrates
of Plato
facts. When
made
what
is
Plato's
own
these
true
better
means
man
be
us
of
repugnant
was
Plato
to
the
been
to
have
he tells
when
of his
time
matters
justified.
of
more
numbers
to
That
was
and
have
must
not
of his
men
almost
are
critic
in the
Academy
teaching
those
interpretationof
He
by
be
to
distinguish even
held
much
too
(" 162),
makes
What
us.
seen
we.
unsympathetic
it
attributed
include
Plato
and
interpret
make
two
evidence, it is necessary
to
in the first instance
at least,distinguish (i)
must,
stated
his
have
we
to
Aristotle's
with
We
facts which
the
the
vaguely
also
in the
far he
doctrines
between
led
made
how
see
dealing
In
at
that
As
tells
day
present
writing,
to
very
mathematics.1
he
to
looks
it had
by
biologist,and
it
Aristotle
is
he
that
place he complains
philosophy
what
on
the
at
us
philosophy.
commit
to
entirelydependent
worse
for
easy
quoted
17 "f"iXoao"f"ia,
ARISTOTLE
of fact,and
evidence
as
the
most
from
which
time
same
differs in the
Plato's,which
as
at
Platonism
philosophyby
the forms
of any
that he knew
Aristotle
had
been
or
taken
not
the
age.1That
is
of the
member
with
with
one
numbers.
placeof
identified
modification
of but
knows
that
an
earlier
numbers,
introduced
only a modern
Academy for
into his
lation.
specuthe last
said
In M.
years
4.
there
said of them
both
p.
cases
280).
of Plato's
had
were
change
philosophyis expounded
never
or
his
255
clear. Aristotle
One
He
PLATO
ON
1078 b, 9
were
sqq.,
forms'
which
Aristotle
it
life,and
seems
to
me
impossible to identifythose
with
are
is
thinking primarily
of
be
admitted
that
who
'first
things are
explanation is, I think, that in
the et'Soiv "f"iXoi
in the Phaedo
(cf.
256
ARISTOTLE
ON
PLATO
There
" 232.
mathematics
(2)The
as
distinct from
Pythagoreansheld
their form
and
number
as
the One
the
and
the
both
the
and
matter
intermediate
between
of numbers
to
them.
be the Unlimited
dyad
of the Great-and-
of
Small.
regardsas reallypeculiar
the substitution of the term
to Plato ; for he looks upon
tion'
'participafor 'imitation' as a merely verbal difference. Both the Pythagoreans
and Plato left it an open question(d^etcrav
ev
KOLVW
fyrelv)
could
forms
be.
That
of
in
what imitation or participation things
confused by a long
is the outline of the chapter,but it is somewhat
These
pointsare
two
parenthesisintended
to
show
that
the
first difference
between
have
heard
the
Plato
I.
expound.
FORMS,
MATHEMATICALS
AND
SENSIBLES
between
numbers
and
the
'introduction'
ON
ARISTOTLE
PLATO
257
practiceof 'considering
and that
thingsin statements' (Starrjv eV TOI? Aoyoi?eyevero O7fe'j/ui")
is as clear a reference as can
be to the new
method
introduced
by
Sokrates in that dialogue(99 e sqq. ).We
also told that the preare
decessors
forms
of the
of
Sokrates
due
was
to
the
unversed
were
in
dialectic,and
that
is
explained by what has been said above (987 a, 20) about the
Pythagoreans.They began, we are told,to discuss the 'What is it?'
of things (TO rt eVnv;),and to define them, but in a naive
and
universal
definitions
Sokrates
introduced
and
superficial
way.
busied
himself
whole, and
it
with
numbers
him
with
to
follow' the
things.He
had
of writh
instead
matters
Plato's acceptance
was
impossible for
ethical
of his method
Pythagoreans
convinced
nature
as
that made
in
himself
it
identifying
of the
Hera-
in flux,and he saw
that
thingswere
the definitions of Sokrates could not apply to them, so he gave the
of forms to something other than sensible things,and said
name
distinct from
these (-naparavra) and
that sensible things were
of things sharing the
called after them; for the multitude
were
what
in virtue of their
the forms
name
were
same
as
they were
that in this
in these forms.
It will be observed
participation
passage Aristotle insists rather on the distinction of sensible things
from the forms than on that of the forms from sensible things,and
Plato from Sokrates. We
he impliesthat this is what distinguished
have seen
reason
alreadyfor believingthat Sokrates recognisedno
realityin sensible things apart from the forms, and Aristotle's
it is equallytrue to say,
languagehere confirms this view. Of course
Aristotle usually does, that the forms
distinct from
the
are
as
sensible things,
but itis significant
that,when he firsthas occasion to
mention
the point,he emphasisesthe other side of the distinction.
with
this separation(xuipicrfios)
of
" 234. Closely connected
sensible thingsis what Aristotle calls the 'introduction' (eiaayojy^)
does not imply that Plato invented
them.
of the forms. This term
The
metaphor is, I believe, derived from the use of the word for
bringing on the stage or 'producing',and the suggestionappears
of Sokrates had made
it necessary
to be that the ethical inquiries
kleitean doctrine
to
certain universals
assume
of course,
numbers
that sensible
would
were.
were
be separate from
the
The
Pythagoreanshad
as
specialform
square
which
of
numbers,
not
things of
defined
had shown
sense
and
these,
just as
the
Justice,for instance,
that
we
must
postulate
Sucaiov).That
is
not
258
mentioned
as
implied between
Sokrates
stated in
so
while
in the Tenth
words
many
and
the forms
thingsfrom
sensible
of Plato's. The
innovation
an
PLATO
ON
ARISTOTLE
the former
Book
is also said
did
not.
That
is
(1078 b, 17),though it
the impulse to (e'/aV^ae)
going further,and it is
is priorro
still to
worse
make
and
Conceptualism,
talk about
him
I doubt
'concepts'.1
very much
whether
anyone
Aristotle,and
intermediate
his historical
not
tells
He
reallyto interpret.
differed from
immovable
and
between
from
the
us
them.
of
It is that statement
have
it,which
we
upon
further that the objectsof mathematics
notes
things of
the forms
in
sense
in
being many,
being
eternal
whereas
each
and
form
that,we shall
interpret
what Plato's 'separatism'
know
meant.
(xwpicTfjLos)
really
and the objectsof
The
the objectsof sense
difference between
is a simple matter, and is fullydealt with in the
mathematics
is not reallyspeaking about the senPhaedo.
The mathematician
sible
diagram he traces in the sand. The sensible circle is only a
In the Phaedo,
of what
he reallymeans.
rough 'image'(et'ScoAo^)
are
however, the objects of mathematics
regarded as
certainly
is meant
to ask what
by distinguishing
forms, and we have now
is
and
one
from
them
unique (avro
the forms.
forms
thingPlato
1
word
The
for
are
would
on
ev
If we
(JLOVOV).
It cannot,
a
think
lower
of course,
level than
be
matical
that mathe-
meant
others. That
is the
possibly mean
Ao'yo?cannot
'concept'at this date,it is
term
can
'concept'.So
far
as
there
is any
last
on
Greek
26d
THE
ELEMENTS
two' which
OF
NUMBERS
four? The
say make
we
will appear
answer
of the mathematical
sciences
particulars
are
objectsof thoughtjustas much as the universals. We can think
'twos' without regardingthem as inhering
in any sensible
particular
if
that the
remember
we
substratum,
on
distinguished
which
the
four
make
the
that
so
seen
pebbles, and
on
brings us
to
'two
and
two
from
other
the
are
pebbles'
unique
is
are
understand
what
thinking that
certainlythe doctrine Aristotle attributes
cannot
we
the
Aristotle
it
completelytill we
of number
discussed
That
for
That
Plato, but
the
four'
'make
two.
reason
sense.
which
two'
from
some
to
and
hand
one
universal,the number
It is
'two
to
the
forms.
otner
the second
regardsas
have
peculiarity
of Plato's philosophy.
(t'Stov)
THE
II.
Unlimited
THE
AND
INDETERMINATE
or Continuous
(a-n-eipov)
the elements
therefore
as
One
the
and
DYAD
Pythagoreanshad regardedthe
The
" 237.
ONE
of
the elements
things.Plato
Great-and-
of the
dyad
as
Limit
and
(rrepas)
of
number, and
Small.
The
only difference,
things,as
points out
dual
in character. It also
elsewhere,from
Plato's
the
was
fore
there-
follows, as Aristotle
separationof
and
numbers
as
thingsthat there will be what he calls 'matter' in the numbers
well as in things.
This is called the Indeterminate
dyad (aoptaro?
it from the Determinate
dyad, which is the
Sua?)1to distinguish
number
sort
of matrix
" 238.
1
The
this
dyad
it is
Now
at
of this term
is not
he
used
that
it.
imply
Aristotle's
the numbers
generatedas from
are
(eV^ayeto^).2
attributed
use
to
seems
2
From
two.
account
obscure.
Mr.
of the
way
George
A.
to
Plato
in which
the
Johnston
has
I have
Indeterminate
term
by
name,
but
Met.
1091
dyad
a, 4
are
tremely
generated is exsuggested a most
interesting
have
his permission to quote. We
seen
numbers
(i.e.
oblong numbers
always changing. It is a dyad, because
numbers)
the ratio is
it is always a ratio between
two
numbers; it is indefinite because
of the successive
root
always changing. The one, on the other hand, is the square
between
the sides of 2
are
means
oblong numbers, "Jz, ^6, "Ji2, etc., which
(2 : i),6 (3 : 2), 12 (4 : 3), etc.
(p- 53,
the
sums
n.
i) that
the
ratio between
of the series of
even
the
sides
is
of successive
ARITHMETIC
is
new
for
name
the old
'increase'
That
is
which
and
Continuity,
Unlimited
term
why
Plato
have
also of
intended
to
express
introduction
of number.
view
learnt from
than
clearly
more
finite
only admits of ininfinite 'diminution'
(KaOaipems).1
infimmentpetit.The
entirelynew
it expresses
It not
nature.
its twofold
but
(a#"77),
261
GEOMETRY
AND
Great-and-Small.
that of the
was
of this
That
need
The
new
idea
the
infinitesimal,
conception involves
not
surpriseus; for
an
we
numerical
; for in that
case
be identified with
the
the Indeterminate
unit, which
the
numbers.
not
as
was
We
i
but
may
as
now
o, and
would
number
mere
source
of
all the
there
is
no
trouble
irrational
about
the numerical
for
refusingto
best proof that
reason
is
series,
call such
this was
The
quantitiesas Jz and ^/5 numbers.
reallythe step which Plato took is that Aristotle always insists
but number
made
againsthim that there is no number
up of
It follows that Plato maintained
there
units (/xovaScKro?
d/Hfyids-).
was.
" 239.
The
hypotheses of Geometry
to
and
Not
necessarilyby
covers
given below,
subtraction
p. 330.
division
The
(Siaipeots).
It is used
(d""at'peais).
were,
new
Zeno
term
in the
of course,
view
had
of number
erected
Kadatpeoisis
extract
submitted
from
more
had
between
general,
Hermodoros
262
INDIVISIBLE
Arithmetic
LINES
and
'infinitesimals'.What
than
so
more
Plato
the later
is
meant
commentators
but not
paradoxical,
that, if
was
clearly
the originof the
as
Newton
the
as
spatialunit.
Leibniz, and
the
All this
brings us
close
very
historical connexion
tesimal
infini-
or
to
still be
can
traced.4
look at geometry
in this way, we
that its
we
see
" 240. When
character tends to become
of
irrelevant. It becomes
a form
spatial
whether spatial
Arithmetic, dealingwith continuityin general,
or
This view is fullydeveloped in the Epinomis,where we
not.
are
told (990 d) that Geometry (which is said in passingto be 'a very
absurd name') is really'an assimilation by reference to surfaces of
similar to one
numbers
another
not
by nature'. That is just the
development of what we read in the Theaetetus (148 a),to the
effect
certain
that
numbers
but commensurable
(fjLrjKei),
roots'
are
Met.
nXdrwv
2
A.
toy
992
ovri
Simpl.
'by means
(rot?em^e'Soi?
Stereometry is
said
a"
'"
Phys.
be
p.
incommensurable
'in
length'
In precisely
the same
Suvairai).
the art by which
certain numbers
ye'vei
(sc.TO) ra"v "my[j.a"v)
/cat
fj.ev ovv
Soy/icm.
Proclus
722, 28 (Diels):17 ypajtt/n)
cm.yfj.rjs,
pvais
Tovrti)
yea^erpiKO)
in
to
are
they
way
not
TU"
in Eucl.
i. p. 97, 6 (Friedlein).
8
Met. ib. : TOVTO
8e 7roAAa"a? eridei.ras
OLTO/JLOVS "ypa.fj.fjLais.
Discourse
Method
has thrown
on
recently discovered
by Archimedes
of infinitesimals
the
unexpected lighton the development of the method
among
Greeks.
See
etudes, pp. 134 sqq., and especiallyp. 154.
Milhaud, Nouvelles
4
The
Cavalieri's
modern
former
'method
higher
from
of indivisibles'
Mathematics.
Wallis
and
Barrow.
is the
Newton
Wallis
and
connecting
Leibniz
translates
pvois
link
between
got their
Greek
knowledge
byfluxus.
and
of the
naturallysimilar
of
of each
to
illegitimate
science
is also
There
the
matter
mathematical
in
study
completes
In
241.
far clearer
is such
and
than
tends
to
of
It will
sense.
him
explained tillthe
One
the
combines
with
sensible
the elements
were
good
great
fortune
while
written
he
the
of form-numbers
of Plato's
indications
of his
one
Diels,
Kol
T"XVO"V
8f\ei
maturest
Vors.*
TToAu
/cat
.
a.
etSt'aiiTta
i. p.
to
the
the
is how
at
note
dyad
with
sense
nothing
the
it
things
Plato
time.
is that
present
to
the
generate
Great-and-Small
it,and
states
must
Academy,
subject, and
have
and
to
the
by
been
which,
avoids
nevertheless
I refer
to
of numbers
elements
Aristotle
another
the
the
some
Philebus,
works.
337"
/cat
drap
8ia"f"fpeiv,
em\eiTT"i
have
of the
at
of
possible for
be fully
cannot
This
contains
altogether,
thought
the
it became
dialogue which
member
is
preciselybecause
that
combine
it is
Indeterminate
and
assumption
is the
appearance.
possess
was
One
the
importance
less disparatefrom
sensibles
of
to
reduced
of this is that
that
things. In that
of things.That
we
regard
here
new
chapter ; all we
next
with
even
way,
generatedfrom
are
is
world
justifythe
to
turn
from
'separated'numbers
fails,Arithmetic
study of figures.1
the
observed
be
4) :
(fr.
says
Geometry
same
forms
intelligible
the
make
direction
reallythe
He
puts
continuity.The
abstract
We
which
then, geometricalfiguresare
in the
even
in the
thing as
in
these
element
more
dyad. What
Indeterminate
material
proper
that it is
Arithmetic
Where
way.
last resort,
the
numbers,
to
the time.
taking at
was
its demonstrations
if there
figures,
fusion
con-
Arithmetic.
Archytas
was
arts, and
"
this
proves
I think
to
thought
the
and
undisturbed,
friend
of Plato's
clearly,and
very
the
regards as
otherwise.
held
fragment
the third
to
insists that
He
be left
must
he
geometricalproposition by
prove
may
Arithmetic.
with
Geometry
hypotheses
what
strongly objects to
Aristotle
power.
by being raised
assimilated
be
can
263
ARITHMETIC
ON
ARCHYTAS
al
/cat
So/ret d
raj
yeaj/xerpta,
/cat
Trpay/xaret'a,
irepi
rots
dAAdV
ao^i'av
TTOTL
rav
Aoyicrrt/ca
/nev
evapyeore'paj
T
rpayfiareveadai
a
yeco/ierptK-ay
aTroSet^taja Aoytcm/cd emreAet
6fj,ws,
/cat
/cat
fiBtoiv.
ratv
264
hint of how
he
Epicurus
did
at
far
wrote
the
Phaedo
dramatic
might
is
power
of the
touches
no
have
Sokratic
the
fewer
are
manner
evil.
an
done
not
quite
was
there is littlein
other
and
it was,
as
Eudoxos
was
subject.It
the Sokrates
said. On
Good,
discussion,
he had
discuss, and
to
longer what
the
had
Demokritos,
of
he did what
dialoguewhich
not
is the
that Pleasure
dialogueon
for Sokrates
Pleasure
particularopposed
and
course,
Eudoxos
raised considerable
in
get
we
written.
the school
maintain
to
as
Sokratic
appropriatetheme
or
from
Speusippos
interested,of
was
for years; he
an
in Aristotle's Ethi"$
discussions
vehemently, going so
Plato
PHILEBUS
probablyreceived
natural, and
was
THE
to be
probably came
Academy the heresy that
into the
doctrine
as
PHILEBUS
the Philebus
introduced
a
certain
From
" 242.
THE
the
than
of the
Gorgias
hand, Plato's
characteristic
in
the
earlier
Aristotle's
than
more
is often
of these.
criticism
get the
We
impressionfrom
the
the younger
dealingwith a dispute between
of the Academy, in which Plato condescends
to take part,
members
the conversation to the fifth century and
though, by transferring
self
by making Sokrates the chief speaker,he avoids committing him-
Philebus that
much.
too
" 243.
Philebos
the
are
we
Before
the
(ayouth
of whom
Philebos
Good.
and
dialogue, Sokrates
nothing is known) have been discussing
of
opening
has
the
stated the
positionthat
the
Good
is
while
Sokrates
has identified it with Thought
(77801^),
and
Philebos declines to argue the question,
Wisdom.
or
((f"povr]aLs)
of whom
Protarchos
man
nothing is known)1
(anotheryoung
Pleasure
He
him
is addressed
with
one
Apology (20 b)
as
as
'son
of the
two
of Kallias'
sons
pupils of Euenos
ing
ground for identifyin the
mentioned
Hipponikos,
of Kallias
in 399
B.C.
son
of
no
undertakes
replacehim
to
The
positionsare
Pleasure, understood
is that
Philebos
after
called
be
stated
distinctly
more
It is
of Pleasure.
dialogueshould
no
practically
part in it.
takes
two
the advocate
as
that the
little remarkable
who
265
THOUGHT
AND
PLEASURE
thus.
sonage
per-
of
That
its widest
in
not
sense
as
be
to
are
Thought, in
of these
"
be
apply the
or
must
we
case
Sokrates
pleasuresmay
either Pleasure
is better than
to whichever
give the preference
12 a).
nearlyakin to it (ii a
begins by callingattention to the fact that
indeed
opposite,so that we
very unlike and
which
is most
two
" 244.
cannot
of soul which
third habit
all of
to
predicate
same
appears
cannot, in fact,
the
on
troublesome
old
do
the
mean
we
is therefore
and
is with regardto
difficulty
the
good (i.e.
ox, beautiful,
such
units
hold
hold
into
This
refer to
to
seems
Good, since
9 *"?"?)"
The
we
have
the
argument
and
See
3
my
The
think
see
and
e"u
terms
to
the
Republic).
ask
edition
sense
that, if
of the
of the
we
that it refers
from
Pleasure
(Arist.Eth.
A
medicine.
doctrine
Aristotle
the
it
at
that
made
has
it
an
been
Nic.
'habit'
Happiness
be
must
is
is
a
the
1172
a
b,
more
habit
of
'activity*
(evepyf(.a).
much
disputed.
read
to
that
of Eudoxos
aim
irrational,
Academy;
Ethics,p. 3.
second
question (15 b, 2-4)
of
is characteristic
soul
and
(monads,henads) as horse,
to
we
are
(i) in what sense
to
are
that each of these units really
we
is,(2)in what sense
that each of them
being one, and admitting neither coming
being nor ceasingto be, nevertheless is that one,3 (3)in what
these
regard to
With
questionarisingfrom
it with
an
266
PHILEBUS
THE
sense
we
wholes,
that
so
This
section
numerabl
present in the in-
(what seems
in their
identical both
be
can
thingsof
as
units
that these
hold
to
are
unityand
to
serves
"
At the
the Parmenides.
to
If
themselves.
forms
two
the latter
hands
our
on
we
while, if we
in
One.
a
form
hint
an
thrown
was
see
The
" 245.
whenever
we
of this
out
puts
the way
on
us
it.
to
and
into a one
that a thing turns
difficulty
speak of it,reallypervadesall statements
affection of
nor
to
about
make
can
propositionsin our
It is this that givesrise
ages'.
get rid of that tillwe
cannot
The
of
and
higher nature
it down
as
innate
of
in it.What
in
(iSe'a)
the
After
that
many
forms
unit, not
we
and
we
have
thing we
or
are
in
at once
we
to
not
and
merely
become
two.
of
are
we
many,
TO
That
ev
ev,
is
look
to
number
of these
each
one
then
whatever
or
them, until
speak,
seems
is, and
three,
it is
been
able
but
of
singleform
for
in that
there
and
may
two
be.
how
see
to
but
chief
handed
Unlimitedness
units
new
were
given moment
to
at
have
are, have
and
many,
say
look
must
only that
is,when
the One
one
forms,
subordinate
gods than we
everythingwe say at
the
to
nearer
arts
to
tradition,that
is consists
(det)
that
revealed
gods once
discoveries in the
and
dies
never
and we
disputation,
a sound
theory of it.The
Sokrates has always been a
It is 'an
all eristic
formed
have
many
or
(Ao'yoi)
anythingwhatsoever.
minds
(eV yp-lv)that
we
propositions
become
must
direct solution
No
but
have
to
seems
the whole
or
many,
that we
so
up
is,it
One
that the
say
TO
crux
ev
6V. When
we
do that
of the Parmenides.
268
THE
number
to
where
another.
division
" 246.
far
So
must
as
have
we
there
yet gone,
is
point
cease.
illustrate what
To
PHILEBUS
he
by
means
Unlimited, Sokrates
the
translation of Kpdcns.
If
consider
we
the sensation
or
qualityof heat, we
see
at
once
be much
hotter than our
Water
intensity.
may
hand
or
only a littlehotter,or nearlyas hot, or not nearlyso hot.
In other words, heat 'admits of plus and minus' (TO naXXov KOL
On
the other hand, these degrees of intensity
are
quite
rjrrov).
attach any clear meaning to the statement
indefinite. We
cannot
sensation
sensation of heat is equal to another, or that one
that one
considerations
These
of another.
of heat is the double
explain
what Plato meant
by 'the dyad of the Great-and-Smah", which was
that it varies
in
his
own
for what
the
of indefinite
possibility
from
name
fixed
point.The
the double'
(\and f),and
ratio of
number
one
to
variation in both
continuous
Limit,
and
in the Philebus. It is
on
less'. Its
in
the other
directions
hand, does
simplestform
away
is 'the
equal and
which
generalit is everything
another
or
to
measure
one
another'.
'has the
This
is
quality,and its
to
chief characteristic is that it enables us
speak with perfect
and of addition,the simplestform of the latter
clearness of equality
being 'the double'. What enables us to do this is the introduction of
of which
measure
we
unit, in terms
degrees of intensity.
a
may
that it is
attach any clear meaning to the statement
We
cannot
what
is
do understand
but we
twice as hot to-day as yesterday,
meant
by saying that 60" is twice 30".That impliesfurther that a
the
zero
conception of quantityas
has been
of temperature
distinct from
with
that of
fixed,all temperatures
above
which
the
He
explanation.
1
Phys.
192
says:
a, 6 sqq.
See
Simpl.
in
Phys. p.
247,
30
sqq.
(Diels).
269
OYZIA
thingswhich
Those
small
the direction
way,
the 'more
all have
or
less',so
having the
that they can
and
narrower,
relation of great
as
and
of the 'stillgreater'
the broader
which
spoken of
are
go on
the 'stillless'. And
the heavier
in
infinity
to
in the
and
lighter,
But
infinity.
and
to
to
same
thing
everywhat is
If
It is
we
not
Sophistaright,the meaning
meant
of this is
of the
plain.
and
more
less
is
the Mixture
where
the
two.
health
We
of both. We
this both
in Medicine
and
see
is producedby such
mixture.
of soul, and
see
indeed
(25esqq.).
The thoughthere
of
all
The
same
the due
a
mixture
due
to
such
and
a
of
climate
be
explanation
may
body
Music,
in
temperate
soul,beauty of
body or
good things are
and
given
order
mixture
alone.
with this is the new
in which
" 249. Closely connected
sense
Plato uses the term
in this passage. The Pythagorean
'being'(ovcria)
doctrine simply identified the Form
with being and the Unlimited
with becoming, but Plato distinctly
alone
that the Mixture
states
is truly'being'.The
a
'becoming'
process of mixing is indeed
),but it is a becoming which has being for its result
THE
270
els ovaiav)and
the
PHILEBUS
itself is
mixture
being, though
Just in
ouCTt'a).
(-ye-yevrj^vrj
has become
the
Timaeus
what
supplement
As
form-numbers
the
sensible
even
Aristotle
mixtures.
be
place,but they
interestingway.
most
mixture, it follows
and
mature
sensible, in the
or
intelligible
form, and not in either separately.
has
There
" 250.
considerable
been
same
of
out
reality,whether
matter
of the
that
real in
words, the
other
others
no
be
in the
us
themselves
are
things may
In
tells
are
being which
told in
are
way we
of the Same
and the
same
blend
discussion
combination
as
to
the
of
'kind'
maintains
seen
On
forms
the 'ideas' or
which
the
Philebus
were
other
hand, it
is the
world
the
belong to
kind, and
Mixed
we
have
of sense,
and
the
forms
must,
therefore,be
in
are
to
turn
limit, but
Limit.
The
mixture.
In
the
they themselves
world
intelligible
in the
limited continuum,
blendingof
Dyad.
as
the Indeterminate
and
the
matter
and
appear
form, of the
is
to
as
One
" 251.
is also
be
Now
new
mixture, there
fourth
'kind'
view
of
must
be
(27b),and
implies.Unless
Movement
this,we
this
have
failed
to
must
we
we
can
explainthe
of the Mixture.
cause
now
give an
world
we
go
on
to
That
consider
account
intelligible
know.
will
what
of
XVII
of Movement
Philosophy
The
THE
" 252.
It
was
theory of
his
SOUL
Soul
that enabled
account
to
for
Apart
from
should
Plato
that, we
have
world-soul, not
the
phraseology of
of the
'firstmover'
the
point is set
on
that of the
the Phaedrus
continued
at
rest
by
individual
remained
to
the
be
soul. In fact,however,
in use,
fundamental
and
the
one.
perfectlymatter-of-fact
question
All doubt
treatment
THE
272
SELF-MOVER
of the
subjectin
mature
He
which
the
is the
motion
and
ninth
that
Plato
really,
It is
can
is
But, if soul
of
attributes
can
prior
soul, such
forethought,and
as
ask for
we
that does
souls, one
two
of
lives,that is,in
of itself
itself
move
can
other
can
(TTJV
belong
all
motions
at
that
once
all the
are
bad
and
things.
all other
habits
bad
things as
other
find motion
not
in what
body, it follows
to
as
and
itself,
move
memories
wickedness,
ninth
The
Kivrjcriv).
and
do
we
only
which
soul is therefore
and
body,
but
water,
Swa/xeV^v /avetv
avrr^v
avrrjv
Now
nine.
other
if
cannot
itself and
both
The
present.
things but
move
only
to
soul ; and
at
of
says, the
earth, fire,or
in
has
what
can
of motion,
kinds
us
of Plato's
indication
an
concern
other
move
have
we
alone
tenth
to the
(apX'nKt-vrjaecos)
this kind
where
is that which
the tenth
and
the Laws,
such
opposites. There
there
reasonings,so
and
good
foul, righteousness
be
must
the other
such
are
at
least
opposite
(896 e).
This
is
passage
evil world-soul
generallysupposed
well
as
observe
one
there is
a
only
is
two
only
no
is
one
good
That
many.
body
be
must
is the
shall
evil. We
some
be
evil
caused
; the
it to soul
justas
soul, and
be
by
main
of
plurality
can
philosophy of movement
much
as
good.
no
does
to
infer that
that
see
that
presently
but
there
view
point
souls
is
there
is
is
pressly
ex-
is rather
; for evil as
by one soul
longer refer evil
soul, whether
thing.We
to
illegitimate
to
implied
(270 a).The
must
important
matter
or
it is rather
pre-eminently
good
soul, as it would
and
as
It is as
two.
an
opposed
one,
suggestion of
well
bad
of
important
of Plato. He
the words
less than
evil
one
it is
but
one,
from
not
are
one
of souls,some
plurality
that there
good
are
follow
not
not
to
of
as
the existence
assert
to
requires us
to
or
to
bute
attri-
GOD
THE
AND
GOOD
273
GOD
if
indeed
by
That
the motions
at
of the
that
be caused by
they must
best,since they are the most
at once
see
look
we
the
is due
circular
their
to
heavenly bodies,
character, which
have
must
been
given them
not
we
by
which
only when
be
can
thing in
his
as
this that he
of doubt
sort
no
done
that
philosophy,and
we
once
demonstrate
than
Plato
shall understand
we
that
time, we
same
it tells
us
central
justin
must
portion
proat
note
sufficient
about
more
no
There
the
as
of God,
the existence
world.
explainthe
regarded this
can
to
him
that he is the
of good motions.
Even
so
self-movingsource
this is something quitedifferent from anything the earlier philosophers
had meant
when
of
God.
had
called
The
lonians
they spoke
and the like gods, but that only meant
there were
fire,air,water
no
other gods but these. Anaximander
and Xenophanes had called the
worlds or the World
of
a sort
gods or God, but that was at most
also with Parmenides.
Belief in God
was
pantheism, as it was
doubtless part of the Pythagorean religion,
but it was
hardly a part
of Pythagorean science. Plato brought the idea of God
into philosophy
for the first time, and
that God
was
that, but
as
was
no
the form
livingsoul
he
more,
and
believed
the doctrine
that God
himself
to
So
good.
was
have
much
established
by
scientific reasoning.
strictly
We
must
not
therefore, that
assume,
Plato
God
by
meant
theist would
mean
exactlywhat a modern
by the word. Plato's God
is certainly
a
'personal'
god, as we should put it;for he is Mind
(vou?)existingin a livingsoul, but it does not follow that he is the
to
'supreme being'.We have seen
(" 171) that Plato continued
1
This
was
rightlyinsisted
fundamental
made
the
that
it must
than
Plato
its nature.
any.
distinction
circular
have
did
Plato
motion
a
cause.
upon
between
by the Platonist
the
theories
of
(znd
Atticus
Plato
and
natural
to the heavens, while
(x-u/cAo^opia)
We
call this cause
Gravity, and we know
of the way
in which
knew
there was
a
it acts, but
problem
we
here;
know
Aristotle
no
A.D.) as the
cent.
Aristotle.
Aristotle
held
Plato
much
more
than
denied
that
he
more
did
there
was
of
AND
GOD
274
THE
GOOD
the Good
on
that
proves
it
to
the
regarded
was
we
arises,then, is whether
if
not ; and,
we
are
not, what
have
This
Good.
the
to
God
identify
to
are
relation
question is
to
are
we
not
question that
The
fundamental.
as
the
with
conceptionof God
included
it is certainly
the
the
is that
answer
it by
the
Good
is
the
identified with
be
to
held
in that
the other
means
no
as
to
it appears;
is to
the Good
as
or
God
understand
simple
so
Good
theists,
by modern
conception,though
God
existence
whose
Plato
believed
to
have
and
is
hard
found
have
you
all people.'That
before
and fullyexplainsthe
unquestioned authenticity,
Plato speaks of the same
in which
to
enigmatic manner
difficulty
Dionysios(who imagined he had solved it)in the Second Epistle
wrote
or
published the
(312 e).It also explainswhy he never
written for
the Good, and why in the Laws, which
Lecture
was
on
of the Good,
and
never
publication,he always speaks of God
is
of
sentence
the
though
The
Laws
problem
Greek
be
must
continued
to
thought. Some
supreme
him, and
God, and
there
is,in fact,the
were
later writers
of the controversies
source
at
by authority
it from
continuing
prevent
does
mover
not
is
of the
it is independent of
by which
of
the Council
concern
not
best
form
but
motions.
God, and
even
the
here. All
us
The
we
difficulty
this did
of
minds
have
to
ultimately
were
Nicaea, though
trouble
to
which
the
as
subordinate
attempted solutions.
other
many
settled
thinkers. That
of the world
the Creator
made
Good
the
regarded
to
not
original
make
clear
above
276
THE
for Timaios
him. If
is representedas his
I should
and
understudyand
agrees to replace
has to be given,I would
suggest that of Philolaos,
explain his absence by the consideration that the
name
TIMAEUS
beyond
goes
Plato
we
can
understand
can
we
so,
what
the
plagiarised
had
which
However
that
it is worth
what
Timaeus
to
the
'three books'
of Philolaos
took
Republic,he
have
must
en
scene
much
so
suggestion for
must
surely have
offer the
only
elaborate mise
If Plato
significance.
some
points
possession.1
the
"
the
from
be --and
may
in several
Timaeus
into his
come
his system,
on
trouble
the later
meant
attach
to
the
dialogueto
be connected
supplement the earlier in some
way, and this must
with the startling
fact that Sokrates beginsby givinga recapitulation
of the Republicwhich includes Book V., but ignores
Books VI. and
VII.
We
altogether.
allowed
not
are
receives the
that
answer
that the
only mean
to replacein some
reason,
now
wishes
Sokrates
is
an
sight;
over-
is complete,
can
intended
Republic.The
fact is
no
to
of the
of solid geometry, go
learnt and probably did
Plato
attribute this
the summary
whether
way
and
and
Timaeus
to
learn, from
make
to
Pythagoreanassociates,
For
further advance.
longerthe
chief
with great
his
reserve
speaker.The
new
and somewhat
disputeas
much
the
to
same
views,
obscurely
the
meaning
forgetthat
some
of the
most
E. Gr. Ph.3
"
140.
NECESSITY
That, however,
literally.
of God
scientific
We
the fact of
from
of the
account
impossiblefor
of Platonism.
is
277
can
anyone
who
has
motion, but
we
cannot
in which
way
grasped
of the
give any
world
of
the region
experienceis only,after all,an
of becoming, and we
therefore do no
than tell 'likely
more
can
be
tales' (etVores1
Aoyot)about it. Cosmology is not, and cannot
than Theology or Psychology.It is only a form
science,any more
matical.
of 'play'(-n-cuSta).
be matheScience, in the strict sense, must
And yet Cosmology is not mere
play either,for our account
of the world
will be
related
to
the truth
in the
same
way
as
the
not
is related
to
moving
" 258. We are first told that God found a visible mass
in a disorderly
fashion,and resolved to bring it out of disorder into
ask why he did so, the answer
order. If we
is 'He was
good, and
of jealousytowards
the good has never
at any time
a feeling
thing,
anyhe wished everythingto become
like himself as possible'
so
as
(29 e).This he brought about by creatinga soul of the world, into
which
he introduced
relations (35 a
mathematical
and harmonic
sqq.).
We
note
as
This
reservation
Mind
is called for because
possible'.
(vovs)is
confronted
and cannot, therefore completely
by Necessity(avdyK-rj),
effect its purpose
(47 e).We must, then, consider the 'errant cause'
In particular,
must
(TrAai'cu/iieVi]
we
curia).
explainhow the elements
into being. For these cannot
be ultimate. So far from being
came
'letters'(crrot^eia,
elementa),
they are not even syllables.
278
THE
The
an
by any means
for
physicalnecessity,
not
We
Mind.
are
of the
as
old
causa
cause'
the
as
could
(99 b). We
'that without
learn
here introduced
are
what
not
certainly
cause,
be
can
and
be realised without
concausa
which
as
the
the
distinct from
people make
most
idea
the
be
never
ness
good-
it.This
would
cause
call
we
'subservient
cause
is
'persuaded'by
(awainov) of
cause'
the
is corporeal,
and
cause
not
Phaedo, where
as
we
told that it
are
'concomitant
world, which
defined
as
we
It is
one.
easy
told that it is
even
is
TIMAEUS
servient'
'sub-
or
the mistake
as
confusingit with the true cause, explaining
they
everything,
do, by warming and cooling,rarefaction and condensation,and so
is Mind
and Mind
forth. The true cause
alone, and the corporeal
well as a help. Mind
could do nothing without
is a hindrance
as
something to work on, but that of itself stands in the way of it
completely.We learn also that these
carrying out its purposes
'are moved
by something else, and then of
secondary causes
necessitymove
something else',as contrasted with the primary
of
That
is self-moved.
cause,
which
of the
reader
Mind
appreciatethe
to
Necessityif
is
be understood
to
above
("256). It
Plato
account
in the
help the
Timaios
give of
makes
may
it with the
will compare
that this is the best of all possibleworlds. The
and
Leibniz
light
he
theory of
difference
Plato
is ascribed
to
the disordered
mass
has received
can
only get
literally,
supposed
to
of this
out
by the help
difficulty
be assumed
in the Laws
is
created.
world-soul
was
be
to
("256).
identified with
But,
even
supposing
in the
much
to
be
depended upon
is 'subservient'
consider
what
to
it.Besides that,we
Mind.
is said about
similar
Time.
have
seen
that
arises
difficulty
In the Timaeus
Necessity
when
it is spoken of
we
as
TIME
SPACE
AND
(37 d),and
'movingimage of eternity'
into
the heavens'
being 'alongwith
creation
of the
in time. That
world-soul, which
grasp
we
shall see,
its true
motion
hand,
not
of the
nature.
but
that
cannot
be
known
in abstraction
itself.
the other
conception of motion,
from
On
since time
to
of motion.
we
as
(38 b),that is to
does
measure
knowledge
mean,
are
we
the
givesus
of the whole
character
279
besides
is also hard
to
being temporal,the
express
in
the
mother, and
which
Philebus),
K
the
of
offspring
is the
the
Corporeal. The
two
(the Mixture
of the
Recipient is altogether
B.C.
P.
280
THE
TIMAEUS
all-receptive
say of it is that it is an invisible,
It is,
something,partakingin a mysteriousway in the intelligible.
formless;all we
in fact,space
can
(xtopa).
That
"261.
the
space
of three
both
from
dimensions
Plato's
own
other kind
of 'matter'. The
be
to
means
reduced
to
great deal
of his real
we
senses;
the
from
constructed
occasion
in the system
'elements' of the
by the regularsolids,and
for
completely accounted
can
is there any
of Aristotle. Nor
statements
any
so-called
that
say
for
corporealare
they in turn
Plato undoubtedly
elementarytriangles.
be
the corporeal can
completely
be
must
everything
the elementary
in a place and occupy
a
space (52 b), and when
which
are
discussed,it is said that the principles
(dpxaC)
triangles
is a 'bastard'
one.
It is 'in
dream'
that
we
say
is dear to
he who
higher than these God knows, and of men
and not an
God
(53 d). Space is only one aspect of Continuity,
These considerations,however, take us beyond the
essential one.
are
mythology of
The
" 262.
that
the
it can
reason
only be described
be more
say of the world is not, indeed, the truth, but it may
business to make it as like the
less like the truth, and it is our
and
The boundary-line
between the intelligible
possible.
merely sensible is not a fixed one, and the sensible may be
It will,I think, be admitted
that
intelligible.
progressively
truth
the
made
as
Plato held
rise
with
an
to
which
naturallylead
onwards
to
Plato's
That
language.
mythological
teachingon the subject.What
in
and
from
dialogues
I believe
we
the
Theaetetus
shall find
proof that
it.Unfortunately,
however, his followers
this
to
up,
all the
absolute
dualism.
Xenokrates
confined
were
not
able
credited
generally
the
province of
to
the
THE
THE
AND
SENSIBLE
be
we
to
be the
first time
only a
doctrine.
It is certain that he
Aristotle,however.
about
Platonic
true
that the
281
INTELLIGIBLE
nature
distortion
There
is
of what
doubt
no
introduced
of the heavens
for the
was
quite
and
from
that
of the
it is strange that
Aristotle,who
legitimate
separationof forms
from
condemned
Plato's
perfectly
sensible
things,should himself
be responsible
for a much
more
questionable'separation'
(xcopia/Mo?)
like this. There
is no trace of anything like it in Plato. He certainly
assigned an exceptionalpositionto Astronomy and its sisterscience Music
in his philosophy,
but that was
simply because, in
the sciences in which
the intelligible
his own
was
day, these were
most
obviouslyadvancing at the expense of the merely sensible.
in the Republic (530 d) it is hinted
that there are
Even
more
sciences
the
of motion
Parmenides
account
for
motions.
It
'hair,mud
is,however,
and
from
dirt'
well
as
his astronomy
to
as
we
can
see
would
for the
alone that
exist between
we
from
have
to
planetary
can
gain
the sensible
It would
be out of placeto discuss it fullyhere;
intelligible.
it will be enough to look at a singlebranch of it,and I shall select
which is commonly misunderstood.1
one
" 263. The great problem of the day was that of the planetary
these are hopelesslyirregular,
For the senses
motions.
and that is
of the 'errant cause'
probably why we hear in the Timaeus
In the firstplace,since the paths of the planets
atrta).
(TT-Aavcu/xevrj
are
are
oblique to the equator, their apparent courses
spirals
circles. In the next place,Mercury and Venus
not
at one
(e'Auce?),
time travel faster than the Sun, so that they get in front of it and
as
morning stars; at another time they lag behind it and
appear
as
evening stars. In fact,these three bodies are always
appear
and being overtaken
'overtaking
by one another' (38 d).The other
to
more
strangely.Sometimes
planetsbehave even
they seem
accelerate their velocity
the fixed
so
as to appear
stationary
among
stars
to get some
or
even
way ahead of them ; at other times, they
and
the
This
tarchus
applies even
of Samos, which
to
the
recent
in other
discussion
respects
is
an
of it in Sir T.
excellent
guide
L.
Heath's
in such
matters.
Aris-
282
THE
retarded
are
further
and
PLANETARY
have
to
seem
MOTIONS
in the Sun's
irregularity
equinoxes do
expect them
Now
of the
course.
solstices and
equalsegments
be ultimate. If
cannot
irregularity
only answer
The
is
as
should
we
do.
to
this
annual
not
There
retrogrademotion.
Good, and
disorder of any
kind
ask
we
the world
not, the
why
the pattern
on
is
hypotheseswhich
would
anomaly
" 264. Now
as
we
hypothesis,that
on
irregularities
and
know
we
know
problem
know
of doubt
be
to
the
for
account
celestial phenomena. We
solar
admit
as
fact that he
further
propounded the
(" 174).
that Eudoxos
invented
beautiful
of concentric
the
did
not
The
assumption of twenty-seven
simple enough, and fuller study showed
required.Kallipposadded
add
conceived
his scholars
to
that Plato
to
their
spheres did
that
number,
and
still
factory.
satis-
as
not
seem
more
Aristotle
were
had
to
stillmore.
the
was
result. Besides
the
into a mechanical
geometricalhypothesis of Eudoxos
system of
with one
material spheresin contact
another, and all that arrested
for nearlytwo thousand
the growth of a true astronomy
years.
" 265. Plato,on the other hand, saw clearlythat the geocentric
later Pythagoreans
of the trouble. The
hypothesiswas the source
the earth revolves round
had
taughtthat
was
in this direction
have
againwe
Athens
to
It is worth
For
solution
was
to
be
Fire, and
looked
it
for. Here
immediately
not
that
the Central
while
from
clear account
to
note
that
reAos. It has
of
this,see
of
Theophrastos(who came
almost certainly
Plato, and was
a
this term
no
is derived
implication of
Heath,
Aristarchus
an
from
re'Aetov,
'complete',
external
end.
of Santos,pp.
190
sqq.
284
EARTH'S
THE
of
referringthe irregularity
of the sensible
the
world,
MOTION
planetarymotions
to
or
'matter'
to
or
the
to
evil world-
an
is there
comings
short-
attempt to
the contrary, the whole
the
any
on
phenomena as illusory;
remain
objectof the inquiry is to 'save' them. The appearances
know
what they mean.
The
exactlywhat they were, only we now
and
the intelligible
the sensible has so far been
gulf between
bridged;the visible motions of the heavenly bodies have been
referred to an intelligible
system, or, in other words, they have
represent
been
in the
seen
appear to
is because
be
present
state
If
Good.
ask
we
be
must
they do, the answer
are
placed on a sphericalearth
we
should
the
as
us
axis of the
the
lightof
universe, and
that
placed,though
so
of
our
which
knowledge.That,
I take
had
He
be
to
shown
alreadyin
the
it,is how
is
appearance
take it for what it is not.
an
had
round
be
to
an
and
appearance,
Greek
haunted
of the
laid
Plato
that is what
image
Sophistthat
nothing.An
if we
'the
was
revolves
good that we
clearlysee why in the
theory which
ghost of the two-world
philosophysince the time of Parmenides, and
the sensible world
lines. It
same
it is
the
by sayingthat
the
on
is because
cannot
we
he meant
intelligible'
CONCLUSION
no
more
for it than
that,and
also
no
less.1 I do
It is nearly a quarter of a
and
Plato leading me
Sokrates
what
could
Since
then
his
text
be
done
I have
with
edited
through minutely
the
century
into
ago
that
I found
scores
text
the
hopeless scepticism
the whole
many
of
Plato,and
of times.
and
really meant
an
editor
current
make
while.
Plato's
views
resolved
what
not
to
he
of
see
said.
necessarilyreads
285
CONCLUSION
immediate
follower's
to
their
master.
of
the
doctrine
result
that
work
Plato
Aristotle's
of
monument
of
soul
as
with
of
Soul,
detailed
the
could
these
only
in
in
for
in
appear
the
this
so
true
his
light
when
of
we
and
successors,
tales'
the
in
to
it
explain
After
which
Plato's
have
especially
the
grasp
of
ways.
phenomena
sides
many
to
as
way
and
that
sides
different
the
among
Good
the
failures
different
such
Good
The
warning
very
the
the
'probable
these
many
reason
their
of
hands
also
are
be
to
in
reconstruct
lights'
and
Yet
witness
misunderstood
'saved',
fared
knowledge.
to
his
sophy
philo-
evolution.
of
doctrine
only
are
defined
that
of
course
Euclid
and
held
the
which
Plato's
motion,
remember
could
bear
the
Plato's
to
to
these
thought
'broken
be
failed
of
of
in
of
two
out
form
Elements
Speusippos
arose
they
attempt
be
only
in
results
The
nearly
really carrying
confused
philosophy
justice
our
central
justify
will
of
state
Plato's
to
but
The
side
it.
for
rights
Xenokrates
more
application
actual
it
did
touch.
number'.
but
primary,
the
his
'self-moving
Neoplatonists
not
mathematical
understand
to
were
their
attributed
I have
the
its
put
to
position.1
numbers
not
was
that
who
men
would
criticism
with
to
come
bound
felt
began
not
ideal
the
trouble
even
those
Even
years.
not
did
this
of
short
impatient
was
did
and
far
very
Aristotle
was
thousand
fell
and
how
all,
have
philosophy
seen
in
how
those
it
of
Aristotle.
Perhaps
'innate
true
the
ideas'.
nature
of
significant
most
That
is
hypothesis.
stoic
touch
formula
is
which
that
he
enables
calls
the
him
axioms
to
avoid
Koial
ewotat
discussing
or
the
I
2
g.
"
INDEX
Abaris, 3 1
Abdera, 158*
Academy, 174
Aristokles,
Aristophanes,
the
53,57,77
(atmospheric), 57, 62
Aischines
against Timarchos
II25, (I.I75) 152
Akoumenos,
154
Alexander
the Great, 240
112
Alkibiades, in,
sq., 114,
Air
152,
154
Alkidamas, 244"
Alkmaion, 39, 60
Analysis, 179 sqq
Anaxagoras, 60-65
Anaximander, 17-19
Anaximenes, 19-20
Andokides, 153 sqq
Anthropomorphism,
Antichthon, 74
Antisthenes, 139, 204
Anytos, 89, 146, 151,
Apocalypses, 51
Apolaustic life,33
27
22,
sq., 229
152,
153
Apollo, 31
Appearances, saving, 9
Arabic
figures,42
of Athens, 100
Archelaos
sq.,
Archimedes, 162, 262*
Archytas, 242, 263
Aristarchos
of Samos, 283
Aristeas of Prokonnesos, 31
Aristeides
the elder, 104
Aristeides
115
sq., 117
sq.,
sqq., 247
tortoise,68
Adeimantos, son of Ariston, 168 sq.
Aether
("u'0ij/")
16, ( Fire in Anaxagoras) 62
Aggregation, states of,21
Aigospotamos meteor, 64
'Air' (i.e.mist), 1 6, 19, 31, 34, 4",
Achilles and
100,
the younger,
1 1 1
119
(i)
121,
ism,
Aristotle,9, 58, 281, 285 ; on Atom76; on
Sokrates, I281; on
Plato,145, 254.sqq.;Categories(ga,
8),265*; Prior Analytics (670,21),
128; Sophistid Elenchi (1650, 22),
871, (1786, 36), 21 1 ; Physics
(1920, 6 sqq.),268, (2030, 13) 42*,
(2500, 20) 92 sq.t (2656, 25) 2I1;
De
Caelo
(2960, 5) 283*; De
physics
generatione(3356, 10), 135 ; Meta(9870, 20) 257, (987^, 22)
(9876,
i) 127, (9876, 29)
127,
256, (9890, 5 sqq.)201, (9920, i)
2621' 8,(9920, 32) 2541, (gg8a, 2)
92, (10146, 16) 2I1,(10436, 5 sqq.)
(10786, 9 sqq.) 255*,
204
sqq.,
u)
(10786,
127, (10786, 17) 258,
(10786, 21) 127, (10786, 30) 134,
(10800, 12 sqq.)255, (10810, 35)
255, (10830, 33) 255, (10866, 3)
258, (10910, 4) 2601, (10926, 8)
422; Poetics (14516, 25) 148
Aristoxenos, 32, 37, 39, 70, 101,
104", io83, 124, 125, 180, 244"
Arithmetic, 67, 183, 263
Arteries,6ia
Astrology, 5, 6*
(Babylonian), 5 sqq.;
Astronomy
(Academic), 184 sqq.
the
Athens
as
meeting-place of
Ionic philosophy, 69,
Italic and
96,99, I071, 174-5
Atomism
(v.Leukippos and Demokritos),70; (origin of), 76; and
Pythagoreanism, 79
of,77
Atoms, motion
Atticus the Platonist,273 l
Axiochos,
154
288
INDEX
Division, 179
Babylonian astronomy,
5 sqq., 14
and becoming (yeveais), Dodecahedron,
Being (owu'a)
Dramatic
and
126
182, 231,
132,
sqq., izg,
72,
269
Biology, 19
Blend
38
(xpaais),
17
v.
Rarefaction
Constitutions, 238
Continuity, 67,
260
sq.
72,
92,
161
sq.,
sq.
Copernicus, 4
Cosmogony, 3,
Crete, 13,23,31
Croesus, 14
Cujas, 247
Cyprus, 240*
13
Damon, 154
Darkness, 40 sq., 48
Delios of Ephesos, 24O1
Delos, 23
Demeter,
Demiourgos, 38
Democracy, 238 sq.
tagoras,
Pro157-164; and
Demokritos,
93 sq., is8a, i6osq., igS1
Diagoras, 61
Dialectic,108 sq., 133, 186 sq., 213,
230
Dialexeis,i883
Diapason, 37
70,
124
260
sq.
Earth, Mother, 20
Earth (shape), 15, 16, 18, 20, 28, 34,
nation),
57, 64, 8 1 ; (place),
74, 282 ; (incli8 1 ; (as an 'element'),21
Echekrates, 124
Eclipses,7, 14, 15, 19, 34, 48, 64, 74
Ecstasy, 24
Education, 248-253
Effluences,60, 96
Egyptian mathematics, 4 sqq., 171
Elea, 26, 50
Eleatic Stranger, 192, 222
Elements
(v.aroixela),
20, 48, 55, 57,
61,62,70,71,80
Empedokles, 33, 56-60, 96
Enlightenment, 25 sqq.
Epameinondas, 178, 244
Epicharmos, 50
Epicurus and Epicureans, 18, 28,
77,78, 157
Eristics, 139, 189, 197, 206, 214,
222
24
Dikaiarchos,
67
dialogue,190
Dropides, 169
Dualism, 71
Dyad, indeterminate, 256,
Blood, 60
Body, 24
Boundless,
5, 43,
narrated
117
Eros, 1 12 sq.
Eryximachos, 154
Euclid
(axioms) 285, (I.47) 31, 43,
(II. 1 1) 43, (XIII.) 179
of Cyprus, 243
Eudemos
of Rhodes, 1 5
Eudemos
Eudoxos,
18, 162, 174, 214, 264,
282
26s1,
of Megara,
Eukleides
171,
123,
187 sqq., 191
Eurytos, 42", 73 sq.
Evil,272
Evolution, 19, 60
Experiment, 8, 57, 63
Explanation, 8
Figurate numbers, 42-3
Figures (v.eiSij,
iSe'ai),
39,
71 sqq.
40,
41,
42,
289
INDEX
and
207
matter,
133
35, 44
(v. etSij,iSe'eu),
125
Forms
sqq.,
sqq.
Fractions,68
Hippon of Samos,
Hipponikos, go1
Homer,
22,
Homeric
88 sq.,
138
sq., 140
Gorgias, 96 sqq.
Great-and-small, the, 256,
sqq.
260
sqq.,
268
Gymnastics,
Harmonic
249
sq.
38
185 sq.
(ap^ovia
'Harmony'
spheres, 44
Health, 39
Heart, 58, 60
Hellenes
35;
of
the
100
sq.
26 sq.
Hymns,
mensura,
23
92
sq.
sq.
Hyperboreans, 23
Hypotenuse, 3 1
Hypothesis, 120,
186, 212
132,
181, 182,
233
sqq.,
72,
92,
252
science, 7
Indivisible
lines,262
mean,
Harmonics,
Hekataios,
Homo
Indian
sqq.
Goodness,
69, 81,
25,
sq.
Irony, 107
Isokrates, 87, 140, 175 sqq., 222,
2402, (10.1) 139, (10.2) 91, (10.3)
97, (10.5) 139, (11.5) II21, I2Ia,
(13.1,3) 140
17
and
barbarians, 27,
177
Herakleides, 242
Herakleitos,45-50
Herakles, 96, 98
Justice(cosmological),17, 48, 86
Kallias, 89
the
Platonist, 167,
INDEX
290
Law
and
85
nature,
sqq., 94,
Lawgivers, 86
Leukippos, 74, 76-81
Likeness, v. Images
Limit
and unlimited, 35,
Lives, the Three, 33
Love
and strife,
58 sq.
Lydia, 13, 15
Lyre, 35
Lysimachos, 104
Lysis, 178, 244
99
40, 266
sq.
71,
254-
Oinopides, 64
One
and
sq.,
155
Maieutic,
113
sq.
is the measure,
Man
Materialism,
227
92
sq.
sq.
Mathematicians
and
Akousmatics,
71
Mathematics, 30;
Geometry
Matter and form,
Arithmetic
v.
and
21,
Perikles
35, 44. 54
275
190
Nature
249
sqq.,
dramatic
sq.
and
Pentagram,
Pentalpha,
Mean, 38, 44
Measure, 92 sq.
Medicine, 32, 39 sqq., 71, 100 sqq.
Megarics, 109, 124, 187 sq., 191,
sqq., 225 sqq.
197, 206, 221, 222
Meletos, 146
Melissos, 69 sq., 77
Menon's
latrika,71, 100
Metapontion, 30, 32
Metempsychosis, 33
Might is right,98
Miletos, 13, 21
Mind, 63, 100
Mixture
(v.Blend), 59, 61
Moon, 1 8, 28, 48, 64, 74, 184
and less,the, 268 sqq.
More
Motion, 54, 55, 63, 67, 79, 199, 271,
Narrated
law, 85
sq.
136
sqq.,
dialogue,
and
43
43
and
Zeno,
Persia,
66 ; and
240
Phaidros, 154
31
241
INDEX
Rhind,
Temperature,
4*
papyrus,
Law,
Roots,
247
Terms,
44
Tetraktys,
sq.
Thales,
57
Rotation, diurnal,
Theaitetos,
59
Saving
24
(546 B.C.),
9
appearances,
Scales, 36
Science
and
Seeds,
philosophy,
159
193
sq.,
intelligible,72
and
sq.,
129,
Thourioi,
Wise
Men,
Simmias,
278
123
Sokrates,
162
sq.
the
Solids, regular,
19,
130,
23,
135,
24,
Sphere,
Unit,
71,
and
263
Up
49,
74,
125,
sqq.
28059.
167, 181,
67,
43,
sqq.
35,
down,
67
40,
18,
sq., 77
59
Voice
of
Void,
77
149
sq.
80
Vortex,
243,
Sokrates,
264, 285
of, 44
78,
80
Weight,
77,
Worlds,
innumerable,
17,
19,
80
8, 28
Stereometry,
Sulva-sutra,
18, 28,
Solid
J. A., I361
7
64, 185
59,
Geometry,
v.
Prof.
Stewart,
of the
193,
261
fittest,19
Xanthippe,
276,
Xenophanes,
26-8
119
154
A.
152,
280
Sokrates,
102
Memorabilia
(i. 2, 48)
39
17)
123,
120,
(iv. 6, 13)
Apology
39
Zagreus,
Zeno,
sq.,
(i. 2,
123,
(i- 6,
120,
20;
sq.
120,
(29)
(iv.
151
24
66-8,
71,
92,
108,
5,
12)
(iv. 7, 3-5)
Temperament,
Temperance,
150;
sqq.,
sqq.)
12
186,
70
Taureas,
and
Xenophon
(iii.ii,
32
104
Xenokrates,
14)
Tarantism,
Taylor,
43J
3',
222
47,
32,
Spheres, 'harmony'
Taras,
261
66,
Unlimited,
43
IS,
127
282
271
144,
53,
40,
Speusippos,
Stars,
71,
100,
193
Space,
73,
50,
younger,
anomaly,
Soul,
5),
(3:4:
191
Sokrates
Solar
33
(isosceles right-angled),
102-156,
15059.,
sq.
sq.
Tranquillity,
Triangles
14
90
(i.6), 27
Transmigration,
134
Seven
Sun,
193
life,33
Time,
sq.
sq.
282
Theoretic
Thucydides
Sensation, 60,
Sensible
171,
Thrasymachos,
9"10
193
244
Theophrastos,
15
183,
71,
Theodoros,
fall of
Sardeis,
41
13-16
Thebes,
Sabazios,
39
38
127
PRIKTHD
BY
ROBERT
THE
IN
GREAT
MACLEHOSE
UNIVERSITY
BRITAIN
AND
PRESS,
CO.
GLASGOW
LTD