History of Antient Philosophy

>
0
0
0>
co
(J)
.....
... c:::
0(1)
...... (1)(.)0
.- c:: (I)
0
.\I0
MO'JSOW
S~3HSI18nd SS3~90~d
>
~.., ~
0
0
(I)
CD
0
~C:-,=
--0
Q)
(1)(.)0
-- I: (I)
J: 0 .
-~J:
0c..
0)
. III
"
(J)
CI)
"
<U
"-
en
Q)
..c
0I '
en
Q)
"1J
"-
::J
C)
en
en
...
...c...0
Q)
C)
A.S. Bogomolov
History
of Ancient
losophy
Greece and Rome
Progrt'~" I )uhli"ht'r~
'\l (l~('u ....
CONTENTS
Publishers'
Note
Part One. EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY. .
. . .
. .
.
.
-Chapter 1. FIRST PHILOSOPHICAL DOCTRINES
. . .
f. History of Philosophy: Its Subjeel.-Mat\er aDd ..et.....
2. Birth of Philosophy: Soc:i.1 OackgrouDd . .
3. Prephiloeophic Formsor Consciousness and Pbilal opbJ
34
34
38
52
8. ITALIAN PHILOSOPHY . . . . . . . .
Pythagoras and Pytba,oreaDs: Scieace. Religion. Pbik .,..ta,
Xenopbaoes of Colophon . . . . . ; .
The EI.atic School from Parmenides to Meli l1li
14
14
77
82
Chapler 2. IONIC PHILOSOPHY

4. General
5. Th. Milesian School
6. Heraclitus
Cllapler
7.
8.
9.
7
12
20
Chapter 4. THE "PHYSIOLOGERS" OF THE FIFTH CENi'URY

to. Empedocles's Cosmic Cycle . . . . . . .
t 1. Birth of Philosophy iD Athens. ABUag..... .
..
lOB
Chapler 5. PHILOSOPHICAL FERMENT IN THE SECOND HALF
OF THE FIITH CENTURY. THE SOPHISTS. SOCRA1'BS AND
SOCRATIC SCHOOLS . . . .
12. Sophlst.lc Philosophy
t3. Socrates . . . .
. t4. Socntle Schools .
. . . . .. .
1111
115
Put Two. CI.+SSIC+L GREEK PHILOSOPHY . .

10 Lieu of hi&rodueUOD . . . . . .
Chop'" 1. ANCIENT ATOMISM, FROM LEUCIPPUS TO ~.
SIPHANES . . . . . . . . . . . . .
t . Hisw"cal TbdltioD .Dd Sources . . . . .
2. Al,oml.U.,. ..d \he "World-Order" _
3.. ~iDiSID: Nile. I\y .nd Ch.ace ID D MOLl.
hil)PbY . . . . . . . _ . .
I.
138
MJ
t47
IIr
.t SImi IInti Iht' Thl'nr~ nf I\n,,~II'II~I'

~I. \Iiln. SllCidy. Ethi\"~ ;11111 Ikli~llIll
6. Tht, 1),'mnl'rill'lIn~
f"/wpla 2. PI..\TO
7. Litt' ilnd Wtlr!.

s FT\.lIll Criliri~rn
Ilf S,'n~IIIH)~
}\11n\\I,,\ ~I' I" I
,.,
It'
lI'ory "
I;'H
Fnlm Iht' Thl'on

HI. Thl' SOIlI. thl' Ethieal Itlt'al, tilt' Siall'
II Criticism of Iht' "\ni"" TIlt'ury tlf Itll'as M)(I
of thl' 011(' . ,
I~, Plato's Sehuol: "neit'rl! .-\rlldl'II1\'

Chap/a 3. AH ISTOTLE
207
211
218
225
234
240
251
'.
251
259
260
266
272
Kno~'le~lgl'
13.
I~.
1:).
279
279
282
286
~~: r~~~~ ~\'y',',hhoni:~11l

and
onlsm
12
202
Principles and
Theory' o!'
:
8 0",. 0 h' 1 osophy (Physlt's) of StoiCism
,~ II' 1".\ leal Theory
9. Roman Stoicism
Chapter 3. SCEPT IC ISM
Chaplf'r
IH7
207
Chap/a I. EPICL'RUS A\D EP!CUREA~ISM

2. Epicuru~'s .Canonic and Physics . .
3,' From PhY~IC~ to Ethics and "TI$'o!ogv"
Roman EplCUrl'anism
'
~: ~~;~r!f~~'lalld
P H ILOSOPHY
L l1elleni~m and Its Philo!'Ophy
Chapter 2. STO I CIS~I .

5. Hi~lory of Stoici~~
HI!I
13. Life and Work . . . .

H. Logic and ScientifIc Ml'liwd . .
15. First Philo!'orhy. Thl' $orlrin(' of Fir!'.1
Cau~es of Being and Knowll'ogl'
16. Physics. World, Life and Man .
17. Society. Ethics and Polilic~ . . .
18. Aristotle's School (Ihl' Peripatl'tics)
ParI Th ree. GRECO-ROMAN
1'12
172
171i
of Id\'a~ 1(1 CIlSIlIUIII~\
n.
--
"Aead(,tnic" Sel'ptiriS11l
. . .
4. DECLl!';E OF ANC I " .
. .
F
'
I
E~r PHI LOSOP HY

. rom Phllo~ophit'al Eel
'.
. . . .
SynUt'tislll . ' .
l't'llclsm to Philosophico_R('li ' .
Judal~m and Crl'l'k Ph' .. , . . . . .
glOus
;-';""-Platoni~m: AI Ilo~(jfthy. I'hill' IIr All'xau'l .'
Thl' S)'rian Blld Ath('x~ndrl.all.Rl)tnan Sehool (Tla
*'Illan Sdlooi .. of .\('1).1'1
:.
alfJnl~1U
291
295
305
305
313
319
319
Publishers' Nol('
This book is primarily inl"Jllhd f(Jr stud"llls (,f tIHIJlHII<lnilies, hUl will alsf, IH' ffJund h"!pful in sf'H-l'ducalioJl,
It consisls of threl' parts, (>31"":h <;er\."in~ tllf' ClJUHJI(Hl purpos!'
of providing a systematic pxposition of 3ncipnt philo-',oplll'rs'
teach i ngs.
Part I outlines the history of the early Wriod of (In,pk phi,
losophy. Parlll familiaris("s the reader with its classical pNi
od, Part III gives a brief survey of the Hellenic-Roruall phi
losophy.
The founders of Man:ism have repeatedly pointf'd out the
outstanding historical role of ancient culture in general and
ancient philosophy in particular. "The Grffks will for ever remain our teachers ..... "Recent philosophy ha.s only continued
lhe work begun by Heraclitus and Aristotle." z '\fan and Enge ls continually underlined the creatin originality or ancient
Greek philosophy which had been the first t.o risf' to thf' I{'V(>I
of the rational world outlook. The main fervour of ib materia list trend was invariably directed towards explaining nature
from nalu .'e itself, from the laws inherent in matter.
The histor ica l importance of Greek philosophy abo derives
from its un ique contribution to the development of dialectics.
T he fi['sl naive form of materialism was simultaneo.usly
a s ponta nC'ous dia lectical concept of the world.
The G.'eeks' own history of philosophical ideas illustrate:;
the profound revolutionary role of materialism. Thi:; hi:-;tory
which has provided das~ical examples of antagonism bE'tween
327
3.12
344
.,
materiaJi~Ill and id(',lli~m c\l'arly n ' Halt'ci thl' in('\' itabil ity of
thl' ~plil of all philo~tlphl'rs in " rll.\~S snci('ty jntn t wo hig
('aIllp~. Speaking of thl' agl' -.oi.d strnggil' bl'l~Vl'(' n th > two
philo~ophicallint's and undl'ritnlllg a class, partisan c h aracter
of Lht' ideologicaI1)atli('s in Grl't'k philosophy (.Rnin askl.'d:
"Could the slruggll' bl'twN'n materialism and idl'ali s m , til(>
struggle bl'tweell the telld('ncil's or lill(,s of Plato and D('m ocritus in philosophy." ha\'e b('com(' antiqu<lled during th e t wo
thousand years of the deVl'lopm('nt of philosophy ?,, 1
Greek philosophy is a grand monulIlent of human cultu re,
Its manifold forms, wrote Engels, "contain in embryo , in the
nascent
. state, almost ailialer moc\C's of ouliook on the world . ,,2
I'.\ itT O:'li J-'
E\HLY GRI':EK I'IIILOSOPll'f

( '/HIfI/,'r J
First Philosophi('<ll Ooctrines

I. 1I,'\tor)" uf Philo~()ph): lt~ Subjl'l'l- \taU('r and 't('thod
'1'11(' subjpct mallN of the history of philosophy is philoso phy in its histori('al dl'v('lopment. Ancient philosophy tra \'ers('d a long and diffi('ult path from "physics" or a doctrilH' of
natun' ill til(' :-;1H'eific :-;pnse of the word to a systl'm of thE'or(>lical ~(' i\' n{'l':-; induding'. along:-;ide physics. also logic and
l'lhi('s , Con('rt'l(' analysis shows that the structuft' of philosophical knowl('cigt' in individual systems turns out to bE'
t'V('n morp (ompll'x. \\'e shall therefore try to gin' a general
;111(1 ahstrcl(t d(' finilion of philosophy which would makC' tlH'
iill',\ of this seit-'1\et' Illore accurate and specific and lh('rphy
lu' lp sift til(' ma'tt'flal '"'To- bi'-i-\tildi(>d,
Philosophy a~ 1\ product of hi!'torical development iwlongs
to til(' spht'I"t' of human ('uitur(' and is cio:-;ply conne('tpd with
its dirfl'l'('nt fll'ltls, It is born of their int(>raetion and th('ir in
ll' 1'1wl ('olltra<iiclions and. in turn, ('xt'rts a reriprtlcal innu
<'.tICl' upon titPlIJ , By culturl' we mean the dynamic totality of
thl' l'('~ults of human activity aimed at mastt'I'ing till' world
and r('pr('sl'nlP(1 in dirfC'l'('llt forms, from uHlt(,J'ial production
to al'1. According to ll1alt"I'ialisl philosophy ancl this book i!'i
intl'nclNI to l'xpoll1ld th(' vil'wpoint of historical and dial('elical
ltIat('fiali~111
llwh'rial production is tile most importallt form
of human activity , whl'J'{'as all otill'l' tq.r.t.!~ _includi.. .g al'ti~tic,
LcJigiou!:Lllw l I.Ilt!.QllticaC are :2c.co.u.dur,Y a n~I .:"1I bonl i n li ii' -to it,
That dot'S !lot lllPi.H1, of ('OIlI'S(', that tlll'Y IHNPly -ren-ect 1lIall~S
mllt('ri1.ll, praetical activity. Arising froll1 praclict', tllt'y
til('lHs('lv('s \){'('()IIH' part and parn'l of ohjl'clin' l't'ality ,llld
mak{' a pow(,rful illlpact on atl aspects (If social tift' 1t'lltlinJ,{
to hampl'l' or sLil1ltllatt' its progr('ss and Ilw!'i IIH'rgil1g in
a singll' now of culluml dt'\'l'loPllll'llt.
Mar\ dislinJ,{lIislH'd IwtwN'n 1II<\tt'rial prarti<'ill (p1'lldll('
ti\'\') <ll1d prat'lit-al spil'itllal (<lftistie and rt'ligiulIs) appro
'I- I')
pn,,1(
(\IIt'jrrllllll"l
.
....
...
(If Iht' world
1111,
1111'_,_,UIH' hand
and i t
,.
!iwore'!iral rllmprrlwlI"itlll. 011 1111'11\ 11'1".

Lt' n IJl'cl 11 IIii'
!Iwon'tical compn'IIl'II"inn of till' wurld, of a tht'ordll'al altl
tudl' to il "rC'lllilins (lul"illl- tlH' inll'lIl'l" alld 111111'1'1'11111'111 of
it", wht'r{'<ls it mil"! "alway" lit' t'lI\i"ag:l'd '"' <1"1 tht' .1'1',' f ' OI1
ditlon of {'ompr('Ill'lIsjnn," TIlt' "uhjl'rI of 0\ Ihl'on'tu'al altt
tUlle to tht' world ;" l""I'lIli.llly ,I ('ogni"inj.{ ilulividual for

whom ",hI' t'omprl'iH'IHIt'l1 world ;IS "urh is tht' only 1"1'<11
world."I, Philosophy 1'Il11'rgt'd as tht' IiI'S! hL";lorical form of
thl' tiH'oreliral ('omprC'IH'llsiotl of till' world within till' f.'allw -
work of which human thinking appropI'iatl'd tht' ohj('clinworld and reproduced it as ""piritually l'Onrfl'le" in COIlCt'pt ,
in thought and in word,
Til(' difference betwC'(,1l llwort'tical and PI';u'ticl.l1 attitudc~
to thC' world ;s relative, It ari~e~ in till' pro('('::1~ of ~o('ial dl-'v('iopm('nl and i!'o C'liminated in thl-' saml-' procC'ss when philo~()
!)hy, onc(' contempiath'e, turn~ into an important spiritual tool
for transforming the world, "Th(' phiio!'ophcfs h3\'(, only interpreted the world in various Wi.lyS; th(' point is 10 change it, "
~tat(>d :\1arx in the ('Ie\'('nth the~is on f\'IH'rbach,2 Idriltified
traditionally with the theoretical contemplation of the world
and re~reselltin,g a world outlook, philo~()phy hus always been
pot~>nl!ally an .losJ,rmn(,llt for 111('_ practical transforlualion.m
socl('ty and man, This is only too natural in \'i('w of its intellectual, function- to e~pr('s~ man'!, und('rslanding of thp world,
of hiS own plac.(' III II and?f himst'lf. Claiming to sp('ak on beI~alf of h\lm~nl~Y, thC', phtlosopil('r in fact I'('pl'('senls hut thp
I uhlirI' of iH~ 11IIl(', IllS peopi('. hi~ class, Thp world outlook
1H',(>XpOyl\d~ Inrillde~ of n('ccssity not only cognitive b t, I
(
ax lologlcal '_ and th,e~efore iueologica I, a tti tud I' to rea Ij t IIi natl~~
f?rm 1of, ~o(,lal., ;Jo~ltlcai, ae~th('ti(' anti ethic sympathi('~ or an~' pat 1I( s. He a Ppl ov(>s or II Isa 1>1>1'0\'('s, j usti fll'S 01' d ('n
lut al\\'ay~ from lh(' position of r('"ISon tI
.
OUllcesTIl(> history of philosophy is Itot Ih; alH' rO~'(>t,lcal thought.
1
is a
I'
,<
. IJ WI.';( om nowcrs
cross
'I
,I
I . tr('nds and schools
\nsophy does
vi('w it!:. SUb,-l 1 II
I'
outlook, plliallll'o'\
"
-I IIII'I'i('ll"
_ s, c.la W()r 11I, III quantit<lliv('
h'nlls
J"'.," '. I.al~ ~ natura I
IHtp, IllS too larg(' for thollghllo e!lCOI;I') ",\.1.11 If II If! not inftI ass It and at,count for
Karl \hrx . ..1 C,mlribulwri I" /I ('

'
Pf"~r"~~ I'''hl;~h~f:~: \'''~r""" In77. PII
0/ f>o/lIiCtd HC(!IIomy,
.
K~fJ \1~n_ , IU'!I\'~ "II F."I!' , .. 1 ..
( .. /j'ct,d U'''rk~. ,"<1'-;, 1'171'
r
I , III: l\~rI Mar ... F
I
.dl,I" 'orlll~ lind tjualilif'!'I 1'llilfJ~(Jpll:v,lhc:, ! Ire, het!" nl}' ')lIe

palll to f"lInw to Iry to e mr,relll>nd h.l~ wor\,J nol ill tI .. , )
di\'I'I':-ilv of il ,,1II'n,,'OI'II"', hut In the Wily of It (,S,"WflC!e, III
!,rillcipll'.
,
For litl'of"l>lif.tI tlllllklfl~ tlll~ ta~'(k prpsclllS It,Sf1f III 1111'
fnrm flf 0111' "fI]ri,,1 d]oil"' : 10 :-t.'rllgni"e till' lJIall s world 1I
1111' I'l'n"l'iiull of :-Olfll' obJI't;t ve eali y t'l.isliuj{
ulsirl,
,II11J iudl'!ll'udl'llt of mali 's millll, m to Idl'nt]fy il wilh .11H'
alrl"II!Y l'xi~lillg world of id .. a'~ "on"lrllrtl'e~ hy till'orl'tu'll
thillkiJlg i\sI'If, 1'111 il illlothpr way. f;'\'Ny tlllllk.'r fllld~ [,1111st'lf ('ollfI'OIlII'" wilh till' Kn'ut basiC ,/upslifln of pliiiO!WIJhy,
thaI of thl' r('Jalioll of t!tillkillg <lilt! Iwing, of thp prilllaey of
:,1(
1_
I, '1 .
n', I'fuk
f<:nJ.:l'I~,
ma\t('l' or spil'il.
.
Tlds qll(>.o.;tion whidl asslIllI('(J diffl"rf'llt forms and arqllJr{'d
('V('I' gl'('alt'l' sigllilil'um'p ill the history of philfhnphy hl'calll('
a wah'l'sh('(1 1H'lw('('n materialism and idl"ali.$m, "Thl' an~wl'rs
which lilt, phi1osophrr~ ga .... (' tf) thi .. question," wwll' ElIlt'I~,
"~plilth(,1ll into two gn'at camp~, Th(I"1' who <ts .. "rlt(~ Ihl.,Prlmacy of spirit to nalurt' .. _ compri!'l'd I~f' r:amp I,f Idf'ah .. lU.
The other~, who rpgar<ied Hature as primary, belong 10 Ihl'
various schooi!' of matt'rialism,'" It i!" only the materH1lt~t "11lution of tlJ(-' basic ql){'stioll of philo!'ophy that ae('nr.]s with
the lIatur{' of tlH'Ofetieal co~nition in whieh the ~uhj('('t opposes him~('lf to Ih(' wurld and r{'producf'!' il in a ~y~ll'lll of
concppt~ as indept'IHlpllt of hi!"> con..,;riou."n('!'." and of tilt'
proce~s of cognition.
.
_ ,
Yel th(' weak spot. the heel of Achtlle.... of ll~aterl~lt:'1ll had
always b('('n, till th(' p\'olution of it:<- highe:<-t dlalectll'al form,
the problem of thp origin of Ihl'orplical con~cloll ... np.~!, <llId, fM
that matt('I', ('onsciOIlS1H.'S!' in gl'nl'ral. Idealtsm h~!"> In fart dl:-'
cal'ded Ihi ... probl(,1ll as non-('xi..,;t('nt. From it;,; \"Ie\\"polllt. 11ll'
world of <'onc(>pls evolwd by the Illind is the only r('ol world
tl'eatl'd by Objl'cli\"p Spil'il (the Ah~olute, God, Cl'l',IIM, ('t(',)
prior to any physi('al ohjC'ct .. ,
,
'
"
, .~_
This apPl'ou('h 1'('latl''''; phihJ:'lop.llIt'ai nit'ails_ III II tlh n 11),: Ion
and acrOlllll~ for Ihpil' ('OIl\Jt\tHl t'!ll ... I ('Ill o'og lcal roob ilnd \"N_V
~illlih\l: social and idl'()iogic<ll functions,
,
, ..
Now, pnsilillg tilt' prilllilcy of Iho~lg.ht and i.\bsollll~ n,~!'oll,
rld
till' idl'ali ... t Ita ... to ilt'l'ollnl fM tht' origin of tht' lll<lt('rI,li
and e'plain why thl' rt'iI!'on cn'att'li nature,
';'lijfj;i"f"
'
Phi!II~III'h_\
IIt1ll''',
,,,I.
._,
-.
J.
I nlj;/r,'"
1.('. ";Ollll'thing 0\\
I," I'rha,'h ,\ntl th(',Ent! .. r (:lll~~i(";t! CprUl;t1l

,
'I
_~"
~.nlt,'b, ,\,. ,rt~,
or,- " III,3 \11-I
,,)-,- P :Ht;
!'.Il!!:'- ~,
.Ut \\ lit ,,,
. I \1
IF' I 'rid,
. In: Kllf
;Ir\ line r l t ,
r,'d.'nd,
__
\\t
I' '" 'I I~ ,It "~.,
"",.'(\1\
.
. I t.
.'
"
I
/
"r and It..... :' ratillnal than il:-;t,lf Tht' idl'a1i:-;t liN!' ha~ only Ullt'
way op('n to him -to tr;lIlsJlns~' tilt: prohll'lll onto tilt' plant' of
hUUlan n'\ations .lnd In plt'iHI ('n'aluJIl ;1:->;111 ae! of human .w li
,-it\' which. di\,orn'd (Will lht' 1I1liH'rsd chain of cau~al fplat
ion-:-;, starts with lho\l~hl and lpads to all actioll ,Hid it!'. rt':-;tdl.
TIll' t''':-;t'Il{'t' of irlt'alism is thus anthropomorphism, asniptioll
of human ('haracll'ristics til all IIHII ('xists.
The history of philosophy pivots nn thl' struggle hl'twP(,1l
matNialism and idralism which is wagl'd not only hel\\'(,(,II,
hut also within till' anl.lgonistic lfrnds. This uncompromising
Slfll'tJ.!:h,. 11I)\\"('\'('r, is a hi hl~' cfl'ali\'(' p.!].rss \y~ich con::;li
x
l
lutes IIIP rU()ti~:.JOI'('(' _I~ progl'l's~ ill philo~()JlI~y_an(r account~

{or till' spl'fifu'ity Oflii."t()r1('o-ljhllo~topl1icarres.earch and c.-x
pn"itioll,
TIl!' study of thl' history of philo~ophy callR for a harm oni
ous ("omhinatil~1l o{ historil';'ll inquiry IntC'llded to rcproducC',
WIlEfIwr 11osslht.-. till' rt'al ch'wloprn('nt of thought in all
lb r~r1l1l1'ss II lid J1I II hi form i t~. w i~ h IlIl:ic a!jllv':-;t iga tion a i JllNI
at Ih"doslUg lb laws, Tht' fornwr is ll('ce!'lSarv in (u:Oer',loCto
:e~('nla~l.sP, history hy prt's~'Jltilig f()ns(,(,lIti~'(' philosophical
,,~ .. tf'II\S as ImpI'r{t'f'\ t'lI1hotlllllt'nts of a !'lingl(' absolut('ly true
",\"'11'111, alll'l{l'llIy Ihpir ('omlllOIl ill('al. and tlH' iatt('r dNi\'cs
rOlllthC'\'t'nn<lhr' fl
.
,.,
Inlll"'11 ' : ,. ' J t C) . IIstOr1(,O-,P 11 osophical invt'stigation.
"
t
i "hi tl .Is rl'(iurlllg lht' Illstori('()'philosopilicai pI'OC (~~(' (;.i:~~)lr~I>:t:I\I(I, dppri\'t' philosollhieaJ thought of its sprfirulill2s .... hidl
()!,Hh~.OI:PII 1Il.lpllrll's, cOIiOicb, ('rrors and
nlll ('1I1I1I1'1' 1",.".,,',',1',1,11,1",' ",unHlut. and ('onstitut(' the> e>xtt'r. of law fai
lUrl' to \11"'0\" Ihl' r 'Sl I'S . or It H' Int
. I'rna' , nt'c(>ssllv
doclrilll' WflIdt\ rl,r,",,',',','ss.,''',t It' ,hJ.!ht ofa single philosopiliC(l1
-l.
1',
() a It'tIl) of
' I .
.
'!III Ihp(lrL"S, IlIllOil' [f..
,
'
111'(' e\ant conc('ptlOns
,
I II
alt ' t U' h,stor\:
of P'"
.
I HioslJllhil'a'
on
\
II
"",
,.
.'
J
I
I 1St I)) \tIP "'tUlh'lnn'\I
,., II osophy is. th ('
I'IH~ lltlll lIa\I' ,.,.,.,. ,
' , ... a P)I osophica' ",'ob
.
W\'II nlsl'li a J.
1':>'~I~'..I!lalioll ~r Ihl'sl'l)rohl.' '.
on! It ('an not unde>rt<!k.e.J.he
tT101I1 ry histol'Y
TIJt':
f ,> i'l '\t'llll' ,I IPr a"llt'el 1 II I'
:h(
0' "
'"
~he~or;~j~ ~ ~li~II;~!~'I"I~~I~ L; I~,::; r:;. ~,:: rl ' ~S'~('t~ ~~: ~~s~:o~lh~It~l~!),~l,~
mt'nnosoc
I
. W'NYsll\)'
r ..
(I
'p.
s, IIs(or
'I,
an~ Usu~lt' ~ .~~J Uudt'rJ.!ol's ('(J,;st<llltJ('r
mf'nt of so.-u':v
ommunal. J:!1a~"
0 phdoso
I~ (I \lIP rlw hasic sta . C lange>, ~1al'x

(':,I~d t'JI'IfH'('OIlOllli(' r(J~~~ tl~r the d~\'(>lop.
til a,' lIJ1ltalhl allil
1<1 IOI\S: prllllitiv('
(,fJlllrllllni<;' ' E'
, ,
~a(' 1 fU'-
Illation rlf'\df)JI~ It!'l own world VH'W whi("h rtnf('t~_ ill till' flllal
an'1Iysis, tlw s{)('iill h('ing <Hid till' soriai l'Unsf"iIH]SIlt'SS fI( thl'
('po('h. Till' world vil'w of prilllitivl' ('Olllllllillill s(,df'l~' Wit'l
Illainly r('pn'sf'llll'fl hy mythology: phill)~ophy ('OIlIl'S into be
illg in ~la\l'-owlling ~(}d('ty,
Tht' llH'thodology of histori("o-philosophical rl'"l'ar('h taking accHunt of till' dt'HloplIlent of philosophy and intt'IIN'tU'
al ("lIltul'(' at largl' df'rivl's from a twofold rll'pl'lldt'rw(' of phi
losophy on so('il'ty. naml'1y, on the \e>H'1 of social df'HlopnH'nt
wl,lich ',nakPs phil,&~, <l("rordio2' to 1I~'el all t'.}(Jch ('Oil,
C('lvrtl ]11 lIH~lt , allrlOrl {h(' l~ve>1 of ll:o;; epo('.I';.Sl'_ '('011,
-sciou~'rH~ss,T.P. on its knowledgC;of til(' world ann orlts(If. This
twofold dC'lel'lnination of philosophy c(llis for a simllitan('o1JS
analysis of its socia l (class) and epislt'/llological roots,
The> methodology of th(> history of phi10~ophy has('d on ilia
IPfialist dial(>ctics rlemands that philosophy "IS til(' ultimate
('xprt'ssion of inle>lIe('tual culture> and its theorl'tical lIuc1(>u<;
~ho]lld bl' U'('a te>d , first. as a product of soci('ly's t'ntirl' cultural dl'velopm ent, second, as a unity of intNnal contradic'
tions (opposite views) which constitut(' th(' !lIutin for("(' of
its devl'lopment and, third. as a creatin process of qualil(lti
ve> change>s including negation. the negation of Iwgation, and
l)f{'ab in ('o ntinuity during transition from one syst(,1ll of
vi('ws to another, I n terms of methodology this <lpproilch c<llb,
rll'sl, for historicity . i.e, the innstigation of N("h philosophit'al ,
sys\.{,1lI in connection with the concretl' cond.ilions of its
('m('rg(>llcc _ a[)~(rexi~.!.!!cr.. as...a_.u.uique phenomt'non ci)j,~tITIi1- \ f
ill'g iit'ihe> sa m(' time a link in the gen('ral chaIn liTcallS(' P1rp("t
r('lations and, s('cond, for parlisanship which d(,IlHInds of
a historian of philoso phy to occuPY a de.tlf-CI!.!. social and
philosophical position in assessing C'Vl'ry pllC'1l0lllenOIl IInclt'r
illv('stigation in th(' light of struggl(' b('tW('('il mat('rialism and
i(l('ulism.
TIll' hi!';lol'Y of philosophy in An('ie>nl Ct('t'('(' and I\Olllt'
which is out.litH'd in this book ('OW l'S tIl{' pt'I'iod from the iall'
Pal't of t.he> st'venlh ('('nlmy B,C. till till' heginning (thl' lir,..;t
third) of the> si.'\th ('('ntllty A.D, Proc{'{'ding frolll till' histori
('al division of th(' sla\'(' formation which is Iht' sO('io-p('onorn
ic foundation of uncit'llt philo!"ophy Wt' distinguish Ihl'l'l' llIain
p('riods in ils dpwlopm{'nl: \,Hrly (~rt'l'" philo.sophy (Ihl'
se>\'enth-fifLh c('nturil'S B.C.), ria"si('al en'l'" Jlhilo . . nJlh~
(tht' fOllrth c(,!lllIry) and Crpco- Homan philosoph,. Th~"
path'rn sOllwwhat de>parls from the> g('IIt'rall~' ildopll'd ,'I,,"slll-
\1
whirh thl' phil(\~ophy of '1IItlquit)' \~ 11"'Hll'd II, I

.
." "1'1
I'
L!tr
tIlt' ht'adillg~ 'I'n'-~tlrratl(':-;.
ato '\lH .\I'l~lnlll''' p.
,\ristot('lia~l phil(ls(lpl~y" <llId "1I .. IJt.nic philll:-tuph\' o~tll
"(Intra;,;'
wIth till' tn.uiltwnil\ \'I\'\\' , \\1' ill"!'
IIldllll'd tn 111111"k
,
.
.
that Socratl'S cann.ot Ill' rt'garilt'd as 1l1~IIkllll.t 1111' "lid of thl' ill
fancy and thl? lWgllllllllg of tht' 1ll.\IIlI'~t\ of philosollliy ill AI1cirlll Gr('('('C', at' his thought fl'll "II hili tht' fr,lIlll'work of IIII'
".'1tU)l1 III
eariv Ill'riod and was hut it stepping sIUI1\' to this maturil,

. ' () II
thl' othrr hand. it wa:" 1l~)IH' ot~ll'r than 1lt'1lI0t'l'itlls, ('Olllllloul\"
rankl'd among thl' 1)I'C'-Sonal1l's. who ('n'il\l'd a ('olHplptl
all;'
ronsi:;;t('nt doctrinE' of atomistic Illiltt'rill hSIll , a classical sysh'rn

which can well compart', in tl'rm:-; of lllatul'ity, with Ill(> S\'s
t{'IllS of Plalo and Aristotle. Chronologically, too, till' lif('ti;ll('
of Socrat('s falls within til{' IHth ('('nlII I',\', Whl'I'(,<IS J)pmocri,
tllS'S activity extends well bl'yolld it. Finally, Ihl' v('I"y term
~r(>-Soc~atics cO,illed in ,II~(' ninl'll:l'Il,th ,centlll'Y suggests
sO[Jl('tlung transitory, auxiliary and Ilislgrllftcant. t1WR inducing \t\rious aU,lhor,s mer~ly to skim through this IhC'orC'ticall y
Important perIOd III their handbooks of philosophy.
It should, also b~ noted thai, the c.,reeo-Roman period,
~he longest III the history of anCient philosophy, i:-; also not
IOfr,equently underestimated and treated as the "decline" of
anCient ~hollght. By contrast, Marx wrote in his theses for
<;;eems to me that though the earlier sysa Doctor S degre~:
tem!' ar~ more Significant and interesting for the content, the
post-Arls,totelean ones, and primarily the cycle of the Epicurea,n, StOIC and Sceptic schools, are more significant and intere~t~,ng for,th,e subj~cth'e form. t!le ~haracter of Greek philoso~i .' But It I~ precls~ly the .sllhJ('ctlye f,o rm, lhe~s piritual carer of th,e philosophical systems. ).\1i~h has \Jntil now been almo;;t ~nlt~ely ignored (in favour of their mctapllysic"al characterlstlcs.' I
':It
2. Birth of Philosophy: Sot'ial Background
b The Ilrst steps of philosophy in Anc icnt GrC'C(',c pose a num er OfTcor~piex scientific probl~ms controvcrsial till nowa d ays. heir compl " .
Pirsl, it a
"exl. ~ IS trac(>abl ~ to IhrC'c main reason~,
iosophy'<;~~~:~S ImposSl,blc to l'stabltsh lh(' ('x3cllime of phi ,
. though Its emcrgC'nce brought ahout a I'adiclli
.. ,. '" ,III' hi .. ton: o( Ihflll~hl ,1II1i ,,',Ig a rl'ill .. pirHllal n'vII

r I,all",
"
"
.
IlIlioll- Till' ,'arly pltilo~lIpltll'lll 'p;u'hlllg-; ar' 1101 I'a~v tn Ii,
~lill~lli_~h frolll 1\011 philo~opl'il'al prwilll',lS of, human ill II'I
11','1 II1vll!olllgi"i\1. n'ligioll~, arli,du', -;(']PlllIIiI' ('11111;'11 II Illg
wnrlcl-I';ltlook l'II'III!'III~, In \'il'w of Ihl'ir obvillu-; ,'olltlllilily
Ihl' rp ... t'ard\t'r~ un' oftl'lI ilH'lilll'd 10 d.,"y ally 11111':0: fir IIl'lIwr
('atioll IlI'twl'l'lI 1111'111. SI'('OIHI. IIII' matt!'r i:o: ('0111 plicalI'd hy I til'
allllo~t ("omplPlI' lo:o:s of I'ariy philo-;oplH'r,,' works. TIll' ~11f\'iv

IIIg fragrllf'lIh t01'l1 nlll of Ihl',orig-illal logicill ,"0."11''(1 ~IV.
grolill/l:-; fol' I'ndl(',,~ ('Illllro\'f'r"u'" r('gardlng tlt~"r 1,II,lI'r II 1'1'1 a
tioll and IIS,,('''SIII('III i\:-i philo~o"hiC'ill or otlwrwl"", I h1l"d, Iltl'
dirferf'lIt st.IIHi:-- lakl'll by historiall" fir philosophy al'f' partly
accolllltllhlt' fol' hy Ihl'ir dill.'r('lIt undprstillHling of IIII' suh
jretmatlN of philosophy.
,
Thl' first world view "ystrms whirh may IH' tpl'IIH,d philo
sophica\ emt>l'g('(\ almost sillwltanl'oll"ly ill t~lr('(' (,(,Iltf('~.
Ancient GrN'ce in tb> latt' ~(,Vl'nthearly "I.\th ('PnlllflP"
B,C .. India in tht' ~ixth ('C'lItury H.C .. and China in till' ~hth
fifth ccntlll'il'~ B.C,1 This chronological (Oillcidplicr. nota
ble as it is, r{'('('drs 10 a ~>coIHlary plan as ('olllpar('(1 tn tit'
"social simultan'ity" of th(' inc('ption of philn"uphy. Bolh
lhe \Vl'st and the East \\'('r(' pa~sing at that time fmlll party
slave-owning society, distingui~hed by the pres(,IlCI' of stroll~
social and economic sllrvivals of the old g('ntilC' organi-;atinll
and permeated through wilh its ideology. to a dl'Vl'lop('1i
slave-owning society. It wa~ a transition from till' patriar
chal system of slavery providing the slave-owllt'rs with tht'
means of ban' subsist(,llce to II ~vslem hll~('d on tht> prndu('
L tio,n of surplus valliC', The ('ntlrl" soc,al;trucf'lrt., \\'3S II olh'r.
~OIllg 1'3thcal tfiHlsformalion: citi('::; were rapidly t\lrnin~
mto centres of ('co nomic and political activjty. tradt' wa"
nourishing and th(' mNal nHH1'V horn of its nN'ds l'Xl'l"
cised ~ pow('rful iunllt'n('c to\\'a~ds its furtlwr r'(pallsion,
the pl',lvat(' pl'0p'I'ty in land and mortgage bonds \\"('1"(' all
becom lll g cha l'act'l'istic f'ature~ of ancient stwiC'ty. 1\11
these changes madc fol' th' spl'end of slav(>fy and l)('ightt'IH'd
the stl' ugg\(' helwl'rn landl'd aristocrilCY ilnd warlords 011 til('
onc hand. and II\(' frp{, population or" ('itil'S, on tIlt' ntlwr.
--
K<lrl M<lrx "fY(f,

'
1000uphy ,,( , , ' "I ,'ff'llee Bf'twf'I'n till' 1.x'mfJrrill'ali and Epif'urNIII PIli
' ,
. a urI'
.,
k
.In'
' K'ar ,\,
. arx, ,'ri'f('ritk
EIIJ::pl ... ('o/If'clf'd 1V 0"S,
\ ", I, p, 36,
12
'3
Thr fllndan1f:'ntai contradictioll undt'riyillJ,! all s{l('ial eI('_

wlopllll.'nt~, ho\\"('\'('r, was th(' class antagonism h('1\\"('1'1\ th(>
.. law-owners and lhr sian'S,
such was thr backgwIIlld for tht' t'III{'['g'('IICt' of philosoph\".
1 long, <lnci ('(l~lpl~x pro('l',SS t'\.h~lIding (}\~'I' tilt' ,!-;ixth-f,fth
crnturtl'~ B,C, III (.rN'ce, sixth-tlllrd c(>ntlll'li."S B.t. in India
and China (incidentally, sourc('~ attest to Vl.'ry similar social
and idrological conditions in Mexico just Oil the- ('v('
the~panbh ronqllE'~t), Alllhe~e facts testify against current con,
f~'pl~ of a ~trollg innuE'llce allegedly e\.('rted by Allcie-nl
(.fI'PCI' on lud}a or c\"('n China or, on the contrary, or
IIII'~(' ('OllIl1I'l,e;.;, 1Il~~lrnce on Gre(>('e, Such concepts based
()II olmoll;'; ~1'!'t1al'ltlt's ht'lwN'n th(' so-('alleo \Vestern and
I ~~~tl'~11 t~'<lchm,gs haw long b('e-n circulatrd in historico1~,htlt,)~o~lllC<l1 litl'raturc, by tlw champions of the so~',llI'fl, ~,Ilrol'elllrir tJr ASlac('ntric origin of philosophy, The
'11lt~1 ,I~ Ihat r~al contacts ,belw('('11 Cr('ec(' and India started
I~I "ll'h nlnrh later Ih'II('lltl' l)l'riod as i!-; attt'ste-d to by the
III', Il't Jflitndll Panha (\1ilind<\'s Questiuns)
II
s','ph)('al 11lI)Jlllnll'nt de~rr;hillg <\ talk I t , . , a p 11 0\a~il"'iI'lia <llId (' k k'
\
l(' \\e(,1l
preacher
1ng
ollr 01 till' ' .'rN" f,1t'lIcUHll'r (\1i1inda) filling over
If'~lon~ 0
\orth \\"P't 111 I
Olately 12:J-!1:J IU'
s a y )('lweell approxiCOlitr/IYI'r~\- CIVPr 1I1P im '
'
~
nn l'uly' C['(';'k Phil()~(jPh/f'~I~ o~ ,\1ld(lIt, I'..astern teachings
liS, \11 1111' IIp\II'lIi(' ppr- '\ .~'
olll'lsllt'd for many centllUle Crrl'\.;s Il"Id "0
,1 \1(. I, was C'OllllllOlliy ht'iieved that
F
'
'
rnmt'C 1 Ih("11' phil . I
'
'IUptlall~ fir (rolll IiiI' ill'lil"l'ws '1'1 ,osop Iy ("Ither from the
tilp Alp)..illiciriall ~ril'lIlisb wi 'I', lis \:IPW wa~ traceable to
"\tIdy of CfP('k ;IlIll Fj.t\,;lia 10 II'HI ('arfl(>(1 out a comparative
I'/'spoud
"
I'll lllr("s it
II as of tht' ('orII
11lJ,{ IlIlt'qlrf't<ltioll
o( II'UI("
',' S Wt'
t',hl'('w Old ,[,pHallu'lIt. .'\;11111;'11' It~1l1 I'.gyptian myths and the
~"I 0111', ('OIl\t'lIdl'd that p\tI, IllS (lilt' S('('o nd centul'Y An)
of
I::: ~t:~ ~ Ili:~J ~~)II,:II (I I~ I' "II ra h 1;1 i1I1~: J,{lc:l~:;i ,a ~~(~: ~:I ~() h ~ d l' Xte 11 s iv ~ I ;
lhc)lI~h ~otrl"wh~ ',', \10l'1-I'S Sp('akillg Altir"lasl,l,s '~Illd licobl'ews,
' , 11111 ar ('on

t
P7,13,I, "l'hllpha~i~ ..i~ Il\'ill~ ph::.'(,;;I::"all~o rlll'l'('lIt in Our CdC~y~'
.
(' IIlaKI 'J
prSl'l1i Y t I
"
811d ~1.tfJrlall of 1,,,,1' fI>i'1 ful' iU!\Iilllq, h~ 'B ,II l

1Oiogy (thl;'
1
I
k
O:o1P'\' \1 \\"
"
1'1 IS I l)h'l I
.
CIt to I hl~ "rllbl, I II' "
p~t who Ins I"
10 oglst
~
1111,
IIWI'\'I' ,I
" ((>\(jl'd a s ' I
!I;)(I,.:::n rlt{"rlflprj Ic
.
r, II' ra('tll'll
_' pecla
I "rllVf'
'MliVf> Ir,Hllau
. ' 'IllnlIIat(>rlal at IliS
'
W , r rIll I;r. k /'/ I
Il(>llr("" IS very
S
""
"
il
Ifl; I .
0111'1
dow
"
II I ~"I,h. '''11I II!,

t
I,
fI/'/11
("
. IIn'l,rlo,u
,,('lInly <11111 hig "q~IIITI"11L'S III fad dn not amOll!!t tn ;lIlvthill'

IlHlrt' .than :-;lilt4'lIIl'l\l.~ of prohabililv.
.
I,l:
-.1I.i:.;lo.l'ians ':f--- philosophy -('oming

'
--
n~l~IIHlhty f)~ (.,rpf'k Iholl~hl
)'
I
~--
01lt
ill
IIl'fl'II("1'
of tlu'
h,...... ,. aln'ariy addUl'l,d langLiagf'
(\lfll(,IIIIII'S: II IS ha~'d to .mag-HII' any jn;:r'hallg'1' of opinioll";

011 (,0I1~plt,\ wo~ld-\'lt'w prnhlpllls through an intf'rprf'tl'r, and
~hl'l"(, IS 110 l'vlfl~'Il(,1' ~() pro .... \, that allY Cn,C'k phi!oSOI,IH'1"
III the' pr('lIcI1('llu' PI'I'IOd krll'w langllagl's ~p()kl'n ill thl' \1id
die East, or that Milldl\,- Eilslt'rll priests kllew Crpl'k. Thl'
m'r(' fact that th" Crl'l'ks horrowt'd some of tilt'ir matlll'matical, astronomical and olhl'r COIlct'pts from thp \1idrlll' East
cannot 1)(' I'l'ganlpd as proof of the oriental origin of
tht'ir philosophy,
The argllnH'lIt from th{' language, !-;ignifu'ant as il is,
should b{' vi('wl'd, hOWl'\'('r, as secondary to a far mo['('
, important co nsidNatioll of g't'neral conceptual charader, Lik('
any oth(,1" philusophy, erN'k philosophy is ('!-;",entially dirfeJ'('llt
from mythology, 110 math'r what the traces of orif'lIt<l1 innu{'ne{', Mythologi('al rt'JIIinisr('nces are included hrr(' ill a new
conll'\.t which is so unique that they completely lose llH'ir
original meanin~ and iw('ome integrated in an entirrly cliffe,
!'t'nl train of thought. 0111' task is to explain this piwn n lllt'llon
prot'N'ding' fl'olll lht' (;I't'l,I\s' own intell{'duai history Wl'
al'(' by no flu'ans Il'yilig to hl,littlE:' the importanc{' Hf
Eash'rn ('ullur{' su('h ac('u",;llions ar{' oft{,11 Il'yplled ag,lin st th(' (h'frndl'l's of th(' originality of (;I't'ek philo",ophy, SOIlll'tillil'S nol \\"ililout good reason, Yt't it i", our firm
cOllvirtioll thaI till' l'IIH'rg{,lIct' and dE:'Yelopmellt of idl'ologil's
call not Iw IIlldl'I's tood ill tl'1'ms of "horrowing", as it!.('olug,y
is' rool{'(illlllil' -lllatl'l;"jal alld sljirltual Tifl;' of tlll~ ppopl('
which dpv{'loppd iI, wliale>v('r the intl'l'action 01" ('ulllIl'('.", \
Ancil'nt philosophy is Ihl.' philosophy or sla\,p-owililig
society, The pivolill cOllll'adidioll or this SOell'ty is UtH' /
lH'twt'{'n dominatioll and slavery, till' slaV('-owIIl'J' anti thp
slav('. It is an ('xPl"l'SSiOIl or tHan's ali(>llalioll, sinn' ",liI\1'
is r('(lund to '-' thing, A('{'ording' to l\larx. OtH' pllI'! of tlii",
of production and of its O\\'Il-rl'pl'oduclioll, Tht' sian' i", in no

way rl'lah'd 10 tilt' Ohjl'l'Ii\'l' condition", 01" his lahollr ht'illL!
ranked with olhl'I' n;~~a~_~I,(,l'S' l.'i ll('h .as li~"'tock~
"-_ \Lln. (;f//llliruse ",'r Arillk do'r p,,/iluchol Oko'lomlt' (U,tltr t
II"l/rO J, /N,57 J8,~8, \','rlalj: ilr frl'm,t-llr;,,'hiJ.:" Lit.'r;llllr, \t"~";'Il. HI:),
s_
:iX~I.
'5
..
I. ,I . I ' .. n't' In whu'h "la\!' labolll' .II'nliJlll 'i
H I \ '"
1 I
.
I
'
. I
1 .,- III or till' "hun' n '" H\'I'S III I " , \111111
for socw pml III 1\
I .. ' .- , .
I .
'
1"'I",hlioll
dill''';
Hot
plllY
II
I
1(1"1\1
rn
num hcr 0 1 ,I I t
_
'11
I\' III
..
'h' "",k,'
of "la\I' 1m UIIi/.: sll('ll'l" .
i' r II'r !i aVI".
d('h.'rmlllm~ t
mastl'r relation \It'l'II\I'<I!t-,, through till' ,'1111['(' L (' n Sill'!!',
It'i rH'p
t,- all d ral
I" " h'lI till IIII' rt'!atwlIs 111'1\\1'1'11
I
.
. , b"
I" Ilrincillh' ,\11\' of th,'", \'.111 lost' liS I1l'f:-<oll;\lIl),
1ll(1ll
~.
" "
I "..
k
I"
ilnd turn into a sian' !\ 'th illJ.! ,':htu y. spt-atng lou .
lw can br tak{,l1 prisoner. !-!,O hallkrllpl ,md fwd IlIlIlsplf ill
bondage, filII ill po\'{'rty aud hel'llUlt' ,1\ d('h'll n'l~'ss, lh()tI~h
"frcl"', hired labourer who CIII1 Ill' t'ils dy (urnI'd Into 1\ slaw
by all\' influential member of liIe cOllllllunity. Eyen Ill(> immor
1;;1 gods ar!' not imlllll l\(' from -"ut'h l\ fall'. H('call , for instanc!', how NrptUlH' r('mindg Apollo of th(' tin1(' w he'll 011
Zeus's orders th('y both :::('fved the' Troyan king Laom edon:
S1!{llIfJ('ant \ .
"I'
",n'
", .. th e ruffian king refused

The promised wages, and dismissed us bolh
With menaces; to bind tlu't' hand alid foot
He threatened, and to sell Ihff a,'\ a slave
/n distant isles, and to cui oil the ears
Of both of us .....
(Th e Iliad of Homer, Houghton , Mifflin
and Company, Boston, 1870, pp. 250, 251)
That m('ans that man has no inalienable rights or any
sp('cial non-natural propNties: he is an integral part of
nature. Con\'ers('iy, nature pro\'e,!; animate and even human e.
Much water had nown under the bridg('s before man understood ~is pr.incipal distinction from the rcst of nature, Thi g
new vle.wpolllt found its expression, 011 the one hand, in th ('
separatlOll of soul from body, tl1(' latter being understood
as t!le former's prison, and all th(' other hand, in the anti thesls of nature
dff
d and law
. (,)reseription
.
, a,") "'
" " prrsen ,.lng
1 erent mo e~ of eXistence of natul'f' 'oc" ,
I
'I
.
'
Y
a
ll(
man .
. TI1e sevent Ih i th centuries B.C. wt'rt' marked b . . d
y ,1 I a .eal change in thc life of sO('it'ty 1'1" dc I
.
.
.
.
ve
Ol)ment
of proI
(uctlvc
forces open cd up a possibility for a
..
a new type of slave labour from hO\l~chold sl tr~~l~lhon to
to serve dir('('lIy tht' nCNts I,r ,I, .1.
. avc!} Intended
.
e
s
ave-owner's
I
saw
labour a~ a lII('ans of prorlt I:'xtr r
.f anH' 1y, to
about all es~ential ~hift in S("'al
I ,~c Ion. ThiS brought
.
rl' a IC)IIS a d
greater cxlt'nt, in idl'olo"y. Early "I.. . ~l, ('ven to a
11 I
.
...
.~ ,1\l'-OWnlno . '
.
:-; I
c lara('t('n~f'd bv nUIIl('rOIlS rl'm
.., socl(>ty I f;
.
.
nants of thl:' primitive
'
16
\r "II
I'ol/lira h'sf'll"s I" Ih" fal'l
III t III
Il' !If'\llIlh
PilI Iry ~.I
ttl" Bg ICU" Inti fomllllllll'
""'1
"till tip 1111 II
11(' t 11"11 I 1J III in \Uil'a, 111)\\1'\' 1 it
"". ,0{ nll,idly .1,,"'rlOrot ug fly,.
II{ t l t Ie gro\\iul{ (,Hnc,'utrltioll
IIf lalld III I hI' haflfb "f till' Kf>Ulil p Ir;"loc:" H'y tlw "lIlIa
Irid~. 'I'lIl'ir lalld" w.'rf> (ultiv.lted by p(K)r shHrPfrupi',r".
",hWHO 1'1'111 I"'id"ully ,utllliJlltpd 10 th'c siXlh~ of Ih" n0l'
arid who IIlIlulllalk"lIy IlIrlH'd ifllu .. I:tvl''' if ""'Y falb'l! In
pay it TIL .. 11 .. 1111,, fir his falilily IIwIllber!'! 1'lIlIhl 111"(1 fall
illio hOlHlag!> IIr h., !'oold inli) !<Ia\.'ry if Itll'y faill,.1 III r",JaY
11 IOHn, BI'I", .. "II IIII' t'llpatrids Oft till' Oflf> bawl awl till' d"(If'IIfI
()tlll'r, filllkl.1 ~lIIa l l
('Ill sharpc'''0l'''''!,S iIllfl S!;I\'j>S, Oil
pt'aslInts (gf'IIIIIO .... S) i111.1 h"lIoic'ra1tsml'll (derlliurl{l's) who
Wl'n' gnHlllaJly If)siJl~ thl'ir ('IIIIIlN'liofl with land. " spt'f'ia l
plact' in sorif'ty was O(,(,lIpiNI by nf>w('()rJlprs or alil'ns (IlII"
leks) who WI'((' pl'rsolwlly frN', hut did not pnjoy any political
righls. Their propf'fty rights w('re cllrtailed tl}o: 1M install(,(',
Ihl'Y ('oilid 1l1'ittH'r haw' any land in Attica lor buy a bOIlSI' in
11111111111011 My"h'lII.
nw
Alhl'IIS,
Till! transformation flf social relatioll'" as attf""tl,d by

Aristotle, was eharactf'ri,,(>d by ".'nral tendeucie". The first
tendency consi:-it('(1 in th(> growing stratification of th(' "fr('(>"
population which undermined the trallitional communal sy~
tern and I('d to the aggravation of contradiction . . between the
cla:-isc:-i t'merging within this system. The cia"" "trul':'~lp un
thinkable in thc old grntile or~anbation now "lowed down.
now aec('l('rat('d this procl:''''' of :o:tratification. A,,, a r~ult
of generaiunr(>st and popular uprisin'{. Solon who was t'i(>cted
archon (chid mag-i."trale) of Athens in 59'1 B.C. carried out
an importa nt r('form. According 10 Aristotle. Solon rrl:'pd the
people and (lrohihill'll pN:,onal bondage a" security for a
loan. Th(,ll IH' i""u('d la ws ane! cancelled all debt" ( Ari~t.
Ath('lI. Poli!. J\', 6, I). TIl(' Alhenians who had fallen into
~ lav('l'y through d('bb wen' ran~o m ed by the :,tate.
The ~(' m('a~ur('~, hOW('\,l:'I', cou ld not preH'nt th(' growth
of cOll tradielion :-; within tlil' "free" :\th(' nian "ociety, stimulaling a t th(> sallll' tinl(' what \\',b the secon.d tenden.cy .. thl'
d('\,el op llwnl of ~la\'t'ry. In co ntra st with patriarthal :-;Ian'ry
which :-;atisfit'd intl'rnal hnu"I'hold needs a nd enabled thl'
indud"d tho' hard",,! ('h"n'~: corn thnshiol!' and
s
I<:rindinl{. "il ~'llIt".,inll'. ,lIh'n(\inll' hi li",-h,,". Illaklll~ 'Iillr~ prudud .
, . , .. ",'r spinillog \lid 1...,1'IUI!'. ('an' "f
f ,.
1)'"II,'sti,' sl,,\,'
luh"ur
!'Huk i IIII'. Ilr""un'IIH'lIt"

!' It i ld rl'lI. .'1 r
II: 'I
In'"''''' ,III.,.
')'
.1
,If to 1ll'lrcJlonnur,\hl ,' ;lilt! illll'Ol'lall1 aw:

1\ 1IlilSt
O\:\,,\('r
toI.
apJl I
,.
allinO'TOr grC'll\t'f pl'r~nllU I .11I1I'rr~l , d.
ncu\tura l
]0):- r
~
'l'>'l.p'\IHIl'd
thl' splwn' oi ilpp Il('allOll II f ':i1 1\\1'
n'Opl'
'
"
I d ~a\N~~'", <of .. hvl'''; III hUlHlL
nait.'1, Illlllllllo!;
III( I1Ll'tf\ .
nl. -=
la Ilour. TI.H' nUland
I
lat"r".in 1\IYriculturt'
wa" :-;11'11111~ ~rowllIl{.
construe t lon,
~
,..
.
F'r('(' ..... ('althy
Illl
longN
{Ilrn'd
to tilK!' part
III
prod
proc"<l<;n ... turm'll \0 1101iItf~, 11'<1111'1- ;lrt -L ~1t1I(',!:.

~. "~,
I st1.
I .
jd('olo~o-: alid 1M;" .u.Id-.!101 hut IIlWI'!' tht' pl',:. iC' 0 p ly~L
.
11(' t Ion
('iliz('n~
calla6our. n t (' oll\l.'r hand, lfl(' llHportatln' or ITltt'l1t'dlLal

qllalities wa~ constantly rising: ill ptl~l1lar 1'~lt'I'm Hn~1 kllow
Irog \\'a~ beginning to 1)lay an ('V(>f lIlCI'I'a"l ng roll' III soelill
e
production and social relations.

The third tendency con~iste'd in the chang\" of till' fl\;m,'s'
~ocia\ position, The slave had flta l't('d bringin g pl'ont
and was tlwre[ore turning into a material \alue' which wafl to
be used to advantage, As a result, the slav('s' liviu g condi
tions were somewhat improved, particularly in Attica. This
imprO\-ement, howe\'ef, did not ext('nd to all slave'S, si nce
those working in mines and quarries had to suffer far greater
hard:-hips than other categories, In Athens cruel treatment of
slaws was condemned and the murdN of a slave was pun ishable by law, 1t became current practice to [reI.' slaves for a
ransom, or make their emancipation conditional on the fulfil ment of certain onerous duties, All this brought about a cerlain change in the attitude olsocietv to the slaves who had be corbe the main source of their mast~rs' welfar(> and, which was
cvE'.n more important. raised their own self-appraisal. Historical sources are full of complaints aboul the slaves' "arrogance" which was the result of their increasing independe nce
from their masters.
The transition to developed slaven' led to important
chang~s in the life of society and, 'rll'sl and foremo st
em(lnclpated the in?ividual to a degr('e unthinkable' unde~
the early ~la\'e-.owIHng system. Thes(' changes wNe p3l'licu larly mamfes.t III colonlCs. Col,?nisation was ca l'ried out b
til<'
elements
of Greek polises
olt"d t )Iy t IlOseY
.1 most active
d"
r.'
'
,
.... 10 were
Issatlsllcd With th(> consel'vativ"
I .
h
t
I
G
k
I
.,
.
"
one-r
III
t e
11 (' ropo y, .. rfle
co ony-cltles IJarticularly tl . . A
Mmor (E p hesus, II'f1I etus, Ciazolll('na(',
'
ColophonlOS(-'d In h Sla)
w{>fe notable for the rapid developmellt of va riOI s ~n d~ t e~s
spafarlllg and trade which, in turn, stimulateJ' ' Il~n l~ra. ls,
anrl metalluq;~y .. As regard), til(' coloni('s'
lq)IHII~dll1g
and in Italy, thE' main branch of the-ir ' . In .reece Itself
I COllollly was agricu 1_
"
it ,pl'<lfiuft' l)I'ill~ 11111'111111\ fflr I'.ll'ort. Tbl' rif.vfliclJlflll-'ut

of h;IIHiln'afl!l illll\ 11";1111' f'ldlllll{ fIJI' J,t'ff,IIIr ~r)f'('iilli!lill i(Jn
alld lliVl .. ioll of lalli/III' f'llIIlrillllled to Lhp I~tilbli~hrnf'nt of
eln~"f rplalioll!l wilh III'iJ,t'hllflllring pl'IIJlll's. (xpandpd Ihl'
alll'il'lIl (;""f,k ::;' 1{t'IIJ,t'raJlllil' alld "llf'ia\ hl,ril.On, and IQI,",enf'd
thf> sl.1 "h'rI'ol.Y " ..~ o( (,.,\tUff', lH'ha\'irlllr, !\fwial rplatinn'i
ilnd IlIill1-.illl{. Tilt' IIIII-.Iillliioll" f,f flf'W l'fJ\lJIlij's no 11)lIJ,t'f'r
fullowl'd II", old plltll'rn Ir;!flilillll gOlvP way til ('{JII'i('if)ll!l
apl'ro.If'h. Old !' 1'lll1lanl . Yicrl' r"1'Jaf .. d by npw flflf>~ in the
prorf''-l~ of '11l arp sTrII J,t'1o('1( t'alJ!'iinJ,t' (")fIfljfT"i ill aIr spflf' rf'!I flf
sor ial li(I'.
All Ihl's(' II'UI1!iforUltitiol1 ' fl/'illt II dNlth blo ..... tf) lhp alrf>ady
ouldall'd il!.!!,s ioll s of thl' "Illi Lural!If'!lS" o( tradili(mal <;ociely
ha~.wjt on tht' gPllliTI' nrg,wisaliol1, (jff'pk !Civilisation ..... as til>
!-It'ociur! of g la l'ing rontrtldi rtio ll s. It "has accomplished
thi ngs with which th l' old gl'l1tilf' soc iety was totally
unable' to COpf'. But it <Icromplisitf'ri them by playin~ on thE>
~ [}lost so rdid ins lincl<.; and pi:li'-siotls of man, and by d(',,('lopIng tlil'm at the (;'xpellse oT air liT,; other iacultLe"S. :"I:a"Keil
grecd hilS been the moving spirit of civilisation from the
first day of its existence to the present time: wealth, more
wealth and wealth again: wealth, not of society, but of1 this
,..8lahby i!ldjvjduIII _~JIS it5_ solf. and d_etermining aim: The
development of Greek ci\'ilisation was bound to be promptly renect('d in socia l co nsciou"ness. representing the view ...
of different stra ta of Greek "ociet)', Ancient literature abounds in renect ions on changing times and morals. on calamities and vicissi tud es of fate, w('alth and PO\"etty, domination a nd "lave l'Y, war and political e\"Cnts.
Economic. political. social and legal changes 'call for
ideolog ica lin le rpreta lion - j usti fication or criticism, 11.'gilimisation or condemnation. The struggle of these opposite
tendencies representing the interests of different social
sll'ata and classes constitutes the background of the developme nt of phi losop hy as rational comprehension of the new
world, dynamic and internally contrad i c~ory, H~nce th: n?nun iform ity and contradictoriness of phIlosophIcal thlrlklOg
ilsetr. The ambivalence of philosophy symbolised by the
images of "weeping" Hera clitus and "laughing" Democritus
tlln',
Fr{'dl'rick En g('ls. "Thl' ()ri~in of thl' F~mily, Pr; \atE' ~ropt'rty

~nd 11ll' Stall'''. in "arl Mar_t lind Fr{'lil'rirk EnRI"~. Sl'Iectt'd U orks In
thn'''' \\)luIIlI's. ' ul. 3. pp. 332-333.
I
r('prE'~E'nL" the scienti",t'", primary d('",i rr "tn Ill'a~ both si ~l p",

e\Ohe a comprehen~iye logIcal theory ilnd proVIde a rat IOnal
,,"b!'tantiation for a d('llnite ",land in matH'r", both ('arlh l\"
andSorial
1H',n'enlv,
de'Yelopm('nl ,provi<!e:-i th(' nl.'cl's"'.HY rondit lOn",
for the emergence of a new. rational ideology in general and
philo~ophy in partic ular, ~clting the task of the legiti mation of "ocial relation~, their malerialisation a nd con so li datiull in the shap(' of various sorial and statl' in 5titlltions.
\'J\iik" early s\,:\\'('-owning society which sa n clifH~d such in sti
lution!'. mainly by traring thl' g('nealogy of aristocrati c
"noble" families dirrrlly to ~ods and hNO('S, the (\eve\oPl'd
!,)'",tf'1l1 of slaVl'ry legitimised tll('l11 id('ologi call y: rm,t, by
ol1l'/{ing their "naturill" origin , thell by dedu r ing them f['om
" lilY;" and "custom".
Th(' !'uhstancr of 1'T11l'rging l)hilo~OI)hy was largely detNllIlIl('d by the 1'1(isting thought matPrial. This prehistor ir
substanc(' was not ollly assimilllU'd and presrrved , but also
1ot;]V('1I 0 II('W , fliftrrl'nt ill$'qlrl't<ltioll,
:1. 1'r('philO6Ophic ~'orntf> of Con~dOll~n\"!\ll /Iud
I'hilu"oph )
. B;~tori('al ~("il'II('I' llIa;llta;lI~ that mythology was tia' orig

]11,\1 for Ill, of. ~o(,al ~'f)]]S('lf".I!'IH'~~' thl' iell'olng y of gentile
11111\ I'llrl~ slaVl' OWlllllg so('wly. rill' birth of ~cil'n("l' and
phdo!'ophy undl' r~tl)()fl as ;1 "';111(11', 1Il1l.'grai form of the theo~:;~'I("a~t)l~~llrf'ht'n!'if)1I of till' w()~~'1 h uSllally t',\pr(>sst'd by till'
it i~H t~' _ ~roll\ Ill~th 10 1..41~HS . ] IHlllort;'1I1t ,IIHI "oluable a~
r '1' us orll\u\a, hnwl'vl'I', SIl~~,'sts <I r (' rlain " lill('arit ."
::r :,wII.'rltiS!' HilliN rlJlls;,h'ralioll ('O IlI,(, .. Hllg tlH' dwler'?c)
"Ir ~ $ 11 OSO\1l!u'aTtl'i\"l'loplHf'nt.1n olh.'r words ': , I ' '
]]1
\ H' !'hn(\,. th,
, "I ,
."
] l'a\I'I:Of I
I
(Ill r,11 II lor\' 1.'Ht!t'[U'II'S
tlH' "'1
", I II' nJlllll~it('s" In tht, ('(JIlli)rt'\H'II~ion 'o'r
,~ ~Ilg:~ ('
Ih()H~htlH'(,()II~(' illU"'Il""!
, I l\\I' -()WII' tht Unl\PI
SI'.
. .~, () !llllllrt'S
.
1111 I ('I,d \I",,'Iop;II" frum , "I ' I '
_ ]111(
SOI']('ty
wa
"
'1\ I ()
,ogos ]1'
t
I
' s
11]11
n t It'Or(' I] ('HI
I k IlIg ( n'lI~(lIl) , Wt' prop,;... " 11 tlillt'r"II'
('f'''')\, AI'I'ordin~ to this rorm,,\ " "
, ' ',0111111101 fOl' till" Pi"lT
"
J
II
(),~IJP' Y '0'"
' I
IIlIII
r('so , ulHlII (Jllh l' rllIl/"d I '
f',~
!lito l('ill
h
I
I
I
Ir IIlII }t'IWI'f'1I I
I'
"
i.'
Ihl'
lI1ilill/I'III,'''''''' nOli'
'"
'('(I 1(1' "111/IIII I Oil till' OT/. ,'
I flll(.IHlI
"
.
1/, Io:rllllilf/r ~'rlllll'l,'cll!l' 1/1 iI.~ lirst 11 ./
I I! Ilrf' 1/11(/ .~(JCI I
hl/l/ll.
.
I ,~ Orlrl! form. till 111 1' 0/11 ".
,,'
'0
I.luring tl~(' illrl'ption of phi,losophy and in ib early pt'fiO(I,

sOl'ral fon~(,]Oll~n(>.... ~ Wl.l~ floullnal('c\ by myth. Bein~ th(' produd of tht' prnll]tIH' ('OllllllUIIJI organi!'ation with it!'i sponta
Ill'OUS, \lncon~ri{)\ls r()II('rti\'i~m, Itlylh ('x tended the "natl!
ra!"' rf' latiolls of lhl' gt'nlilt' community and tended to treat
~oci('ty as 1.1 spt'cifH' rOlls<lng'uilll' family of fanta~tic rreature!',
(,H('h ha\'in~ dt'ftnitt' ('osmic, sorial and productiv(' functions to )
perform, Reality liS n'pres('nt('d in myth is taken by man for
gran ted. without any critici!'ll1. no matter how improbable
it may be, ~hlh is. for h~m, .the real \~QrJdl perhaps eV il mor('
real than- t.h e physical ['('ality h(> deal!; wi th in everyday lif('.
Y('t at th(' sam(' time it is an a.1iellatN worloes trangecTmm
!'eality. It is sim ultall ('ou::;ly something tangible, sensually
given. -and magic, miraculous, fantastic. It is both individually co nc['('te and ab!'trllrt, s('[]sl1ol1sly' authen ti c: reaT and
traoscendental. The main function of myll1 ;S to l'(>gu lalf.'
,social lift'; it is lif(' it~w1f, with all its social, producth;(', Ideological anTeven pllys;olog;ral aspects.' Til other words, mythology i:-; a form of practical -sp il'i t ll al assimilation of the world
wh ich "s uhdu ('s, con li'o l!' and fashions the force.!'. of nature
ill thf.' irntlginntion a lHI through imagination: it di.!'.appear~ ther('fon' wlll'1I real rO llt l'ol ove l' these forces is rstabl isll('d,"'2
Evell now, in thl' ('poeh of br('ath-laking arhie\,ellwots of
sdellrt' ;.1 lid tt'rilIIoiogy, we ('H IlIl Ot !'peak of mall's \'('al contro l
OVN th(' (,ll'lllt'II ts. It is not surprising. t herefo re , that mytholo,,:t:), nev('r ('(}]lIplt' tely Inst its g rip on the ollcienl mind in
point of fntt. it t'o lllinlll'!' to ('xist in our day~, though in
diftl' n'nt forllls, It dl'\'('loJl~, rhHnge~ and passes into otll('r
forl11~ of so(' i<ll ('() .. sc i olls n e~s. This proc('ss whir h was
pnrti('ularly [lUHlifl'St ill Ancient Gr('ere sturtNI from
('pos 11(']'oir in lI onH' I'. d id actic in lIesiod's Work and
[)ay s nnd 1'11(,01(0111/, lind III~o in frngnwnts of other outhors
dNt1il1~ with tla' gerll'lli ogy of thl' gods, Th e ge/I('ral traits of
Gr('t'k mythology ar(' we ll known. Th e univl'rs('. i,e, thl' earth,
th (' h(,I1,,'('n and t\tt, St'lI, i ~ {'o utrolled by the Ol ynt pilln gods
lI'Hif'r tilt' dirf,{'tovI'['sight of Z('lI!'. Il is the third gl'll('ralion of
~ods dt'~('('nding, u('('ordillg to 1\0"1('1', from (kl'!1TI0!' lllld his
",i ft' Tethys or, !I('eording to lI ('s iod , from Choos. OCt'llIt is tin>
i~ nnly Ihil< ('''11111\(' ''' fu sinn (If <liITt'rl'u\ asp,,(',-, ,lIut l'nUlI'",wnl~ (If
1II\- lh,,11J~i('al (""n~I' i"n ~ III'~~ Ihnl ll('('''tlnt~ fur .h(' ''' -<"1111<'<1 ma~l(, .nn"" II\'('
n( \'''n''u ~ rill"ll "" prIlHIl;\-" ",,,n. " _~_ for tlw klhlll I'R,'{'I <If ~"nw tah.,,\~
I It
tI"~"rilH'tI in "nntl'r"n~ I,thll\,~raphi\' work,,_
, Karl \llIn ,. 1 (" UI, ln hul /url /0 /llf ('n/I </I//' of P" /It i l'a/ f:('(JII""'Y' 1'- :! tli
:.!\
N!ionified cause, "father or the god s.' ( hilos is thf' nonpt'f

~onilied cause; it is a yawning aby ~", hf'lwf'ell heav ('n and
(>arth. Unlike Homer who does not g ive a n ordl'rly pic-tun>

of the lheogonic process, Hesiod presents i t in a systematic
form. The first to emerge was Chaos , then ca m e (but not from
Chaos) Gaia (Earth), dreary Tarlaros (th e underground
kingdom) and Eros (Love), "the rairE'st of th e gods. " AftE'f
that Gaia and her. son and simultaneously hu s ban d Uranus
(Heaven) begot the Titans with Cronus at the head . Having
overthrown Uranus, Cronus and his wife Rh eia begot the

Olympian gods. Zeus, onc of them, overthrew Cronu s and
became their ch ier. Alongside the anthropomorphi c gods. th e
theogonic process produces monsters- -thc hundred-handed
lIecatonhaires, Typhoes and Echidna, Gorgons, Sil'e ns, Scylla
and Charybdis, etc., as well as various deiti es d irecll y
embodying certain biological and social fun ction s. S uch are,
for instance, Thanatos (natural death), Moros (v iol e nt
death), Hypnos (sleep), goddesses of fate Ker and Moira i,
goddess of vengeance N emesis personifying retributive justice
and others. Liaisons between gods and goddesses on t he on ~
hand and tht' mortals on the other produced the heroes.
In th,' Works and Days, lIesiod d('scribcs human society
~!I passlIlg through four epochs: golden, silver copper and
Iron. The first generation of peoplE.' living in ~ach e po~ h is
~rfa,tt'd by god (Cronus in the golden epoch, Zeu s in the
.)t lH!I): hwherle,as the last g(,Ilt'ration is "cover('d with ear th "
I.e. ,1NI!I es he caus('s of th(' I ,
"
'
li\"('o in lhe' gold
I
(es I'lichon of the peopl e who
en epoc l art' not kno
TI
1
came to an end becaus('
I
'
wn.. le SI ver e poc h
did tht'y "!lacrific(' on th~e~p t' dll~ tOl worship the god s. nor
wlwre{ls lht' people of tI~arr('( a la l's of the blC'ssed on es,"
inh'sline war. As I'egards lh~ ~~~.pel' .E.'poch perished in th e
of anXi{lty and di!:\cord C'IlV I U;('llIt.lroll t'poch, it is the tim e
1'1
I,
..'
Y 1I1l{ vlOiellcC'
It'. CltiractNlstlc fC'utul"C's of thi
....
prt'rl'(hng the C'mC'l'gl'llC{' of 1\ .' .S I;lythol ogy lIumediate ly
a~ f~)II()ws.
I \I Osop Iy ran bl' Slimmed up
fIrst, It is an ordl'riy l'f'IllUIHir s S
..
frnml' work for the UCCUIli I ,- . y. tl'm prondlllg a specific
.
[[ a Ion lind stu
f
(':qWrt('Il(:e in til{' -"Illwr(' of pro(]urtioll I ' I ~ag.c 0. practical
us for rau sal t'xplanatiolls of 'Ill nutur 1\'II'd sorl.al ltfE', as WE'll
<
,
1111 SOCial phenomena
Tlt t' Iliad 0/ J/nffl U' r r llll~lat l'd by \\ III
('
M,!TIIII .rl(l (~IUl"any , B(I~t(lli . IH7n. \"01. 1l ,la~n 'oi~~'~~:~)~rr~.nt, ltoUlrhton .
'l'l
' Pp. 24:2-21,3_
att ri buted to thC' activity of fantastic omnipotent creatu rE'S.

Rely ing on their assistance which can be secured by the
correspondi ng rituals, invocations and prayers, man hopes to
achiE'\'{' h is aims in all his undertakings. For instance, the
=-u cc(,ss in a military expl'dition depends on the help from
Ares, in fa rmi ng---from Demeter, etc.
Second, th is mythology is presented in the epic form and
if:, a litera ry production, a work of art. Hence the figurativeness
wh ic h ca uses the reader - and not. on ly the contempo rary
on e-- to id E' nt ify . fo r instance. young radiant "pink-finge red " goddess Eos with morning da"'.'n. Significantly, the
rel a tion s bet wee n the godf:, a re treated Ln mythology so much
like t he most ordi na ry. even trivial relations betwee n th e
mortals t hat t hE' ancients sometimes fe lt it necessa ry to sublim ate t hei r myths, i.C'. to give a spec ial refi ned interpr~ta l.i on
of cE' rt a in scenes th at a rC' incompatible with the gods dlgmty.
S uffi ce :t to reca ll. fo r instance, the pages in the Odyssey devoted to poet De modokos's story and the subsequent scandal
on Olympus:
. .
" ... De modokos stru ck the lyre and began slllging well
the s ton a bout the love of Ares and sweet garlanded Ap.hrodit e, h o~\" t hey flfst lay together in the house o! Hephalstos
~ecre ll y, ht' gave he r much and fo ul ed the marriage and ~ed
of th e lord lI e ph aistos; to him there came as messenger..~ehos,
th e sun , who had seen them lying in love together.
h t
Th ird th e formal orderliness of later mythology t. a
es,h
reached 'a"
hIgh deg ree 0 r pN rcc ,"IOn I"n cpos and
. theogolll
'
tes ti fle~ to tht' fact t ha t the days of the pr lUlOrdla l nr, y,
. .It!'; unlvcrsal
.
.. determi.,
WIth
nIsm .. (a Ilything may
. come. romr
0
anything) wel'e ov('r. WL"I
t l t I1e "Illcr eas ing cegllnentatlOJl
d 'r
,
"
,
I '"on of the go 15 un c
the Olympus and eve r strIcte r legu a I
.
r "I"
"Ion s and mutual I'e latl"o ns t hc spon
" 'leouS
pi
uraltsm
0 ea l y
al
..'
I
r
"
I t"l 'e ly mOIl1SllC Illera rc Iy 0
mytholog y gIv es way to a I'C a. \
.h
is former ly
divinities. Pallas At hena, for Instance, \\ 0 W.k I ' ,
th odde"" of \\ar, t H ar s,
ass ig ned a ny functi ons, becom('s e g
--. cd patriarc hal
s
ll
"
d
"
r
',nd
we
orga
llI
t Ile 111 us trJes 0 peace < . rpen t both now
community. She is no longer an o~vl or la lS('er a m'N(' thun dbecoming he r attri bu tes. Z('~IS, too, IS d~o o~f th; Ilt'roic I('gal
t'fbolt with li g ht nin g. H(' IS H.glla~i~an being his :-:ymbol.-;.
order, the thu nde rbolt and light ~ I pcrtainin~ to prodEpic poem s co ntain a wealth of Illatena
_ Richm,lnd IA1\till
I Th(" OdysSf"y 0/ HOffl("r_ Tr!lll~latt'(1 b\ (lfl;

Row. '\ {'w York. EVII Il!lt(lll. !lnd LOfllhlll. I. . p.
I~."i
tIro',
Iflirp.r ~
23
'ar Irad!:' pirae\' and ever increasin g knowledg(> of

urtlon. \ \ .
,.
h'
d'
physiology, medicine, geography. ,Istory an ot ler di.sc i
plines. Homer's poems. for O~lI~. m~ntlOn only once the m a~ic
formulae used to stop bl('edmg 111 a ll other cages they glVI'
quite rational recommendations for wound tr~atmf'nt. T hl?
description of Troias' topograp,hy, by Hom.er which called for
considerable skill enabled Jielnrlch Schllemann to find the
place where the city had been s ituated. The plou gh ma k ing
technology described in the Works and Days could have been
found quite up to date eveil in the nineteenth century A. D.
Examples of this kind can be continued.

One cannot help noting, however, that the empiri cal
material, technological processes and produ ction techniqu (>s
described in Hesiod's poem seem to be in perfect agreement
with magic practices and prayers; their natural. matterof-fact merger 1 creates the impression of a very unstabl e
e~llIilibrium ,which is bound to collapse, Indeed , th e eighthSixth centurtes B,C. witness the protess of myth disintegration
as at~estPd to, by numerous literary sources. The auth ors
of w,rluen fletl,on that originated in that period treat mytholog~cal mat(,rlal a<; plots unfolding them with the help of
-. speCial mpIJ1~~I:- -all('gory, m'laphor....lypisalion. The broad
U"('
. . . presenlillg a myth as
. of alit"
, ,gory, lor Illstanc(', perlll1ts
~ n~ura~I\(, story, the t'v('nts (h'sc ribed being symbolic an d
la\"lll~. III fact, a dift(-'r('nl meaning. Allegory was born as a
~ecultat; lU('thod of I~tt'rary crilicism aimed at defendin g on e
. r ~no IN pOel ag!llllst \'arious char
T d"
.
Its Inv'ntion to TIH'a~('IH'S of Hh ' ges('l ra ILIOn . aSCribes
tury B.C.). S('(' king tr, Justify lie (>glllm t Ie early Sixth cenlanguage in relation t~ g(~ds )lne{ ~cc used of using obscene
, all( 1('roes. Theagenes pre-
SPlits HOlliN' s gods as the embodiment of opposite elenH'nts

or m(' ntal q\laliti('~. I n hi~ opinion. by Apollo, Hellos <lnd
H('ph <u.,stlll) Homer meant fire. by PosE'idon and Scamadf'r
water, by Art(,lllis-th(' moon. by Hera-air, rte. Similarly, h('
sOIll('tillles gav(' th(' names of gods to lIH'ntal qualitiestht' nam e of Athelia to r('ason, of Ar('s to recklessness, of
.-\phrodilt1 to passion, of Hermes to ~p('e~h (D~ 8, A 2)
What was with Theagenes a method of iIlvesllgatlOll and
defence of Homer's works turns in historical and philosophical
literature into the rationali~tic interpretation of myths a!'l
storie!:i of real historical events (ror instance, the mythical
king Geryon, whose cows were allegedly stolen by ~crac~'s.
was re ga rd ed by later commentators as t~e Ambraloan kmg
who had been conquered by Heracles With th' help of the
Aegean army), Thi s process of myth "rationalisa~!2.n~'..!..e....llli
nated in e llh emerism-the theory held by Euhemcrll s (the
fourth-century B.C.) according to which the gods of myth?logy were but dei fi ed politi ca} I.eaders and the mythological
s tories were distorted deSCriptions of real events that had
occurr('d in th('ir Iifetime.
Though thi s interpretation str.ip,Ped the myth~ ~[ all t1~e,lr
poeti c charm and replaced the orlgillal verve by q~lte pro:-;alc
and largely arbitrary stor ies, th_~.new tn~ nd t'stlfu!.d. 10 1h('
break-u.p 01 t.h.c old. world.Q1!tloo~ ~_ndhelped clear th!. way for
a new s)'stem o( ,,;C\'iS.
Sy mbolic interpreta tion of myth opened uy yet i.\liOthe~
path to phil oso phy. Symbo l is more than a !:\lmple all('gor~
that s ubstitutes an abstract notion for a mythological nil~le or
ev(>nt, e.g. reckl ess ness for Ares, and far morE' than .ratl~nil
li satio n wh('reby a myth is reduced to tlH' so-callt'd re.li t'\~nt.
rer '
of imag' and mE'ili'!,lng,
a
' I rellgiollit-crellote~
1I1gs pI'
ana represents {'xtralimilill. "tr<lll."('ellIlIN~er
de nt" ['eality . In Anci ent Greece where the complrte
'r
of II l'W
of mytho
was only
.
. logy and . religion
.
. . eharocterls
d locnl Iemyst('('lcs,
esote n c c ults, reilglOll s com mu mtles an
. I ' 111 ftN
an important role belonged to a trend callt'd orp IIS1 , "
"
0 I ..; Thi..; tn'll< l atlllg'
the legendary poet and mUSICIan rp \ell..
',"
'1 ".,
(' hut
I
to
Sixth
C('lltIlIH-'S
pr(>sumably from t ,Ie seven I 'a'
1
'L.,
,
",'mhnlir
nolau
l' or )rnm '.
'lor )hie tradition Z('u~
k nown from 1ut('(' sources, ." S
interpretation of m yth. For l~stan~E")I" (" I r,11I0S (time), Pan
"d
"d WIll
'1 " ' e (0)
1 , )
.
IS I entllle
z e , 1\ronoo,;\\1
'
.
I'
a
(I"
p"n, . llnd
f
('H'rvl
lin",
is undt'rstood a~ till" 5ylll h() I 0
.
25
DelUetN. as til(' "llIotlU'f of l'artll " (J.,re I1I1:ta I~f'ml'lf'r) Thi s
is not the alll'gorisali()l\ IlH'nlilllH'd ahon'. ZI'II~ IS no' a 1ll!'1,.

phorical nanH' for lifl', hut 1,ir~ i!:-it'lf. a.symhol of th~' lIll ity
of liying process and its dlvltlt' IJI'llI el pl l'" tlH' ,\)('gllllHII J,{,
the end and the mi(hll{' of all that l'XlstS. Olll' Z{'us old y,
one Helios. 01\(' Dioni~II!'. Olll' god in {,n'l'ything. 1I0w should
we call each onE.' separately?" a~k~ 1111 ol'phle (OF, fl'. 23Bb ).
, / This is no
a simp le claim to .
the divin {'
~
name,
.
log.ij:al
,
prasenSll OUS
world
,consequently, on tTH'
between the believel'
and the object of his faith , absolutely alien to mythology.
Various orphic theogonies and cosmogonies are mainl y
traceable to i1(>siod, but also include other elements that
may have originated in the Middle East. Here is oll e of th e
variants of such a theocosmogony known from Athellago l'as:'
The beginning of the Whole was Water; from Wate r came
Mud .. and from both came a Serpent, Heracles or Time (accordmg to another version of the same theogony, Water and
E~rth prpduced a Serpent having the heads of a bull and a lion
With the r~ce of a god in between: it had wings and was called
Ageless Time or Unch.allging Heracles), This Heracl es produced a huge Egg, which, overfilled with the strength of the
one who produced it, split into two because of friction Its
~~p(~a~~~) bs~amf Ouranos (Heaven), and the lower part,
Heaven uniledl:~i~hla;:~~s~~~e pr~duced a god without body .
male Giants and Cyclopes U pro I uced. the female Fates and
deprived of power by hi~ c~i~~re~arong that ~e would be
shackled the males and flung tl
'. uranos, I.e. Heaven,
lem mto
Earth in anger produced the T't
I
Tartarus, whereat
A ..I
lans
slm] ar, though somewhat d'ff
'
c.osmogon ic picture is presented b I p~rent 111 details, theoheved.. to be Pythagoras's teache~ lerecy.des of Sy ros beLaertilis (1.119), a book su rvivin 'f According to Diogenes
began with these words: "Zas ~Z~~:l Phcl'ecY?es of Syros
a.lways, and Chlhonie; but Chlho nie ) ~nd Time existed
sl~ce Zas gives earth to her as a ift o~cqll1red ,~re name Ge,
thiS fragment is a play on words' gge n honour
(the end of
"
lean s earth g
, eras means
Fra ' .4f!Cill~ to tile Pre SOcratlC PllllosOl}her~ A
Ha r~.lanf~n tt~. I n I)II'[~, ,Frag iliff! If dtr I'orSOk"a/jk~(),r"~[('tKe tra ns[ation or t h ('
2
nl\'(' fSlly )rl' ~Q Carnl . ,
\,
~'
athl{>(l F
Ibid., pp. 13. 1".
.,
Inl l{l' .. assachusetts. HH8.
recmall .
P.3.
26
gift). 1 '~xp(J'IIIr1il1l{ fllrtlil'f 1'~If'ff.('~df'S s tf'arhing. Dam,asC'llls

8,'Y!lll1at UlI'IJIII)'1 prod'lf't'd !lrf', Wind <Jncl watl'r rrum hi!' own
.o;(",d (air, bfl'atIJing). TII .. !'p distrit)lltf'rI hy Chrollos amollg
IiVI' [Jollk~ (myel/oi) ill till' bfJw .. l~ of the earth profiu('('(1 IIt'W
g4'rH'ratiol'~ o! gild ... Th".IJfJok ~Iso inclurJpd a story abo.llt tht'
murriagf' of ZI'IlS and Chtlloflw and told of war of Kronos
(Chronf)~) llllll his fl)f('ps against serpPllt Ophiollf'IlS and his
brood. Thf'ir struggJp was likened to thp war of thp gods
against tll(' litans and giants in Greek mythology, or of Ih'ra
against Seth, in Egyptian mythology
.
.
Both Pherf;'tytles and the orphics recognIsed the Hornortality of soul and believed in its wandering!'. in the next
wol'ld. Though we do not know if Pherecydes was cOIlIl('('ted
with any existing cult (this possibility cannot bp C'xcluded
as there did exist a temple of Zells, Kronos and Ge, Ph erE'cydes's principal trio). his narratin provide:,; a good example
of a religiolls concept with personified deitie:o; represen~ing the primary cause of all that exists. This concept IS
simultaneously a speCific prephilosophic doctrine attesting
to the process of transition to philo~ophy proper.
The eighth-fifth centuries B.C. notable for the tran~
form ations of my~h witnessed the ~mer ence of science as
relatively independent sphere ~r gnow ~ ge: t is commo~ y
-believed that scientific knowledge. primarily mathematlc!'.,
was borrowed bv the Greeks from the ~1iddle East. Yet mathemati cs in the ~I iddle East of that period was of a markedly uti
litarian character and took the form of practical rules of
thumb for various calculations. These rules were expounded
in a dogmatic manner without any sub~tantiat ion and ~er~'ed,
for in s tan ce. fOl' determining the quantity of corn or beer In a
vessel, the number of Uricks. the area of a crop field, the
ear niJl gs or the share to be inherited from a decei.l:~ed by each
me mber of his family. etc. Such rules were known JO Greece as ""logist.ics" and they indeed may han> been borrowed re~d .... )
mad e. Th e GI'eeks, however. were the first to turn them ~nto
an
tJ'act science that concentrated on, fl' ular relatl~n
slips he t wee n various ma lema Ica propOSitions and .p~o\",ded a theOl'etical basis for transition from one propo~ltlon to
anoth e r in the form of a system of pr.oofs. .
.
As regards the theoretical (speculative) SClellce o~ Ilt~tllre:
the ancients developed it within the framework ~r p.hilo~o~h.~
(the rm,t Greek philosophers wefl' ca lled "ph~isICS b or p .1)
s iologe;s"). This science was not based on t 1(' o. :-<t'ry,ltlon
of natural piH'1l0IlH>[Hl. though it dill rontaiu ('I'rlaill notiol\ !i

regarding natural rr(l\'ll .... ~('S and lilt' '~'(lrl\lll~~ of naturl"!'i
mechani:;ms, It should \w !lIlINI JIl tillS (,1I111H'Clion
that the current concept of ('uriy (;n,{,k Ihinkl.'rs philosoph y
("physics") a:; initial lIndivi(\t'cI !'cit'nlifi(' knowl~'dgt' call
hardly be considered tl'nabll', WI.' ha\"(, good reason to r('gard
the science of antiquity. limited and historicall y immatur('

though it was, as independent of philosophy inasmuch as it
took the shape of concrete know\('dge based on experience and
observation and enabled man to solve ('e l'lain lypical problems
of practical lire. This knowledge ('<Ill we ll be dist ingui shed
both from myth and from philosophy. as it no l onger invoked
preternatural forces for explanation of natural phenomena
and did not offer any non-empir ical J..('n~~al i salions of the
worhl!vlew character.
- . _.
.
Early scientific notions. ('veil when they are interspersed
~mong philo~ophica! world-view teachings are re lat.ive l y
Independent If they are based on structural descript.ions and
c_ausal explanalion~ that can be conflflned by direct. observatl?1l and supported by obvious analogies. and yet do not d eal
"':Ith th~ ultimate I~ature of the world. This is prec isely
\\ he~e "'~ ha~c l~e IlOe of d('marcation between science and
fanclfuilmagmatlOll or myth on the on(' hand. and philosophv
on
.'
tifie-th(' other. In conlra~t wilh
I 1
notions.
and
li\"e in this r(>spect ar('

I
r
.
and historical 5cienc(> 1'1 J~amp es. 0 anCient. medi c in e
th~ condition of m('di~in('l~n t;~:~~rt~lt~~OI~~~ounts r~necting
rCHal two approaches to heallh and ill .
centurl~S B. C.
be termed philo~ophical r""
can"
",.,ard's manne~s.
as aOne
" WlllCh
.
I
mIc rocosm
( sma II world) with interacting ('I
a disturbed balance betwe('n th ('menta forc(>s a nd invok es
The other approach, the sci(>ntiflc ~m a; a cause of illness.
direcll
ne, ema nd s that illnesses
ass('rtions of natural
or water. or ('arlh or
tI~at man is a ir , or fire ,
as self-e~'i~('nt (Hipp. De nat
('\. ~ that does. not appear
I
In ('xplallllng an illness and pre~
). It ma In tains that
:~'cerary to proce('ci from th(' h\'~'ic~; ~~~ a trea tment it is
lIr('of man revealed
t Ie body s componen .'1- 100
and black) . TI
' mucus
and
b
II!' rt' I'lanc(' on practical
c
.,
11('
(White
XPNI('nce, observation
28
of vi"-Ihir' sylilptOIJ1!! illld h~lId mpthod~ trt'atllH'llt (hl()mJ.

1~'lt;II ~, bill'-l'xp"llillj;{. de,) is a chararh'risti<: fl'atllrE'
of ali (,lIlpirif'11 phYRiriau di~tingllishing himfr()rn a natllral
philo~oplwr 111'1\("1' tlH' Pfl)llfi conviction of ttll' author of trpa
li~" 0" .Inri,"t . ~fpdjcinf' that this scienc(' p()~~r~ses f'YeryIhin g flf'f"l'~sary to Hf"hil'vr its aims: it has found both thf'
sourc'p .ulI!tlH' nll'thfJd. mad' many important dis('overie!i and
aS~llrt'(1 Sll('f"('~S for thus\' already !ikiJled in tllf' art who
ar' willing to apply thrRl!il'l\"eR to re~'arch (Hipp. De wt.
IIH'(I.
1 ),
\10 Il'ss indpprnr\f'nl in Ancient Crt'ece was historical
scienc'. I n the sixth-fourth centuries B.C. it wa!i mor' and

mor' tu rnin g into a rational investigation. The authors Wf'rl'
making inu('asing us' of sllch hi~torical docllm('nl~ as til('
li s ts of varioll~ officials. prie~ls and priestesses, wi nn e r."
of Olympian gallll's ancl other contests, records a nd verba l
stories of tr8\"t'ller~, merchants, participants in military
expC'ditions. EY'nt~ were recorded in a chronological order.
Hecala('us of Mi l etll~. Charon of Lampsacll~. Hrllanicus
of Mytilrne develop('d the genres of historical chroniclr~
and hbtorico-ethnograp hic de:';cription. The lAmpsacus Tables of Charon. Allhides (Chronicles of Attic Hi~tory). Lesbiaka, Persika and Scythica of Hellaniclls pa\"ed the way for
the Hi story of H('rod otus.
H C'rodotus (between 485-425 B.C.) was called the "rather
of history" t'H'il in anci('nt time:::. Using the form~ and
meth ods of hislOrical narration developed by hit; predeces~or~
h(' col\ecte(\ and rt'corded various historical data .. ~O that
the (>vent~ of th(' pa~t W(>f(' not buried in obli\"ion and that
the gr('at <lIHI a~toni:;I1ing tit'('(b of the Hellen('~ and th'
harbarians did not ['('main unknown. particularly why tlu'~'
waged wal's against '<l.ch olh(>f" (Herod. 1.1). Thl' hi~lor ia n'~
mi ss ion, according to Herodotus. was to record the tt~tinwny
of those wh o W('l"' impMtial in th('ir attitude to hi~torirl.l[
per:';o nag('s and ('vents (I. 95). To 1)(' sure, I iel"ociolu"
had many weakl1es~('s. For 011t', ht' took histol'1cul SOUI'cr~ for
j
granll'd and paid no attention ('ven to obvio us contradir .;
Li ons. striving at best to ]"('col1rile Ihe data they CO lltain t'<1
w il h common ... ('n~l'. Yet his writings already rested on a
sril'ntilic fOllnfi<ltiol1.
Thp prillrip<l1 f('atlln' of ancient hi:-\t))'iography was till'
etiologi ca l 'lpPf(m('\l. tht"
t'l1l It to
i\'t' a cau~al l'X liallil
lion to hi~t()ri{"al ('n'nts. Tht' etiologica
IIII('liol1 0 111~-
b " U ' Y"'t the t>\.planatinn it pr()vidf'~ is ba

tholoj.!\'' I~'nabl
0 \I,,~.
.
' as t Ill' CalisI.'
. . "incl'~ til(' InvocatIOn
of a (I(,Ity
"Ira II ~ un l'
'" "
. . .
.
of .'n'nt" in interE'''t is in fact a IJutlllo
\\ I
0
h' I the semantic framewor' 0 I H' m~th. B.I cont.rast ,
l"Ollt
T
"
'I
d I .1
sc;('nlifie explanation hreak" In' VICIOU'i ('tn' (' an
eau ~
10 rE'a\il~. to objective ohser\"i\h1{> phelloOl('na all(~. proc:!'se~:
UN' ('mpiriral certainty takf'~ the pla('~ of, the certainty
of nn"lh rooled in tradition. 1 he emancipatIOn of the Greek
mind' from the mytholngic<ll ('twr..; was facilitat~d owing to
the fact lh<lt (;1'('PCt' had no spt'l'ial cast of priests as til'
soria! rarriN of tradition. nor a syslf'lll of unifH:d dogmata.
For a Crerk of that period, ('ven a rpligiolls one, the object
,
nf faith had to b(' plausible h(' could TlO longer accept

ftlutastir mythologi('al storirs.
TIl!' spirit of l'ITIpiricism which dt',niy manifested it self in Inl'dicine and history alrt'ady in till' fifth century
H.c. but had IIndoubtl'd\y crept into Greek thought much earliN was inrompatible with th' elltir(' pattern of mythologi cal
thinking. It callE'd for real kuow\edge that accorded with
llvNyday exp(>fi('uCl', was npPIl to layman. lent itself to
\'~rilicaliOl~ and causal l'xpla.nation and had nothing to do
~Ith fanCiful hypothl'ses. 'tt't thl' fragm(,lltary scientific
know\l'dj.{l' of the. early Gr('~k thinkt'rs who sought to give
t'ollcrNe l'.xplanatlOlls to concr('ti' pht'1I0ml'na could not pro\Idl' a hasls for the world Vil'W. This function ('ould no lon ger
~t'. I~('rfnrmed by. myth either, ,h it had already lost its
s~a~ .o\('r pf'opl~ s Illlllds. Thp resuftilll! ideological vacuum
Ii as filled by philosophy which bridged the _up b t
II
I
d
I
.
,.,
e ween myof(y an ear Y sCience alld prol'ided (l dialectical
th
;IS of the general II'orld outlook with the ration I
etlOn 0/. obsert'obh' phenomena.
a exp ana 10
nf'~ld('s
SY7
myth or divinl' fl'wlation

d .
kno .... lt'd!(t' ~h('r(' exi~led )"l'! anotlH'r f~~lm sc-Ience. or human
"nmllr('h(,IlSIOn of social rt'"I'Itv r Ik . of the Intellectual
. 0
Wisdom I A '
"
"
, ,rl'I'CI'
It was rf'pr('s('nlt?d bv th~
I)'
. n nClent
ms
~a't!.'s'. Historical ~ources, l;ow('\.('ar~~('\t l.eg of the "Seven
nf which constant referenc!.'s art? n d n1lon seventeen names
uf :\-Wetus, Bias of Priene. 'Pitla~u! en~o ~nlY four: Thales
flx.ampl' of the most current apoPhth:
,olon. Here is an
f)wgpnes La('rtiu~:
gillS, as attested to by
\Inopralion is b('~1 Cleobu\Il!oi of L' d
ka ... hne"~s h
',
a~ I .... prrlls
Pf'riander 11\
'h l' USson 0/
Cypst'lus. born al Cormt
. h
.Know thine opportunity ... "\Vhat is agreeable?"

' Time" Pittacus of \1itylene ...
.uost men are bad Bias of Priene ...
To Thalrs (of Miletus) belongs the proverb "Know
thyself" ..
.,. Be led by reasoll ... ":\othing 100 much"
.Solon, born at SalamiS'
Thl' apophthegms ascribed by traditioll to "the Sevt?n"
provided a basis for num'rous tales, poems, proverbs and sayings. Rt?prt?srnting the wisdom of the masses. they bccamr, as
it were. part of Greeks' popular philosophy. Its viability,
common sel1s(' and til(' rationalistic interpretation of the
motives of human conduct are irresistibl e. What is more, it
was not "divin(''' wisdom comi ng from myth, but wisdom by
and for til<' people. Nevertheless, the moral maxims, political
precepts and the downlo-earth wisdom of the man of the
world did not become a compr(>hen~ive theoretical system with
the Greeks. The only exception was. evidently, Thales who
was not by chance ranked simultaneously among the "Seven
Sages" and the first philosophers: he is justly credited with
having enormously expanded the Greeks' intellectual horizon
by linking theiEJ!.r~Q!.ic~J wisd~m with cosmologica l proble~s.
t"rapp('ars that early pl1ilosophy represented a peculiar
combination of two very different elements: myth and science.
Gravitating on the whole towards the scientifiC explanation
of the world, it used myth in its interests as a source of
material for analysis and for subsequent reassessment of
reality, and also as a method of thinking san~tified b~< tra
dition. Appealing to scientific knowledge which not IIlfrequently he him self procured, the philos?p.her a~ the same
Lime denounced the one-sidedness of empIrical sCience lack ing the integrity of true wisdom and turned to myth in ord.er
to fill the gaps in his knowledge a?d fo~m a complet' Pi C'
ture of the universe. However, thiS alliance of myth and
science could only be but a temporary solution, as lllyt~ in
fact referred the unknown, which was subject to explanali?O,
to what was the unknowable in principle, namely to a d~'ty
or deities, thereby imposing upon man a system of notl.oos
entirely alien to reality. The prog~ess of co.ncrete sCI{'n
tific knowledge deriving from practical experience of mall
I'
Cllld Opinions 0/ Emilll'lIl Phl/I).f(lpht'rs,
Di()g('nC"~ Lal',",Hl ', ,',lI't,s...ondOIi Willialll Bl'inl'lllllnu \.Ill .. liAr-art!
Thl' \...o('b
(I~"'I('(I
.1 b ra .
'.
t
Univl'r~ily Prl'~~ \1C\tXX\VIII. CalnbndJ(t. ~ a:;s.
I
'"
and then,ron' rapahh'. in lum , of providill.K guiilanc'p til

his practical Heti\'ily Wil~ n~ort' and mnn' cal!IJ.'g' III. qlll'Stioll
the mythological world VIt'W !\nd undl'flllllllllg It s lI!lil y.

Under the condilion~ wl1('11 1I1ytholoJ9"had aln!uly. nutli vl'c!
itself and science was I~()t )'l'l In a p(l~LlI(Hl to t.ah Its pl;w l>.
philosophy servl:'d as a 1.1Il k bet Wl'l'tl. t IH' II neon s(' lOllS ,t(,llIle' l\cy
towards a compre h('lISI\'(' world vU'W nnd till' ral~_o_lI~isti c
approach to realit. based on cau~!!. _e:-OT...!!nall?ll. 0 servation
ideo'-a ana ogy. n lCf wor ,':5, p 1I1os~p lY prov
"logical ioumlation for socml consclousnc~s and gave the
individual a general orientation rooted In the scientific
rather than mvthological attitude to the world .
Philosophy came into existence as a combination of "wi s~
dom" and knowledge. Tradition presented its birth as follows:
"The first. to use the tel'm [philosophyJ , and to ca ll himseJr
\ / a philosopher or lover of wisdom, was Pythagoras; for,
.A said he, no man is wise, but God alone ... All too quickl y
the study was called wisdom and its professor a sage,
to denote his attainment of m~ntal perfection ; while the
student who took it up was a philosopher or lover of
wisdom: 1
The synthetic characte r of philosophy which was essen ~
tia.lly different fro.m myth and science, from the average Greek s
nottons and religion , called for a radi ca l transformation of
which could not but tell on the language
of
was form ed by
too. ~he specific
different. methods.
of conventional
it
means
that.
a word used
in everyday la nguage was pI ".e<
ff
t I . I
.
a
dI eren eXlea environment and a diff
..... . .
parted to it.. Viewed hil
.
er~nt meaning was Imin that a philosophi ~ o~oirICaIlY, thiS process consisted
of a conve ntional w~~~g e etc expl?red the possibilities
and used it by way of e~pre~ea Cd. all Its semant.ic richness
,
enmentlOg on the I
press different shades of philo
h'.
anguage, to exso~hy assimilated, transformeS~~n~al thougl~t.. Secoo.d, phil oI gave a dlrterend loterp relatlOn to the language of
myt 1 relig
d
to t h e very names of the gods We
Ion an fltes, even
names of the gods were conve~t d . shall later see how the
bois of element!"; and how the a~lallll~O allegories and sym YSIS of the semantics of
Diog-po(>:'. l...al'rliu s. op. cit.. \o!. I, p. 1:J.
tilt'S!' IHIIIIPS IlIfII~ into a philosophical investigation of

tlU' j,IPIIH'llt!-l tht'rTI!;l'lves. At this point it will hI' slIfflCi('ut to not(' lhut the sf'm'Hllic richness and diversity of lhl'
(I11elt'llt (.~r.('~'k langlJ~~jl was highly io.s~rum('ntal in achit'ving
til(' nt'XIIJllity, mobility and versatility of anrient dialtc
tical thought.
This {f'fmt'ot of the language element. rpnccting tht'
progress of philo!-lophy.and simultaneo~sly eXf'rcisinj,t a retro
active innu ence upon Lt calls for special invcstigation which \
is beyond the scope of this work. One should be aware
of t.he fa ct, however, that the linguistic changes led to
considerable instability and ambiguity of terms in eady
Greek philosophy and, accordingly. to serious difficulties
in the translation and interpretation of philosophical texts
of that period. [t is not to be wondered, for one, at th'
hypoth etic nature, g~nerally. objectio~ab!e in ~ textboo~,
of many of the ancient phllosophers views discussed iO
this work. These difficulties also account for the need to
cite occasionally the original terms used by one or another
thinker in the fragments referred to.
I'll'st from I yd a, .mll tll,'n f 0111 PI'r III

whirh ('ollljlll ' rl'd LYllta ill ;,,,fj B.C. The sllh~I'qlleJlt (,OlllpH'St
of Ionian I'itil'~ hy Pf'rSiH underm ned to a rOJl!"idl'rabh
l'xt('lIlthf'ir C'OITlIII('rCt' ilnel IUHlclierahs, 511(,(' m(>(iiatory tractp
was almost ('ornpll'tely monopolised by the Ph()('ni('i<-llis who
enjoYl'd I'l'rsia's I}atronage, and thr- (;ff,(ks' own trailp
with Egypt and their economic links with citit's on thl'
Black Sl'il coast wprc' wl'akpned. Thl' popular uprising against
Persia which brok<' out in 499 ended in failure ah'r a
few years of bitter struggle: the insurgents wpre ch'fl'att,d
by Persia's superior forces. In 494 B.C. \Iil('tlls rell and
was destroyed, its inhabitants
Jartl
kill(~'d~
2,artly flvcn In ~ savery,. Y the summer of4.J
,C, the
Persians had-seized the last insurgent cities, Ionia's
prosperity came to an_ "end -and, though the country was
later liberated as a result of the Greco-Persian wars
(500-449 B,C.), it coul(tnot. recover its pl:eyjoHs position
and never again played an important political or cultural
role in the Greek world.
It was the turbulent sixth century that marked the
rise of Ionic philosophy. The Ionian thinkers went down '"
history under the name of physici or physio[ogi, i.e. people who wrote "of nature" (peri physeos). According to
Aristotle, "of the first philosophers, then, most thought
the principles which were of the nature of matter were the
only principles of all things. That of which all things
that are consist, the first from which they come to be,
the last into which they are resolved (the substance remain
ing, but changing in its modifications) this they say ig the
e lem ent and this the principle of things, and therefor(>
they th ink not hing is ei ther generated or dest.royed .. ," I ,
or course, it would be rash to infer from this that these
early philosophers professed mat~rialism: fi~sl, in chara~
terising theil' views Aristotle uses hIS own termlllology and hIS
concept of matter has a peculiar "Aristotelian" meaning;
second, the views of Aristotle's predecessors from Thales
to Anaxagoras and Empedocles \\"(>re not ide~ltici.\1 and undl'rwenl essential transformations from one thlllkl'r to allother
Yet in the main Aristotle was right: the "principle" of all
things with the early philosophers was, not a deity, nor wa~
a deity derived [rom it. MOl'eover, their approach wa~ fun
ThiS tlll'PHI
Chapter 2
Ionic Philosophy
fl,
General
By Ionic philosophy is meant a grollp of specific phi

losophlcalteachmgs that came into being in Ionia, a regi on
on the West Coast of Asia Minor inhabited by Gree!:
tribes. In the seventh-sixth centuries B.C. Ionia was th e
richest and most advanced region of the Greek world in terms
of ~u\tur~ and socia-economic relations. Mild climate and
fertIle. sOIl created excellent conditions for th e develop ment
of agriculture, whereas the geographic position of the country
~~uated on the great land and sea routes stimulated
an~i~~~\\~\~il~f aC?mmerce and handictafts. 'The proximity to
factor in th! tlOn~ o~ the Near East, too, was an important
Greek pOPulati~aPl4h IOtellectual advancement of talented
proved highly con'd e general cultural atmosphere in Ionia
epos, lyrical p:et~~IV(io t~.~ development of not only heroic
Hipponax, Anacreon) a rc lochus, Mimnermu s, Calli nus,
also of philosophy. Th~d I~~e prose of "lo~ographs," but
their activity to 10nl. I
IX
an thmkers did not confine
t rave II'Ing over Greec a one:
h
I I eno panes
of Colophon was
Sam os founded his sc~o Ita y and Sicily; Pythagoras of
Archela~s of Miletus and ~n at Croton, in Magna Graeci a;
~~~~~s In Athens", Howeve~xa~horar of, Clazomenae becam e
M'lllonall y associated with' tie on Ian school pl'oper is
orlgtus -Tha\es, Anaximander a~e thre~ philosoph ers of
of :h(>sus, and the late lonians ~,Anaxlmenes, Hel'a clitus
loln~:r~h~f:soD~ogencs of Apolio~r:.onax of Hegia, ld aeus
period or th . p y ~as born in a d'ffi
l
tions and ac~t~outtry s history, Torn b I~ult and troubled
with its constan~ rt~~~le between aristo~r~~terllal contradicwas simultaneously e:~cy towards tyrannY alnd ,democracy
reatened w'th
y, onlan society
I
rOr
'
,Invasion,
(,Ign
r.;HI1P
I T}/(' fit/sic \rorks o/..1ristotle,
New York. HH1. I'P- 693-69!+"
Ed, by Rirhilrd \k
1\.1'\)11.
H,\lUj,11ll 1I0\l:--',
,'j:)
damenlally different frolll till' myth~log i t'i~~ tlI odl' ~!f th~)tlgh
eings that came from Chaos dl(t !In! ('(I n :-;I~I of II nnd
I ,.'
.
'
b
II
naturally enough, did not " 1'(>50 \'l' ~ Inlo It U p Ol1 nllHpl(>tioli
of their eyrie, Gaia. Tartaro:-; and .... ro:-; , till' t! ('St'l'lIliants
Gaia and Uranus and other immorti.l!s eo uld 1I 0t ht' ('on('l'iv('d
as coming from , consisting of and rr:-;o lv ill g in to Chaos,
The v'ry understanding of gods by tlw r<lrlip:-;l pili
losoph'rs ~hows a radical d'parture from till' traditional
mythological views: till:" gods are regard r d in th (' u atHraii5tic
terms, associat'd with the physical world n nd are, in fact,
relegated to a secondary plan, MoreovPf , in co nt.rast to the
mythologist who speaks on behalf of the g od s a nd pretends
to divine wisdom and absolute t.rut.h, the philosoph er speaks
of the love of wisdom and qUPf't for knowledge , As dist.i nct.
from utilitarian knowledge aimed at achieving dir ec t r es u lts
such as human welfare or personal fame, philosoph y was
believed to spring from curiosity and represent di sinter ested
knowledge untarnished by any practical con sid erat io ns,
Illusory ,as it was, this view reflected the objec tiv e posit ion
of a thl,nke,r in a society where mental work h a d j ust
started Singling out as an independent kind of human ac ti vity
oppose,d to o~her forms, of socially use ful labour, H aving
come mto ,:~Isten~e,,,phllosophy began to develop its own
~ethods - dlalecttcs
as the art of dis pute and d e b ate
alme~ ,at establishing the truth , and " theory " (theoria)
~s dl5mterested contemplation of the truth Ie d
t
cont
I l'
I.r'"
._
a 109 0
ri' l' em,p: ~ve I ~ (bws thfj oretikos) whi ch purportedly
I~~~guis e a phllo~oph e r from ordinary peopl e ,
or
y'
p.
.",
(,r
p~l.losophy
interes{l~~c~::; o~O\~~:~ur~~,t, (t~e
,e)arh'Cest, philosoph ers'

verb h - - h' h
P Y Sl S,
omlng from the
thi s ~o~% ;n~c itsm~::~~ !~ producc , to grow, and the lik e,
as well
in which they are used vhav,ves. d I
~s the expressbionhs
_
e a ua mealHng de t
a proc's~ ( birth , generation) and ' lts" , __ ' _ no .lOg . ? t.
e~tE'rnal appearance , " breed") TI . [csults rprOpe l'tl e:'\,
PIIHlar lh (-' word s phya and -, - ~uJ III Homer, Theognis and
~la~llCe a n~ beauty usu allyP ~~:OCienote Il?ble appearance.
rillS lileamo g of physis r(-' O t
t at(-' d With nobl e birth.
th inking, By eont rast in II ~c ~ tlle mythological m od e of
.h. I
'
" l o Scue(<lof
\\ 1(' 1, unlike ancient <.; pec 1 I
' I concrcte kno wledg.
b
'
- - a Ive I~ lYS I
o se rvatlon a nd e xper irn f'n tal' r - , 10ogy, gravitate to
us ually meall t th e stru ctu~e' or clnvesh,g~tion by ph ysis is
oh~~ r\'a bl f' r(-'s 111t of it';
om positIOn of a bod y as th e
AI;, rl'l~ar,Is pllik UIHlY phy ...is ,,3 ,he ,h~ect of ph,
IO!'iophu:al IIIVI'<I,ti~all/m WI! (:oll,"'lved HI lnt IIUIY&llInV
( I
o r two <q,prlJactll'~
hl' rlvcsligalion mtl Ih
.
tI
I'
.J
C cr '1
o r II lings
..
H'lf II lunate 8uhstanr p
lduCIII"
the
h
I
I I
''''
P IIO~(lp 1ler
~(J go )~on( t \Po hnulld~ (If obse vahte o~cts and the
Invd.fig~IIIOIi (If p~lCn.()merl3 ai!I"~:;sihle to ~(-,Il:es. The
first phtlosopht'rs
II I p 1a t IIrc
" I I VleWln ub {,hysi./f in term~

o r t I lIng~
Jaf
()verst(>p the hounds of ttH:SC things
Under .tl~e CfJ,rlelillOliS ,of un~ivided i'way of rnytllOlogir.al
a nd religIOUS Idl'O!Ogy III anCient !;oriety it was tantamount
~~ an appea l to the 'divin!" properties of nature, to the
e~et'na l and e~erlasting" in it. Yet the very nature of
re lymg on human reason for explanation of the
vlSlbl,e world drmandl'd that it should abandon mythological
solutlOlls a nd,effect a logical transition, if only in pr inciple,
fr om th e universal to the particular and the individual,
p rov idin g an "empirical" explication of the general world
view p rin c ipl e,
This accounts for the fact that the concept of physis
or nature was bound to become an arrn~ of acutp
ideo log ica l struggle, The first philosophers regarded nature
as a u ni versa l dynam ic self-moving whole spontaneously
produ c in g its component parts or individual things, The
id ea of "matter " as the ultimate substance of all thiugs
is orfaniCa ll y u~ited in this concept with the ide~~fJ:te~,:is.
d e ve opm e n t, Fo r '""The Greek philosophers. matter was
t h ere fore a li ving self-sufficient entity. causa sui. which
did n ot n eed any external forces for its explanation. It
was , acco rdin g t o E n ge ls, a "primitive, naive but intrinsically
correct conce p t io n of th e world",1 However, being the
res ult of direct contempl ation, this spontaneous, intuitive
outlook o n th e wo rld was o bviously inadequate for explaining
parti c ulars as was c learl y revealed in the course of f'ubsequent
philosophi cal d evelo pment.
Th is inad eq uacy of t he general world ou tl ook containJ'd in
e mbryo th e poss ibili ty of phi losophy's splitting into
opposite trends, Analysing t he teachi ngs of his predecessors,
Plato
w rot e
th at
t he
exponents of
t he ir
views
co ns id ered fir e. watp r, earth and air to be the ('a USt' of all
things a nd ca ll ed th em nature (Leges. X. p, 89t). The:::;e
elem ents werc not simply the "materia l" of t hings, but abo
30,
Frederick Engels, .. l nti.D,'illring,
Pro~rr,," Publi~h\'r". \I()~('nw
l!liS
,
"\.
\
Ihe acti,-e crealin' forc e~, t hl' ('iUl :-lt' (l tlll'i l' l' IlI \' I'~ell('e
d dissoluti on . To thi~ CUlH' l' pt P latu ('oullt t'rpoSI'II
~I~(' concept of th t' primacy of :-;.o ul ( ih id . p. 8H2) - 1I t'11(,('.
it was Plato who cl early defllled til(' world outlook of thl'
early ph ilosophers as materi<lli~.tic and ra ll kl'd th plll with
the trend that considered mlll('r~lIl s U!>l'l t!HlC.C. mallCJ: jll ju'
the prinlS!rv cause of the worlJl~
'" The analysi s of tlH' an cient cOll ce pt o f " natlll'e " thus
brings us t~ the fundamental problem of ph ilosophy . The
direct res ult of its evolution was the e m e r ge nce of t wo
schools associated with the na mes of Democritll s and Pl a to
and representing, for the first time in the history o f phil osophy, materialism and ideali s m as su c h. As reg ards nasce nt
philosophy which was making but its fll'st s t e ps, w e ca n onl y
speak of tendencies which could be pred o m inantl y
materialist or idealist. With the " phys ic is ts" who regarded
" nature" as a living and self-developing whol e ge n e rati n g and
destroying its own component parts the materiali s t t enden cy
was undoubtedly prevalent.
5. The
~liIesian
School
Unde r this heading come three thinke rs from M il etu s:

Thale.s, his pupil Anaximand e r and Anaximand e r' s pupi l
Anaxlmen es. The term "school" is traditionall y a ppli ed t o
t~~m not only because schools or corporations unitin g phySICians . (the AscJepiades, then th e rival school s at Cos
a~d ~nl~eS), s ingers, painters , philosoph e rs (the Mil esian s
t (' f yt ag?~eans, .the Eleates ) , etc, on the bas is of kin s h ip .
or ell?w-cltlzens hlp wer(' common in An c ient Greece . Far
more :rnporta~t :vas a~l affinity of views which in the
('a~e 0 t ~he "Mhrles!an ,pllliosophers manifested itself in th eir
In eres III
p YS ICOS and natural studies
(1) Thales. Thal es of Mil e tus son . f
CJpobuJina was evid ently of Pho : '.
0 Examyas an d
~ost evidence , he lived between ~~~c3~~hd~~~e~~. Accordi~g t o
... , be tween 640 and 545 BeT d"
th Olympiads,
B.C. as the mos t lik ely dates f~r' hisrfif Itl~~ assumes 625-547
have tra vell ed in Eg y pt probabl one.
.ales was known to
a c.quaillted th er' with ~alhema~cg I~~sllless, and becom e
WIth e xpe r t knowled g e of flab I .'
was also credited
, t
y Olllan astron
.
~Tt a ~ . la ve I('a rnt through Ph oe niCia , the n .omy whi c h ~e
a~.(:stf)r~, as well as through Lydia. Ac at~ve land of IllS
lt~t lll](JIl y of Herodotu s ( / 7')
d
cording to credibl e
,
f
a n a number of o'h
... er authors ,
Thillt'g madt 1111 I'xad pl'f'didioH of a full solar !'clips!' of SR;)

B.C:. To Thall's W;tg bo IIsc-ribf'd tht~ calculation uf tilt
limp flf !i()I~ti('t's illl(l 1''1Hllloxes, tile di:-;covl'ry of thf' anlillal
Ulovt'OH'lIt of tltl' Sun a~iJingt thp bafkground of thp st<.lrs,
tlU' estahlishnwnt of 11", yeM length at 365 daY:-l, t'tc
Tha ll'!'5 shan's with Pythagoras the fame of tlIP foundl'r of
:-lci('lItiiir matlH'matics: he was believed to be thf' first to
inscr iht. a triallgl p into 11 circle, to {~stabli~!l J::IH' ..l]lIalilJ'
of tht, oppos"ite anglf's and lllf' angles-at tm' hase of an isos('.eTes
tria ngl e to""rrefiile the- parts ora circle- -dtv1O-cd by its diameter,
etc. '!'ha'ies thc gt'ographer explained the floods of the ~ i le by
t he t rad e-w inds oppos ing in summer the river now. He
e nj oyed a reputation for practical statesmanship and ~ou ~ces
give hi m the cred it for wise advice that he gave the Mdes l a ~ s
on two occas ions: to set up a common centre of governme!!.! ~n
Teos in order to coordinateTlie-e1lorts of the loman cit ies in
t h e face of the Persian threat and to refrain fr om anti
Pe rsian al li ance with Croesus. His advice was accepted and,
accord ing to Diogenes Laertius I. 35 . "sayed the city."
It is not surprising that a t ese exp oits brought Th~les
t h e fame of a "sage," even the foremost of the gloflous
"seve n ." T radition credits him with many dicta that
we n t down in h istorY. Some of them do not differ from those
ascribed to ot h er sages, yet there are sC\'eral aphorisms amo~g
t he m t hat have a tru ly unique character. Here they are, In
P lutarch's r e ndition: "\\'hich
is the oldest? - God,
because h e was not born. \Vhich is the largest?-Space,
because it e n compasses the whole world with all ~hings.
Whi c h is th e 11nest? - T he world. because all that IS fi ne
is part of it. W hi ch is the wisest?- Time; .it h~s already
produ ced o ne a nd wi ll pr oduce another. WhIch IS com~o n
to a ll ? Ho pe: it is availab le even to those who have not h~ng
e lse. Wh ic h is-t h e most usefu l? - Vi r tue, because eve ryth ing
e lse ca n fin d a n a ppl ication a nd become usefu l t h ro ug h
it. W h ich is t h e m ost ha rmfu l?- Vice, becallse a lm os t
eve r yt hin g m ts in its p resence. \ Vhich is the stro~gest?-- Necess ity, beca use it is ir resistible. Which is the ~as l est ? -T hat
wh ic h corresponds to nature, because e\'el~ enjoymen t often
wea r ies" ( P llI t. Sept. sapient. con\. 9, 153 cd).
.
These utte ra n ces show a clear transition from ordll.1ary
prac ti ca l wistl om t o. ~undamental and profonn,g .}Hlrld \WW:-l
with a m arked VCln of rationatm"l\ppri:);l~l~ to probl('m~ ~Hl
wo ndN t h ey a re ascr ib('d to Thales. Tratl1tlO n abo h ol d~ hlln
l!)
to be the author of some d octrinC's w hi c h CllII alrl'aciy lH'

as philosophi cal in th e proper seil Si' of t il(' word . Hl'grNd
I
rae
..
1
II
11'
tably, we do not poss"ss ally W~ltlllgs ,ro m ll' Ilt'll ()
hah's
hiUlself. Though he is credltPd With severa l lreati s('s.
including the philosophical one entitl ed "O n F'i rst..Priflcipl ('s"
(and referred to by Seneca, Pluta rc h and (,3 Ien), th l'
evidence is far from being reliable, As regards th e style of
the excerpts quoted by different authors , it be tl'ays a mu c h
later origin of the treatise which cannot ha ve bee n composed
beforr thp beginning of the Chri s tian e r a. Neverthe less,
we possess suffi ciently credible testimony from AI'is toti e and ,
perhaps, Hippias, regarding Thales's philosophi c a l views .
According to this testimony, Thales was the a uth ol' of two
fundamental ideas: olle regarding water as th e fir s t p r inciple
of all things, and the other regarding the "soul complex " .
Having characterised th e views of th e earli est philoso phers
on the principles of all things, Aristotl e adds: " Ye t they
do not all agree as to the number and th e nature of these
principles, Thal es , the founder of thi s ty pe of philosophy,
says the principl e is water (for whic h re ason h e d eclared
that the earth rests on water). '" Stri ving to re produ ce the
reasoning o~ Thales, Aristotle continu es: " Hi s s upposition
may have ansen from the observation that th e nouris hme n t of
all ~ r e a tur es is. moist, ~nd that warmth itse lf is gen e rated from
mO\ s t~r e an~ hv~s b.y It; and . that from whic h all things com e
to be , ~ .th elr pnnclple. Besides thi s, a nother reas on for his
suppmHtl on would be that the se mina of all things have a m oist
nature" and water IS for moist things the origin of t heir
nature. ,2
Th e ;brev ity of this excerpt, quoted also III other sources
op('~~s th e possibility for .a broad s pectrum of interpre tati o n s:
In? k putable, however, IS the naturali stic tendenc of th e
phil osopher seeking to trace all things to nat Y
and dra
I
I'
ura I cau ses
.
w c ear ana ogles between the world of n t
d I
lif~ of an imal s. If the semina and th e nour' a ure an t lC
things have a moi st nature, if they cannotlivelsh.ment of all
a nd dr y u p afte r death , if warmth itself is the ,~lt~ou~ wate,~
of the warm-blooded, and the fire of h eavenl b ~mma heat
Su n feeds on wa ter vapour (see Ae tiu s,'
odlCS ~n~ of th e
It IS .onl
too na tu ral to s uppose that moistu re ( wa. t er ).'Is 276),
the"p'
I "y
o1 a II b ein g and th e "ele ment" of all things.
rlOclp e
Db
, Tht Bnsic Works.... p. 694

1 I bid, p_ Ofl:l.
TIll' iill'<t that tllp PBrtll n'sls fin watf'r not<'d by Aristotle
as rliaradl'ristk of Thall''5 S vipw", i!' evidf'ntly tranabl('
to til(' Egyptiall mythology in whir'lI th(' Earth was likened
to a nat dish noating Oil watrr. whereas the Sun was
d'scril)('d as noating (H'f()~~ til{' sky in a boat. In all probabili,
ty, it was not only and not ~o much a myth a~ a common,
eve ryday notion of the Egyptiall~. It must have been abo
qu ite access ible to all ali('n ramiliari~ing himsE'if with th('
country's c ustoms, particularly if that alien came from
s uch a seafaring ppople a~ the Ionian~. At this point,
however, another problem arises. As we saw, Aristotle ascribes
to a ll "ph ysiologers" the idea that all things and. consequl'nt- );,
ly . a ll e lement.s (elemental forces) came from one primary 1s ubs ta nce. Are w(> to infer from this that Tha les derived air,
fi re a nd earth' fr om water? Aristotle does not assert that Thales
h e ld t hi s particular vie w, but in later doxographer Hippolyt us we find: "He [Thales l said that water is the beginning , <
an d t he end of everything, as through thickening and evapor atio n it makes up and maintains everything with rt'sulta n t vacill a t io n of earth. vortices and movement of luminar ies, so that everything is carried along and nows in accord ance w ith the nature of the ultimate substance of all things"
(DD, 5551.
This testimony deriving from Theophrastll s deserves

cred ibility. III any case, we have sufficient grounds to presume
that Thales was the first to develop a doctrine. by way
of con jecture not yet raised to the level of a general principle,
of th e e m e rgence of all th ings and eleruent~l forc~s f~om
a prim a r y s ubs tance a nd of their subsequent dissolutIOn II\to
it. Th ese passages, however, may also be construed as representin g a differen t, more prim itive view: the earth en~erges
from wate r in th e se nse that it wa:- origi n ally covered by It and
th e n comes ou t as t he primordia l moisture (sea) evaporates.
This la tter view was not infrequently expressed by lutl'r
phil oso ph e rs (Anaximnnder, Oiogencs of Apollo nia) . .
Th e secon d idea associated with the namE' of Thales. I~ th('
"soul compl ex". Here again we have two diffcrpnl Oplll ions.
O n t h e o ne IHwd. "Aristotle and Hippins affirm that, al'g uin g from t.he' magnet and from ~mb~r, he f,!,hales,l,
a ttri b ute d a s.ou l or life ('\'I'n to lHalllmate obJ(,(ts.
(D iog. L. I, 24)
In deed in A ristotl e we r('ad: ' ... Thales. too, to Judg(' from

wh a t is I'~corded aboul him, .~wems to have held :-oul to b('
a motive force, since he s~id that the maglll.'l has iI sou l in "I
.
"I
I
becau~{' it moves t IH" Iron .
On the other hand. none otlwr than Aristotlp wri tl's
"Certain thinkers say that soul is intNlll ingIl'd in th;'
whole universe, and it is perhaps for that reason that Thal l'S
came to the opinion. that all things arl.' full of gods,":.!
Hence, the world appeared to Thal('s as animated
full of We. It was typical hyloloism (hyLe-maUer, zoe - li fl')
rooted in mythology. In Thal~s, however , it acquired a new
meaning, essentially different from mythological. Nature as
a single and living whole possesses, according to Thales a n
inner principle' of motion, a "motive element" which' he
denoted by the habitual terms "soul" and "gods." Thi s
COIl.ccpt. represented. a step towards naturalistic panth eism
wh~ch dissolves od In nature and makes him but a I' in cipl e
o Its spontaneous motIOn.
, Thales's teachi~g viewed as a w.hol e clearly I'. eveals
t\\O sources, two dlffe~ent trends merging in a s ingl e wodd
outlook-I.nyth and sCience. Their synthesis, i. e. the radical
re~tru~turlng of mythological stories on the bas is of initial
sCl~nlific ~nowledg~ an? rational thinking produced the fir st
philosophical doctrme In the history or ancient phil osoph y
The next step on this path .was made by Thales's followers:
(2) Anax.tmander. Anaxlmander (c. 610 -546 Be ) tl
son o~. Praxlades of Miletus, was a pupil, a rollo~e~ 'an~e
~ccor ,mg to. some ~vidence, a relative of Thales . H e Wl'ot~
~: ':~~:ha ~~sllosoPhlcal treatise!Jn Nature ?ne of the excerpts
stus. The a~~~~en~o:~ t~ us I,n the re~ldlti?n of T~l eophra
Simplicius in lar
naXiman d er s views given by
OK A'9 a 'd B 1) ge part from Theophrastus (Phys. 24 13
,
n
runsasfollo '''A
.
'
,
arche and elemen't of existin ws:
~axllnander named the
the first to introduce this na~~hflllg\ the boundless', being
it is n~ither water nor any othel'~[ \~ arche. lie says that
but a different substance which is b un dt so-called elements,
ess, from which th ere
d
come into being all the h
TI '
eavens an the
Id
.
~I/lgs perish into those things out r ;:or s Within them ,
bemg, as is due; for they make just 0 w Ich they have th eir
for their injustice according to trecom~ense to one anoth er
he puts it in somewhat poetical te:l~l or~l~ance of time -so
he obs{'fved how the four elements cSha t IS ~Iear that when
nge tnto each other,
2
Thr lJa.~ic W orA s .... p. 54 1

/Iud .. II. :;53.
-
hl.' did nut, hink it rPll:-;ullllhh' to conceive of onl' of tll('!"('

a:-; IIIJ(h,r1ying tht, rt'sl, hilt pO!"itrd s()lIlt'thing el~p. \torrov(>r
hl' do('!" lint <lnoullt fIJI' gPIH'sis hy J qualitati\'{' alb'ration
of Ih{' l'it'IlH'IlI, hut by a st'pal'atioll of tht' oppositf's c8u!"('d hy
the eternal lIlolion," (UJ\. 12 A n. B 1),
This pa:-;sag(> fl'om Theophrastus quoted by Simplicius
in hi~ commentary to AristotlE"s Physics and containing an
authentic s('ntencC' from Anaximander's work has given rise to
much c.ontroversy among philologists and philosophers
regal'ding the tru{' IlH'aninK of till' author's words. How(>ver,
eve n if Wf' proc('(>(\ from what is generally recognised as
Theophrastus'~ l'epl'{'s('nlation of Anaximander's actual
clause -" for they make just recompense to one another [or
their injustice according to the ordinance of time," and
regard the first sentence of the above extract as Aristotle's
standard description of physiologers' philosophical views,
we are bound to admit that Theophrastus gave us very
valuable information, namely:
(1) Anaximander recognises "the primary substance
(arche) and element" as something ~ingle and bOUl~dle5s
(infinite, indefinite), i.e. as "apeiron.' He, ~~y have IOlroduced the word himself, though a POSSibility cannot be
excluded that it was coined later by Anaximander's
1
doxog ra phers.
(2) The clause "th ings perish into those thmgs out of
which they h ave t~eir bein~. as is. due" ~s u.ndou~tedly
authentic, represe ntlll g Anaxlmander s genuille Idea. If not
his wording, Theophrastus, ratin g Anaximander among the
moni sts would h ave written "that thing" instead of "those
things" (ex h6n ". eis taylC!). The .7ubSeq.uen~, explanation
showS th at the plural I'del's to the opposites.
(3) Anaximander's reference to "the boundless" is
interesting in that to apeiron can ~e u.nd:rstood b?th. as
ind efinite in a qualitative sense and as IIlfi n lte III a .quantltatlve
sense. We have confli cti ng ev id e nce regardlfig Tha les.
Thus in one of the extracts Simplicius says that Thales
considered hi s primary substa nce, water. as ~nite (peperasmeno n ) whereas in another fragment he Wl'ltes that those
who mad e on e element the primary substance regarded
I To apeiroll i!i a !illh~llIl1li\'i"l'd llt.'ulN adjectivt.'. il.s anlollym~ tll'di~~
r . I'd (I('fillile flllilc) Rud /0 peras (hIlHI, ('nd. bOt n.
peperasmenon {1111 "
pO~~'1 A ... we "ee. lilt.' word i" poly"cmllnlic alltl
edge, fu l filment ant1 e\'('[llllIr ' . :
'
- .-th e refore ,'ery diffu'ull 10 Ir{lll"lal('.
it as the one infinite body like Tha l('::; r'gartil'd
w t
(see OK 11 A 13). Ari5totle. for hi s part. cont(>llded U/~

"none of the physicists made fire or earth the one infiui:
body, ~~t either water or air or what i~ int~rm.edite betwee~
them... (phys. III. 5. 205a). Hence, 10 Ill s flfst testimon
Y
Simplicius speaks about the definiteness o f Thal es's "prin c'
pie" in the qualitative sense, and in the second testimon [
about its quantitative infiniteness.. which is jus t what the d~~
xograph,cr sa~s. As ~egards Anaxl.ma~der, his apeiron is both
qualltaLlvelv IndefinIte and quantitatIvely inflllite. The emergence of things from it is their qualitative determination
and ljllantitativ(' limitation.
(4). Till' "boundless" is somet.imes identified wit.h my ~
thologa'sl Chaos. Such an understanding however does
t. )1
consor.t with Anaximan~er's recognitiol; of th e' tempo~~1
()r~erlllles~ o.f both genesIs and destruction, this orderliness
bl'lIlg ('!'s{'ntlally necessary.
'
_. At'cording ~o another opinion , Anaximander's " boun dle "
I". ~o,"ndl('s~ In ~cneral, resulting from the abstraction s~f
~'d~ythlllg that IS coneri'll:'. lIowever, Ari s totle specially
In H'at~d ~I~a.t It was not so. ~'he notion of the limitless
mfllllt~ as such..was characteristic of the Pythagorean s and
ato, \\her(,8s
- ~ . the physicists ,... all 0 r II1e m a Iways
~t'gar'
.
';1
~;~e~~~~~~nt ~~~~~!~ a~ld belong~ ~o ~he cl~sss~r ~~~~csco_~:~:~~
(Phys I II " 203 )al~rohr. wha,t IS IIltermedlote between them "

.
"
,a.
IS eVidently appl'
I A
.
lex) and the "l'Iubslance" that. I ' h ' _H.>.s 0 ,naxllnander
must bt, sOIll('how sp('cificd 1a~ t .r I~fllllte as Its attribu te
apeiron, tJ\1' most common ~ i ~g<Hdlllg the meaning of
fJ{Jf'iron is indeterminate nat p nlo.ns arc as follows: fir st.,
any qualilalivt' d('t('rminatio:;r~ Wh~ch . d~es not lend itself to
Plaloalld Ari.<;lotl(' later called ~~l~::tC~p
~~eond, it is what
allllllllg!l in a potelltial stat("tl' d .e~ (hyle) encompa~sin g
of all Iii iIIR' . . or ('il'llil'nts fro' 1lr 'hiIISI ~ me-t'hanical mixture
it.
.
1
III \\ l1lC t lings s('

S SjJlIlt'IIIII~ IIll('rme-diat b l .
' . parat('; fourth
F. I
e l' \\('('n tht'm (met)
,
,ar I n tlil'se notion!! r('sling 0
.
. axy .
Wf'ak PlIlllL'I. 'flip nolion of ind('l(>r~l.cerlaln testllllony has its
HI all <IS il is pllrt'ly 1I('U'lltin' It d , ~lIlacy provid('s no solution
hlt'r
tt A .
I'>
O(S not accord M

I
'
. WI I nClximandf'r 's spf'df. rl t
, ' . we g lail see
8l1b~lallrl' of tll(~ IJlJundlf's:.... Th{. :~mt'(' .f'rm~l;ation~ of th e
a~ 1I1lf1l r~h,o(l by Plato. d A .
applies to 'malter"
I
all
rlstotlr who ch8"
. nfll)- 11'1111( or PUrl' poss ibility . By
aracterist'd it
(';
..
boundless j::l an active, creative force, the closest to which is

Plato's idf'a or Aristotle's form. The notion of "mixture" with
regard to the ultimate substanff' is traceable to the
fifth-century physiologers, in particular, to Aoaxagora~. /
However, even if primary mixture is understood as
a homogeneou~ indislinguishable mass, it caonot by any
means be conceivf'd as a living organic whole, as t.he "natllre"
of the early Greek philosophf'rs. The fourth notion is perhaps
the closest approximat ion to what. Anaximander meant by his
apeiron, but even here evidence is by no means conclusivf'.
Aristot.le, for one, charac terising the views of various thinkers
and not infrequent.ly referring to the apeiron a!l somet.hing
int.ermed iate betwN'n fll'f' and air or air and water, never
mentions the author (authors) by name. Though in all such
.;ases th(' cont('xt is sngg('stivf' of Anaximand('r, it seems to bf'
rather a shaky ground for a definite conclusion and thE'
Question remains open.
Nevertheless, there art> certain "properties" of Anaximand er's primary substance which can be considered w('ll
auth e nticated. As Aristotle writes in' his Physics, the
" boundless" doe:;; not com!' into existent'j', nor can it be
destroyed; "there is no principle of this, hilt it is this which
is held to be the principle of other things. and to encomp.ass
all and to steer all. as those aSSl'rt, who do oot recognise.
alongside the inlinite, other causes, stich as Mind and Friendship. Further they identify it wi.th the Divine, f.or it is 'd~a
thless and imperishable' a::l AnaxlOlander says, With the m~Jo
r ity of thl' physicists.,,1 A('cording to Hippolytus who g.lves
a slig ht.l y different wo rdin g, t.he non-Iimitf'd "is eve:lastlOg
and ageless.,,2 Plutarch, for his part, wrote t.hat Anaxlmander,
the friend of Thales's, r egarded the boundless as th(' cause
of universal ge nes iS a nd ilestruction. The passag~ from
Plut.arc h r eads as foll ows: "He "ays that at the bllth of
this co:;;mos a germ of hot. and coil. was separat.ed off from the
eternal substan ce, and out. of this a sphere of name grew out,
the vapour s urroundin g the earth like the bark ar~und. th('
tret'. When thi s was torn away and l'I~ltIt off .!n ce~ta~l ~1~16s.
the sun, moon and stars caml:' inlo t'Xl s lenct' (DK. t ... /
)
Proceedin from this I'videncl' we call e~ncelve of the
following p;ocess by which 11u:' "boundless ~rodllces (\~I
things: the everlasting, ageles:;; and IIldf'strut'tlbl(' natun,
Thl' Ba5ic Worh.-.. p. 2.19_
DK 12 A II. Anrilla . . Jl HI .
.,
"
till' apeiron, !'oeparall's oul H "gprlll" (~t'l1inllln) (If th l ,

,
I'P
posltes-the hoi <lmi IIH' ('old. the dry alltl till' Wl'l wh o I
ill turn, produce all things. Ht'grt'ttilhly . WI' ('un 0111"
" k"
I' b
' lU ll ('
'
gue:,s~s.ltt t he r.e IallOliS lip ~~~\"~('n ~hl'"O PPO~i tl's dl'Scribt'd h '
Anaxlln~nder In INn~s of IIlJIIstICt' and "r('compl'IlS(,)1
though It c1'arly POllits to till' connict of the OI'PI) ' ,' ,
fl'
S I ('s
' I'
I IH~ dIll. edles 0 t lelr struggle which was to be I "
unfolded bv Heraclitu~.
att'r
Analys,S"ot'A11-,lxiinanCler'g philosophical teac hi ng sh '
that he defined the. most important fl'lltures of 'lI e p 'Ima,y
. OWS
su bstance or arche (the term Illay have been introd ce d
by "Anaximander
.
. himself. though thC' validity of The op I"lrastuss[' teslullony
'
dIS.IiOW called in (IU(,Slio,. ),. '",S u rllversal
crea Ive an generative character: it,!i; immor tality a nll ' d "
t
'bT
lfl es~~ctl I Ity "as opp~s~d to finite, emerging and perishin
~,~~gS an~ ~ worlds: Its b?undl~ssn~ss in time and space, a~
Jf- af~ ,Ib e~ernal motion; l,tS IIlhere nt necessity and
:e, ru ,c\enc{ cons~q~entl~', Its divinity as the highest
AX~~x~~~~de~ aractensllc, Fillally" though the apeiron ill
substance of aCl~nl~,ardly, be, c~nc~ lved as constituting the
into being from it ~n;:, i~\OISitlO~:Sput~bl~, that "all come
mander departs from m th
a pensh, Hence, Anaximakes yet another step
e;en fa~the~ than Thales and
world \' iew was largelv a resv~~ ~ sCientific cosmolog y, His
Anaximander is s~id t u 0 1,15 conc rete natural stud ies,
l
u,pright rod, drawn u t~e I~ve lIlvented ~ sun dial with
(.reek world and giv p
rst geographical map in th e
knowledge Far mo"e~n a systematic account of geometrical
'
, Important howe
'
an d cosmogony as they emer 'f
ver, ~ere hiS cosmol ogy
doxographers,
ge rom the eVidence of anClCnt
io\
Anaximander's picture f
presented as follows Th 0 the ?,orld can roughly be
like the drum of a ~olul~n e~~i~ IS cylindrical in shape
br~adth, It hangs freel in th I a depth three times its
to Its equal distance f y
e centre of the world"
'
'h
rom every thin " (A I
oWin g
.... ether the earth evolved from ,gl b 1), It is not clear
,
Ie oundl
, TIII~ ob~cure phra~{' ha ... {'\'ok
ess or existed
r~nl!'lUR' rr()rn III 'th 1 ' t ('d mu c h ('OutfOY{'r~ II '
l't"Jllf'nts hpton
0 oglca . (thl' "hrJlI stirf''' con.'li~L~ i/II Il'mt('qrr et<llions
'1"111 rJn,' a Ilotl~'r) R't to d{'t n lit; d e, tll'.~ \'t'rl sUfil) tl),I{iI'a t ( I h (> COli n i('1 I>r I~;t, Wlll\('f into d ;'y
r .... tllt/HiIHl /oF jlJ~litP)OrlC d{'S('rIJllron
ri\'alr~' bPlw(,t, ) IIIIU~'tl'~a~ Ih,'
. f',
II \o:(>nl(' ... and thl'
IlI;.L
ur
al all IiIlH'~ , lJ!!rilll{ HII' f',rlllatinli of I"'HVI'U IhNI' ill'pl'arl'd

wall'r and ,III' J; I\I'II ~ , and 1111'11 iI IIIit'll of I'll'' 'urlMing thl'
~parl' round tht' I'l.lttl! tikI' hark rIJund a trl't'_ Till' "pil.'rl' I)f lirt'
bn'l\k~ 1IIlo ~l'vNal rill~:-; or rirdl's !'!I('ased in luill's of
l!li st or 11.1'IIS1' air" Tht, illwrlurl'l! in till' :-;urrouliditJlot f'IL\'ptopl'S
of lhe tlng of hrl' appl'ar to us as heavenly bodi/'s, Th('
.sUIl e cli piie~ and thl' pha:-;I':-; flf tilt, moon arc litH' to altl'rnatf'
contractin~ and OP(,llilll( of thl' apl'rtureg in th(' tull's of
mist. Thf.' circle of the slin iii ~ituated highest of all, lI('xt
comes the cir~l(' of the moon, anll henrath lhem the rings of
the stars, ThIS unusual ord('r of h('av('nly bodies coinridl's
with what we- fllid in the Prrsian mythology of the Av('sta,
the sacred books of the an cient Zoroastrian religion, The
wol"lds are innumerable, yet it is not clear from the ('xlant
evidence if they replace one another in their eternal rotation
or exi!'t simultaneously,
Accordi~lg to Anaximander, the earth wa;;; originally
covered WIth water, It gradually evaporated and that which
remained in low place-~ on the ('arth surface form('d a "ea,
Dry ing up from exce~s heat or getting soaked as a re~ult of
heavy rains the earth cracks up and air penetrating into the
crevices causes it to displace - -hence the earthquakes, The
first living creatures arose from the moist element (the sea)
and were coverE'd with thorny scale, "'hen they grew older,
they b ega n to C.om(' out ashorE' and finally ga\'e rise to land
animal s and IllI'n,
Like in all early philosophical te-achings, Anaximan
def's cosmology is a curious combination of fantastic notions botl'owed from mythology with a rationa\bt approach to
the wol'ld, representing an att('mpt to account for the unive rse in naturali stic , even mathematical, terms, The world,
vi(>w resu ltin g f!'Olll this synthesis is a Ulli(IUE' intellectual
pl'odu ct which cannot be 1'('(llIC('d to any of its origina l
components,
(3), Anaximenes, Anaxim('J1('>l, known as AnaximandN's
friend and pupil , lived ill till' most critical period of
Miletu s's history, It is l,\' idelltly for this r('a:<Oil t1H~t o,lIr
know l('dge of hilll i~ \'l'ry IlIt'agrt', The datE'S of hl:< life
are a~sunwd 588-525 B,C" hut h(' may han-lived long ('!lough
to witn ess the fall of Mil('tlls in , ~9-t His book wriUNI, anord,
ing to Diog(,lIes Laerlins, in a "simple and !'~onollli('al
style" W,IS tr'3t('d by lim!' no brtler than that of hl5 teadH'r,
but AIl3Xil1l(,lll's'S vi('w~ haY(' com' down to us III far
more detail. Here is an evidence of S impli c ius which g-
back to Theophrastlls: :' AnaxinH'n ('~ of MilNus , SOn o::~

Eurustratus, the compamon of Anaxlluand N, also pOsi~ ' .
sin~le infinite underlying substance of thin gs. not, howe,,~ a

indefmite in character like Anaximander 's bu t determina~r,
for he calls it air and says that it differs in rarity and denst'
according to the different substances. Rarefi ed. it becon~e~

fire: condensed, it becomes first wind, th en cloud , and when
condensed still further water, then earth and stone
Everything else is made of th'se. He too post ul ated cten Sj
motion, which is indeed the cause of the change" (DK 13 A
Why did Anaximenes go back from his teacher's conce ~
5)
~ion
of ~peiron,. the boundless, to an apparently cI'ud~r

Idt'a of aIr as primary substance, one of th e famil iar for
of , rna,tter? Thi~ retrogression was evidently a res ult of t~S
Mlieslan phil,osophical tradition seeking to ex pl ain th:
wo~ld order 1[1 terms of natural causes known from e _
penence" Anaxim~nder's notion of th e boundl ess as th \
fr0'!l which all thmgs corne into being and into wh ich a~l
perish must have appeared too abstrac t for the Mil es'
t~ought a~ it could not account for the subsequent gene~:~
lIOn of thmgs except. by a purely imaginary process of the
separation of 0VPosltes Anaximenes's ch "
r"
the It'
b
'
. Dice 0 air as
II l'!l~te su stance brought his doctrin e in li ne with
~~: ~adl~lonal c?~ceptions of his time and enabled him to
o e t ,Ie. :mp~ncaJIL.~erifiable prOfess of co nd ensat.iDn
an d rarelactlOn for expla r
r
"
Ident'f ..
h
fla Ion 0 c lange III th e world
chan~e ~r~~~ fr!; o~;ac:~!~Ormation of mat~er w ith th~
s isrs th(' universal m~ta ~ ~o aoothe,f, An,axlme n es emphaIndeed, isn't wind but c~ lity of h.ls primary s ubstance .
follows in its wake but con~dens~d ~Ir and the cloud that
po."lites of the warm a nd th ense wlOd? And aren ' t the opthr statc of air? In hO"~
e cold the result of a change in
PI
.
account of Ana '
,
.
IItarch wrote: " \-Vhat is c
Xlmenes s teaclllng
says, is cold, but what is ra ompa:tfd and conden sed, he
11(' sa id , there is somethin
i~e t~~ o,ose ... is hot, H ence,
bo.th hot and cold w',th hog
h saYlllg that a man blows
I~ mout
fo th
w Ill'n the lips press and co d
.'
r
e breath is cooled
all
.
n ense It but wh
"
op(>n IllOuth it is rarplled and b '
en It ISsues from
II. would not bE"! Corrt'ct to think et~Oa~es wa.~m" (DK 13 Ai),
ltlr
tiJ(> physical s ubstance we ~naxlmenes conccived
!lVUI ahll' rvidence is not completel reath.e. Though the
y unanimous, we have
-==
'r'
good I'j~rJ[1
)
"n,d flHl~idt'rcd
Ilt'lil've that III' illt'lltilil'd it with soul

r at IW' vital prin('ipll' that animah'~ all
tillugs.
It is 1I0t to bl' \\lIudf'rl'd that Antlxiltll'IH'S pquated air
we breathe with lift, It~1'1f SIlH'I' III~ gl'lI"ral naive matl'rialistic ronreptioll of lh(' IIlli\'(>r~E' was root!'rI in the
an.cie.nt myth()~ogici\1 i,Il'a of breath '!'Iour i\!'I a specific
prtnclple of lIVing and thinking hodi!'s. 'A~ Oil .. so u!." h(>
says, "b(,lng air, h{)ld~ liS logt'tlH'r, so do brt'ath and air
sur round t~e whol(' llnivt'r~I''' (DK I :{ B 2). Anaximen('s
cI~arly de~lv(,s the "sou l" from "a ir " regarding it, together
"':'Ith,~naxlmander, Anax~go .. as and Archelaus, as being 'air
lik e. 1\10I'eOVel', on the eVIdence of St. Augusline AnaxiDlenes
co n te n~ ed that t~lC gods too had th(>ir origin from air (A 10).
A~co~dlllg. to Cicero and AiitiuR who e,:idently expreRsed
thi S Id ea III a mor(' ad(>quate form, Anaximenes held that
the air is god and that divine force~ are present in elements or in bodies. The lalter statement attested to by
Aetius seems to suggest that the Milesian thinker formula ted t h e central id~a nf panthrism --tht' idE'ntily of god with
nature or, in that particular cusC' with nair
which
IS the nature 01 air that exisb. tto~e~rr- another or "his
statem ents, vouched for by Cicero, namely. that gods and
d iv in e things came from air, warrants a more cautiolls appraisal of A naximenes's \'i('ws, Evid('lltly. he showed but a tendency towa rd s the pantheistic idcntification of god with being
and app li ed the descriptive attribute "divine" to air.
like Anaximander to thl' boundless, mer(>ly by way of qualify ing the primary substance as immortal and indestructiblf'.
Anaxim('nes 's cosmology was relatively simple and in
som e ways even primitiv(' as compa["('(i with Anaximander's
broad v is ion of the univ('lse marked hy great power of reasonin g and bold imagination, Con:;idering th(' eart.h to b('
n at, Anaximelles held that it is riding upon the air like th('
sun, the moon and the planets. As distinct from th(' immovahle
earth, heavenly bodiC's al'e actuatrd by the co::;mir wind,
whereas th e stars are attaclwd to a crystalline h(,8\'enly
d o me which turns around th(' (,Mth. Thr ~un's and moon's
eclipses, as well as the moo n 's pha~es wrre accountt,d for
by the fact that till' h('annly bodi('!'1 turn to til(' ('(trth al
ternately with their light and dark ~id('s. I:o~lowing Thales,
he believed th(' heavenly bodiC'!'i to have orlglllat('d from th(,
('arth. Some of them carne frolll ('\"aporating moistufl' which
i
' t ""re others (by which he may ha\,(' mean t the

d
rarefie III 0 " ,
d
I
I
h
IIC
lanets) "enclose certain earthy bo ,~(,s('Aa StO,,)w A
~e v()he
P her \\ith them and are not seen
. . na .XIIlH' ll es
togel h at'Inlproved on Anaximander
by abandolllng til(> la t
some\\'
.
ler "s VIews t raceable to the Persian sources that the stars a re
t 0 the ea,th than are the
moon and . the sun. b
nearer
.
Anaximenes's choice of air as. the primary. su stan ce
ts for his special interest 11\ meteorological pheno
accoun
II 1 f l
. f
mena, .such as rain, hail , snow, etc.
al. o.r 11m IS rozen
water falling from clouds. admixtur~ of air In water resuits
in the formation of lighter snow, ram falls fro~l cond~n~ed
air, lightning and thunder are the effect of ~md spllttmg
a cloud, the rainbow is the effect of th e slin s (somet lllies
moon's) rays falling on a compacted cloud. so that o ne
part of it becomes heated and the other remalilS dark, ett-.
Like Anaximander, he accounts for earthquakes by earth
cracking in drouKhts or falling apart in ~eavy rains.
Th(' philosophical teaching of An~xtmenes re;~resel~ts
a consistent embodiment of til(' central Idea of til(' phys lo
log('r~": that out of which all existing things come to be
i~ what th('y all perish into after compl('ting their cyd e.
It was the culmination of the Milcsian~ ' spontaneous se nsual mat('rialism and the high('st expre~sion of their con
crption of eternal motion of living and breathing air tha t
permeates the entir(' univ('rse.
(4) Later "physiologers." The Milf'sian school had
l'xhausted its possibilities for ('xplaining 1I1(, world by th('
I'nd of the Hfth century B.C. Its closing period is associat{'d with sevf'ral names of no great famc and indeed far less
original than their predecessors. NCVl'I,thel('ss. it would
hardly b(' corr('ct to pass ov('r in silence the la st Mi\esi all thinhrll if only for .tile fnct that th(' throrics lh('.Y.J.lfQfcs~l'd refle-ct.ed, th(' p.illloKophical thought of tl\C'ir period.
_IilPPOIl of Samos IS known from a play by Cratrnus,
\w'l, r()nt('ml~(Jr~ry, who dicd in 1,22 B.C. The dates of the
phdo."lopher s life cannot be fixed exactly. Sourccs say that
hI' Y()Slt('(\ w3t('.r (also callf'd "t hc cold") and fire ("til('
IlIlt ) as twu primary elefllNlt!-!. Watl'r produced Hr(' which
titl'll
"0'1\\0' II '
" IfJv('rIllBst('r('d IL<;
. par('nt to form Illf' '-.
s. IPpOIl I'd CIl tl~I:'f til(' .soul wl~lth I th: brain which was also called
wa (.'r,or !IIO!"tuff'. j(' )ralll (,OIl1('S from thl' S('Illl'n or marrow
(1)I..:.m A ,i) H('l\c(', til(' natural 1Il0isturl' or water is, acC'flrdlrtg to Iltppon, ttl(' prilllary !'III
alld the Source of
life and ~f'n~aliolls: "Wh(>11 this moisture ts in it~ proper

condition, tht' living Cfl'ature i~ healthy, but when the
moisture drie~ up, it lo~es s(>llse and dies. This is the ff'aSOn
why old men are dry and enfeebled in their senses, namely
that they are without moisture" (A 11).
Hippon is said to haH' been labelled an "atheist" as
he did not consider his primary substance to be of divine
character. The single fragm('nt of Hippon's writing lhat we
possess is related to natural science and says that sweet water
comes from the sea. The ancient evidence for Hippon's
teaching is largely conrllled to his physiological views
(the nature of scmen, fecundation, the formation and
development n( the foetus, etc.) and seems to show that
he mainly concerned himself with concrete scientiHc problems and did not spccify their relationship to the concept
of primary substance.
Among Anaximenes's followers who shared his views
concerning a single determinate elenlt'llt were Idaeus of lIimera and Diogenes of Apollonia, Anaxagoras's younger contem
porary. Here is a fragment from the latter's book On Nature:
"And it seems to me that that which has Intelligence is that
which is called Air by mankind; and further, that by this
all creaturcs are guided, and that it rules everything;
for this in itself seems to me to be God and to reach everywhere and to arrang(' cverything and to be in everything.
And therc is nothing which has no share of it; but th('
share of each thing is not the same as that of any other,
but on the contrary there arc many forms both of the Air
itself and of Intelligence; (01' it is manifold in form: .hott('r
and colder and drYE.'r and wetter and more statIOnary
or having a swiftel motion ... A lso in all animals the Soul
is the same thing (namely) Air, warmer than that Olltsid(' in which we are, bllt much colde r than that !learN the
sun. This degree of warmth is not the ~allle in any. of the
animals (8Rd indeed, it is not the same among d,ffNenl.
human beings), bilL it d iffers not greatly, .bllt so ~s to
be similar ... Since thel'efore change is l11alllfold, <lIH~lals
also arc manifold and many, and not like onf' anolhc l' either
in form or in way of life or in intelligence, becau~f' of the
large number of (the results of) changes .. Nf've~thell'~~'
all things live, sce and hear by the same lhmg (Air), all~!
all have the rest of Intelligence also from thf' .sallll'
(DK 61, B 5),
Thi~ pa~~<lg(>, a~ well
as m a n)'
oth (' r~ show that Dio-
gt'IH.':O; look a diff{'(>nt l'o urs(' frolll H ip po n : having pos itl'd
air as the uilimat(' ~ubslan('l" he thell ~('l out to dpmonst_

rale that the universe OWCI:i it~ orderliness to inl(>lIigrllr('
inherent in this substance: "S uch a c!i r.t ributi on would not
have been possible without lnt('lIi ge nc(', ( name ly) that all
things should have their measlln': winter and summer and
nig:hl and day and rains . and winds and per iods of fin e
wcnlhrr; other things also, if 011(' will study them c10selv
will be found to have the best possible 3nangemcn t" (8 3):
Diog-elles. thNcforc, 5hould be regarded as a phil osoph er
whose Vil'WS marked a turn from spontaneolls materialist
"physiology" to ~e id~~lj~t.ir conc('plion _of un iy.t'rsa l
Intelligence. In hiS [eacTllng the naive materiali s m of the
Milesiall school giws way to a rising idealis t te nden cy.
6. lIeradilus
HNariitus of Ephestl~. the son of Blos50 n. was born

c. 544 B..C. and died c. 483 B.C. The obscllrity of his style
cau'icd hun to be de~igllated in antiquity as Heraclitus th e
O.b~cure ..wlwrras h~ n:plllilljolJ [or melanc holy earn ed
hlln thl' lllie of th.. \\ l'eping Phjlosopher 110- was said to
weep each time he went Ollt of hili home and saw around him
so ~allY peo~le liv.ing in misery and dying in angui sh (OK 68
A _1). He IS beiteved to have written a book called Th e
l1use~ or On F~rious Way~ ot Ute. Its traditional title wa ~
Oil .'a/lln'. It IS very Iikt'ly, howe\'t'r thal th e book had
"10 tltl~ a~ all. A('('ordiHg: to Diog(,He~ Laertius ( I X 5)
I eracltlus
s work " ..
l" d etI .
. .
IS (IVI
Into.
tilscotlrses, on e on' th e,
~nl\ers.c, another on politics, and the third on theol ogy"
ccord.lIIg to Oi('ls-Kranz, we possess 145 fra menls ~f
~:e.rachtus (tho1;e aflE'r fragment 126 are disPllt~ble) but
~else~~I~:~~~tl%o~I~~et~fW that m?re than 35 ~f them sl~ollid
, f', . ..
, y or partially either as later ('ountI r ,I.S
01
a:-; ulisatisfactorv para. i '
.
,
g(,llulnf' statl'IH{,II\s.
.
P lras(':; of I\ eraclitlls !oj
. ~'iu'. fragments lhat. call\l' flown tu \I!'\
a VN) peculiar IllIpn'SSlon: wlH'rea~ ,
leav (' one with
ohs('urp anel hard to '"r'ts'"
. som(' of th(>m arE' indeed
r
.... . t'O\\II\~h't'II (>ir
I'
d
I) te~ oracular (orm. otlll'rs are dis'
.
ap lorlstl~ .~n
clarity. Tht' difflcultit"" invoh I : tlll~I"lshcd by bnlh ant
II f
, l ' l III 11(> int('rp l ,.
r
If'
PW (>xt3l1t passagl's an' 111.
r(' a Ion 0
rupling . efJf'ct of thc d()xOgraP~~i/gtg~a~~tf'rl by the eortile stOIC Innu('nces which !lot infrNr.\{htlOn . .parlicularl y
!)2
lu('nOy dlstort('d the
fra~nll'nts tlH'nls('lvl's or tilt' ("o"ll'xt in ...hich tlu'Y are used.
:-.lot the I{'ast in illlportall(,t is Ihl' dillh'dical styl .. of H('

raditus who re~ilfl.b {'wry ph CIIOI\\t'ilon as a unit\" of eon
tradiction s and trl'<lb it ill It'rms of 'iplfnegalion '
The r('construction of lIf'raditlls's t'aching ('ails for
11 dt'lai\ rd analysis of hi); fI'mains, th('ir cla"sif1('.atioll
into sevE' rlll groups on till' subjptt prill('ipil' and a ~uh
sequen t sy n. the ~ i s into a singh' Iindrill('. ThE's(' lIIaill groups
arc HE'raeh tu s s statrm{'ntl' on fir' as primary element,
on logos or law, on oppositrs (dia\'elin), on til(' soul 011
the gods (" th eology"), on ethks and Oil politi('s.
'
!-lE'raclitu!:\'s cos mological vil'w!:\ an' prl's('nted in a nu tshell
in ~ragJ?ent DK 22 U :30: "This Ol'th'r('d uniwrsE' (('Qsmos),
which IS the salll(' for a\l, was nol crl'ated by an\' one of
the gods or of mankind, but it was l'yer ani is ~nd shal l
be ever-l iving Firr. kindled in m('(lsun' and quenched in
'm easure." This is a clearly stHtdi central idE'a of matur{'
Ionian philosophy: the ~lIliy('rs(' represents manire~la
lion s of the s in gle primary sub~tanc(' ait{'ring its forms in
a regular manner. IIl'raclituss prineiple is ('V('f-li\ing
Fire", so mething not unJikt' til\' IlniH'rs<lll'tlui\'al(' nl in ('om
modity excha nge: "all things for Fin' ,\lu\ Fir(' fur all things,
like good s for gold and gold for goods" (B 90).
\.
This sociomorph ic stateo1('nt. s'l' mingly all echo of ffi\'tho lo
...A gical ('o nc('p ts, is in fact frN' in this cas(' rrom any myll1tllugical background repl"('scntillg: only au analogy lo Ihe natural
a nd socia l processes.
Lik e in oth e r Ionia n!:;, th(' alterations of thE' primary
substance in Heraditu s are 1I0t disordNiy. D'srrihing his
views, DiogenE's Laertill s wrote: Chall~e II(' called a pathway
up and down, and this determines thr hirth of thE' world.
For firE' by co ntracti ng turns into moistllfl', and by ('ondt'nsing Lul'IlS into water; wal(' r again wilen congeal'd turns in to
earth . This process II(' call~ thr downward palh. Thl'n
again ('artlt is Iiqueflcd, and thus ~hl's rise to wail'r, all(\
from water lh(' r('sl of till' sl'ries b til'rin'd. Hl' fI.-dUCl':';
nearly ev(' rythin g to l'xitHlatioll from Ihl' sl'H. This procl'ss
is thE' upward path' (lX, H-9). Fin' as tOnl'ehC'd. b.y
\ 1-I eraci itus is characlNis('d hy its own Logo:;, fhls
idea shan'd by H rraclitll~ with tlH' .\till'sian:; is l'Xpfl'sst'd
in fragment 66: "Fin', ha,"in~ COIlll' ~~pon thl'.m, will j.\UI~l'
and s('izt' upon (con(h'll1n) all tiling:;, Hpradltlls also ltip n
tifl('d fin- with r('ason and ~"itl th"t it W,lS tht' ('a liSt' \If
t he world order: " Th e th und erbo lt (i.e. Fin") stt'(>fs th

uni verse" (fragmt'nl6-1). F ragment 65 sayg that Heracli t ut'
ca ll ed nre " need a nd sat iety," Ll', the renewal and t h:
c.on nag ralion of t he world .
.'
H('re we clearly have tlH'_ prt~\c;' l p l (' .of c:cosmic circul a_
tion. T he etN na l world process is ilividcd into cydes or
periods by universa l COllflag rati,ons,
the world 1/
is destroyc? an,d t hen bro ug ht Into be lll g
The length /"
of each pcnod IS 10,800 years (A 13). The u lllversc "kindled
in measu re and q uenched in meas ure" is eter n al, i.e. infinite
in time but evid ently limited in s pace (sec A 5).
Th e law un de rl ying t he wo rl d pl'ocess is re fer red to by
lI eracii tu s as Logos. Al t houg h th is Logos exists forever
" men arc a lways inca pabl e of u nd ersta ndi ng it, both befor;
t hey hea r it a nd whe n they h ave hea rd it for t h e fi rst time
For t hough a ll t hings come into be iu g in acco rda n qe with thi ~
Law, ~e n see m as if t hey had never me t with it, when they
meet WI th words (theo ries) an d acti ons ( processes) such as I
expound , sepa ratin g each thi ng according to its nature
and explai ning how it is made. As for the rest of mankind
~hey are unaware of wha t they a re doing a fte r they wake:
JU s~ a~ they. fo rget what th ey d id whi le as leep" (B I) .
Beh ev ln g hl1nseif to h ave come into
of an
absolu te tr uth,
I
d l~ring w~lich
ag~lIl.
teachi ng,
wh ich is
~s it we re, to man reveal ing ,itse lf n wo rds and
In p.henomena perceived by se nses and
,
by m1lld . However, "though men associa te wit h it
Logos)
~~~st .cl ose.ly, yet th ey are separa ted from it. a nd those
(I~nf2) ~ h 1Ch they e ncounter daily see m to t hem s t range"
Now. th e word Logos curre ntl y used in h tim e of
t e
lI era cl ltus was polysemantic i e covered
a br~ad : a nge of
notions whi ch we re closely linked in
t herefore needs diffe ren t word s to b ,th e Greek ~ min d, and
i
e ra ns 1a ted Illto m odern
For
~.i0 n ,". "a r~ u ~~,n t," " teachi ng , " ' "
re l at l o n ~ hl p,
n arra,~
propo rtio n " etc Th h . .

of Logos as used by Ii e rac lil us a ~d ot~l p Ilos?ph lca l m ean in g
ex pre~s<.'d bl. t hc...wotd " law" \I nd e rstoo~r anCH~ '~ ts ca n best be
~Ollll(,('llOQ or thio.is aM Ph(,llom"ena
~ n_lIlne r esse nti al
. t IS not fort ui tous
ys
that Logos as lilt' law of h('ing is r('lated to the social

sphNl.': "If WI' sp('ak with intelligence. we must base our
~~rength on that whieh is common to all (Le. Logo!:\}, as the
cIty Oil til(' Law (nomos), and even more strongly. For all
human laws are nourished by one, which is divine. For it
governs as far as it will. and is sufficient for all and
more than enough ... Therefor(' one must follow the u~i\"er
sal Law, n~mely. that which is common to all. But although
the Law IS universal, the majority live as if they had
understanding peculiar to themselves" (B 114, B 2). Heraclitus's "fire gold" and "Iogos -city law" similes clearly
show that he understood fire and Logos as two different
aspects of reality: fire rep,esents its qualitative and variab le nature, Logos, _ i~s structural stability, the .former
stands for exchange, the Talter:' lor fis proportion (though
not yet expressed quantitatively).
As we see, the Logos in Heraclitus is the rational necessity of being (fire) which is, in fact, identical with it.
At the same time it i!:\ Fate. but in an entirely new
guise. In contrast with the blind irrational force or chance
personified by goddess Tyche (Fortuna in Rome), the
Logos in Heraclitus is intelligence, nature's "word" addressed to man, though he may be too stupid to understand it.
But what does nature say? "When you have listened. not to
me but to the Law (Logos), it is wise to agree, that all
things are one" (13 50). The unity of nature with all its
diverse man ifestations does not lie on the surface [Nature
likes to hide" (8 123) 1, but it is there.
Heraclitus makes an important advance on the Milesians in d increntiating two aspects of reality: the outward a ppearance of thin gs a nd their tr ue nature. The relations hi p of th ese aspects is exp ressed in the conception
of h ar mon y, even two harmo n ics - the h idden and the visible
ones. MOIeovel", "the hidden ha rmony is stronger than the
visib le" (8 54). Harmony, however, is always the unity
of opposites . it is the sphere of dialectics.
The very fact that the largest group of Heraclitus's
pronou nce men t.s dea ls with opposites testifies to the pi\'otal
ch aracter of t h is problem in his teaching. Being is COIlceived by He raclitus as dynamic harmony~ as unity .and
struggle of oppos ites. This unity of opposites lieraclitus.
as is evidenced from his fragments, was never weary of tracing out. Nature produces organic lire ilOt of th.' combina-
f I,k"' but o( Ihe male and female t'h'lllt'nt~ art imi

lion 0
<c"
_
~
I
I
.
nat,m.'
creates
harmonious
CIIl'l'\S ly t I{' ('ontrast of
ta
'
f I ('r('nt VOIO':o;,
t IIlg musical harmon)' .
colour~,
IS the Illlxlun' 0
.
errr
Heraclitus says: "Joints: \\"hol(' an~ lIot wholt" ('onn('('t

J
cd_separate, consonant--dis!'on(lut
(B to )." Appan'n t
harmony, accordi ng to. Heracl!lm;, _is 01_ pr('carl ?u!'l ba'a~c('
of contrarv forces: "harmony consists of .-2Pp-~ t~n ~l, )<
like that
the bow anolllC lyre" 1B""5f).'Thc same id ea F
is expressed in fragment 8 which is commonly beli eved now
l~ be a paraphrase of fragment 51, but with an importan t ad dilion: "cvNything comes into being by way of s trife. "
Heraclitus's assertion of the idcntity of opposites was
regarded by his ancient interpreters as an enigmati c
one and, for that maller, continues to appear as such t o many modern commentators. This profound dialectical idea was
\
indeed difficult to grasp despite the numerous illustra,
tions given by Heraclitus to make it mon' di gestibl e. Th e I
identity of good and bad is illuRlrated by Heracli tus in
these words: "For instance, phy:;icians, who cut and burn,
demand payment of a fee, though undeserving , since th ey produce til(' same (pains as the disease)" (13 58). In other
fragments of this type h(' says: "The way up and down is
one and the same" (860); "And what is in us is th e sam e x
thing: living and dead, awake and sleeping, as well as
YOU~lg and old; for the latter (of each pair of opposites )
havlIlg changed becomes the formN. and this again h aving
changed becomes the latter" (B BS). All these uttera nces
rev('~1 t.h~, remarkable flexibility of Heraclitus's thought,
til(' flUid character and richne:;s of his
dialectical notions.
of
of
con e
was his doc tri ne
{J~ st~,~lg~l~ or war as the sourcl', motive power and "insti gatUi (mtla) of any world process: "War is both kin g of
all and father of all, and it has revealed some as ods
othl'r~
as men; some it has made I
.
g
.:
(8 53).
s .Ive~, others fre e
ThE' idea of universal conn,,t I,,'u already been exprf'%t'd hy the Milesian:; and COllstltutN\ r
~n Important eiE'ment in .\naximander's.1uoelrille.
' or However,
instance ,
HI I'ontra~t wit h Auaximandl' r
opP(j:,it,'s in h'rm ... of
.
. till' struggle of
r(>trllHltion ("things
gin' jllstil't' .tntl makt jllst ri'<'OlTlpPIICe to one another for their
iujustic('''). II l' ra<"litus ta\l~ht: '011(' should know that war
is g{, lwral ( u lliVl'rsal) and jurisdiclion is strife, and every
thing conH'S about by way of strife and neceg~ity" (8 SOJ.
The la st words of this pronollllc(,IllCnt sound almost likl' a
quotation frOIll AnaximandN's hook.
The doell'ine of the tlniver~al ('haracter of :-;trifl.' leads
to a conclusion that thNe is no permanence in the universe,
everything moves on and is in a flux. The conception of th e uni versality of change was accepted in antiquity as Heraclitu s'.!'. en'do arul. the image of the "l1uid" thi nk er has always been assqciated in -the history of philosophy
with the ca tc h phras(' ,",Panta rhei" (everything is in a
flux) though it was neverfmlod in his genuine fragments.
/ His own words were: " I t is not possible to step tw1.('t.. intolJ~e sallie riv('r" (B 91). However, lliraclifus'Sleaching
does ilot bOil Uov\'-it to the conception n[ continuous motion
and c hange, however important it may be. He is a dialectician
and does not regard the process of change in an unre~ulated
and disorderly way, In the changing and the nuid he
sees the stab le, in "exchange" - a proportion, in the relative-lhe absol utE'. The langllage resources in the time of
H eracl itus were pathetically inadequate for expre:5:5ing flexible notions in an abstract way and he was compelled tn
use polysemantic words, metaphoric expressions and sym~ol.s
with variou s associations a nd impllcalions. In many cases
the;r meaning was irretri evabl y lost.
Heraclitus did not know the term "oppo~ites" which
was introduced later by Aristotle. Instead, he used sllch
words as diapheromenon. diapheronton (~ 51,,8 8) ~',h~ch
mean "diverging," and to antizoyr! mealll~g. hostll~, I.e.
words of ge neral d escr iptive charac~e r. Descnptl~e and IIna~e
bearing are also th e words e).~presslllg such notIOn s as movement (stream, nux) , change (~xchan~e, t.url~). E.\e l~ th~
word " Logos" which is the central notIOn of hiS philosophy
Illeans not only law . but also fire, mind, unit... It IS ror
thi s reason that He raclitus'S teaching is uot an abstract
theory , but a " revl' lation," a. ~ingle doctrine of th.e ~\"orld.
apprehended lal'ge ly by intUItIOn where concrete senSIlO\l~
'J'" B 1"'6 (Coll thinl-":~ Kw ....
,
I
1 An npininn h'l" rt'rl'l1ll) hl'('I1 \I,k,'1 11111__
.."
d) ... I 1
hot , hotlhinl-":~ Kw .... ,01,1. ,Ihl'. .....'1 rlril'''.
Ihl parrhl'lil" nlOISlt'lIl' ,.I~ In ,','
.
Ii I, lIlt' word~ a'T<.Ht IIIK \,1 It'
a 1);l""~II-":I' {rum 1\1I,l'(lIIl1IlIt I'r" lrl'lltl~" prl'('(" I

/....
I
. ndl!'r
.,'
,. (~
\\ !\ri;.:J;.t.r Halik It 'Ifll'rt . ndIWh!
.lrra n)t\'IIH'
"/
\IIU'.
.
')
. d..: ,"><'
o~~H\
.
/.ul H
0
/1 ,d. <'1'
anll~la
t. /.,,'~
. "" . ......
In .
tm
I II!'
1'J:rr -,w,'
ff
"living" opposites m~rg{' into Ollt' n IH~IIH'~_ .ThtHlgl~ I"I'minig.

,,-tho!ogJ('a l thought IlIfill1pul.tllll){ ~IIlHIi\r 1'1'"
('e ntO f ll,. n .
- I
.
"I
IIl is doctrine rrprf'sf'nl s n (r('lUel\{ llll:-; ~h'p r\lrw anl in
~"iee:. of its rationalised. w('11 ('onsider('tl and oh('11 dl'arty
defined character.
.
No philosophy ca n aVOid the pr~b l (,111 of human COllsei
, '~and knowledge. Like thl.' Md es HllI s, lieraclltus links
OU5nc~::;
I"
I I .,
.
it with the activity of "SOll, W li e I, 1Il . ur n, IS COlllleN
ed with some natural element. ilerac lltlls taught that
"souls ... are vaporised from what is weI" (B 12). lI,c s~ id : "To
souls. it is death to become water; to waleI', It IS death
to become earth. From earth comes waleI', and from water,
soul" (836). Relevant to this is al so fragm e nt. B 76 (1):
"Fire lives the death of earth, and air li ves the death of
fm,,' water lives the death of air, earth - that of water ."
Fro~l these pronouncements we can gather that Heraclitus
conceived soul as air or thin and movable vapour. The qualities of the soul depend on the extent. to which it. succumbs to
th e influence of moisture: "A dry (des iccated ) sou l is the
wisest and best" (8 t 18) , whereas "a man, w h en he gels
drunk, is led stumbling along by an imm a ture boy, not
knowing where he is going, having hi s so ul wet" (8 t 17 ).
On the evidence that we have , Heraclitu s co nceived the
"airy" souls of men and animals as closely related to cosmic
air which was in this connection called "d iv in e reason,"
He taught that we inhale the Logos by breathing. When man
is asleep, his reason departs, and when he wakes up it returns so that his soul is like coals or embers which glow
brighter when brought near the fire and fade when remover!
from it. This affinity of the soul not only to eva poration ,
but also to the Logos and fire identified with life and
knowledge is very characteristic. The soul is conceived as
a mod~fication of single living "nature." Drawing in , as it
were, Its Logos, the soul communicates with thi s "nature"
~nd cognises it. to the extent to which it assimilates to
Its Logos.
/'
Knowledge is .obtained through the agency of the se nses
and reason . which are closely connecled . H
I ,
erac
I us .IS
quote d. assaymgthathehonouredmost"ll,os
f WIIC
I II
.
e ,I ungso
there IS Sight, hearing , knowledge" (B 55)
I
h
can b
. d b
h
' I.e . t lOse t at
.
e ~ercelve
y t e se nses and comprehended by the
mmd . i t. IS pres umably for this reason tha' I, e d d
I not cou nte l'pose, contrary to t h e almost unanimo" , op
fl liS com 1Il10n 0
:'"
'II'arllil1lo:" and "illb'lli~WI1('p"

thouj.{h "111 lI("h
11"lrllilig dcU'~ 1I0t Ic'ac'lI 'HlC' to haH' int~'lIig(,lIcI" " (13 41l),
" (1)('11 who 10vI' wi:-;clollJ rllusl hI.' illiluirl'rs into H'ry many
lhings_illllC'I"r" (11:1:)). T.t'arnlnJ.t allil illtc,TTlgt'-n('l" (wiscfoIU,
,. '"iiisigTi"t. SC'IIS(') art' two Ollpositps rnakillJ.t a harmonious wholt'.
Heraclitu s dO(':i not call in qUl"stion lh~' close rt'lationship of
the soul and hody comparing tht'lll to a spider and robw('!!:
justlikl.' a sp iMr fl'cls whC'rC' hill thread is dama~ed and runs tn
the spot wherC' a fly got (,lItangled, so a man's soul
ru s hes to wh(' re thl.' body !-1\Iftl'r('d an injury as if unahi(' to
bear it. At t.he salHl.' time th(' soul is not confllled within til('
bod y: "You could not in you r going find the end of the soul,
though you travelled t.he whole way: so deep i!'t its Law
(Logos) " (845). As has already beCD indicated, the soul
in Heraclitus is a part. of t.he universe which is everlasting
fire and Logos.
The interpretation of Heraclitus's teaching has always
been under a strong innuence of theological tradition that
tended to use his utterances in support of the doctrine of ..
immortality and even corporeal resurrection. HoweHr. un biased approach to Heraclitus'S extant fragments. s.hows th~t
his doctrine of god did not fall within the traditIOnal r~h
g ious-mythological scheme, but represented ao early philosophica l conception. The soul. according to Heraclitus. was
not immortal. Life and death were conceived by him as natural
opposites and he wrote that people "when they are born. t.hey
are will ing to live and accept their fate (death): and they
leave behind children to become victims of fate" (8 20).
Though this clear s tatement seems to be overshadowed by
mysti fying fragment 27 ("there await men after they are .dead
things which they do not expect or imagil!e"), the most likely
mea ning of this obsc ure pronouncement IS that the so\l1 after
deat.h dissolves in th e all-embracing living nature only to be
reborn again.
Comparin g "mortal " people with "immortal " go~s, IiNac
liw s says: " Im mortals ar(> mortal, m?rlais .ar~ \1!HllOr~'l.I:
[ each 1 Ii ves th e tlea th of til(> OthN, and d te.s their \If e (~6_) .
It is not easy to interpret s uch aphonsn.ls, but thl::; Olll'
is clearly indicaliv(> of a tendency to bnd.ge the. mythologi cal gap between p(>opl(> and gods. lIeracittus rejeCL" ~ra
diUonal polytheistic beli(>fs and takes a f~rm. stand agalilst
sacrifice. religious processions and Bac~hlc rites. The. only
deity whiclf h(> knows and rl'cognises IS the cosmos Itself,
1II1.'1I1i110 r :-l.
the ('verlasting liying Lo/oto~ fin' . II. i~ ub i qlliloll~ IIUt!
one can hide [rom it. Il :;I('ers ('\t'r~lhlll jr{ a nd ~Wily3 th., ths' ....... "That which aloiH' IS WISl' I ~ 1lI1l' ; It I ~ wlllmj:t alltl
Iunwilling
Illk. _
to be called by I I~(' IHIIlH' (I r Z,I' U",; "' (.II "\'.-). h i~
willing because the ~!tos: hn' IS no ~t'SS Oll llllpOlcli1 _ thun
Z('U!~. the sourcE' of I1f('; It IS not wlllllljr{ , h"I"uUSl' It rl'
veals it:wlf to man not in the anthropomorphi c g ll isl' of the
Thunderer. but in the slrnggl(' and waf, in T I' uth a nd. Strife,
in the cosmic harmony of oppositl's.
Of course, it cannol be sHid thai IIt'radilus's leaching
was free [rom mythological views as s uch. Bes id es Zeus. He raclitus speaks of Hades the god of death and Di onys us the
god of Iife - "Hades is the same as Di onys us, in w hose honour
the,' rave and perform the Bacchic rev('ls" ( 8 15) . t h e Erinyes ....:. .. The sun will not transgress his meas ures; otherwise
the Furies (Erinyes), mini~ter~ of Ju s ti ce, will fi n d him
out" (B 94), the Sibyl "with raving mo uth , u t.ter ing her
un laughing, unadorned, unincensed words" (8 92) a nd "the
lord whose oracle is that at Oelphi" (8 93) , All th ese quotations sound today \ery dark as the associatio ns He raclitus
wanted to bring to his listeners' minds have bee n large ly lost.
. The interpretations given by antique commcn tators o f various
periods are far-fetched allegories or symbol s. I t is ver y likely that the meaning of these phrases was ind e('d presented
by Heraclitus in the form of allegories and meta phors which
were used in a definite context and intend ed to e lu cidate
his dicta; now, however, being the remnants o f an extinct.
culture ..they can do nothing but. obscure hi s tho ught.
TradLtLon p~esents Heraclit~s as a solitary thin ker, a
. npbleman by bLrth and manners who k('pCTiimseli al oof f rom
hiS leilow-cLb~ens an? held most 01 mankmd III grea t contempt. AccordLng to DlOgenes Lacrtius (IX, 3), "he wa ~ loftymLnded beyond all other men, and other meaning ... F in a lly: he became a hater of his kind and wandered on the mo u ntams, and thcr~, he continu{'d to live, making hi s diet. of
g~as~~ndd~erbsd HTo su~po~t such opinions, the commentato rs
usua y.a uce
eraclLt.us s own pronouncements )Or ort.ed
ly tshowlllg
I S arLs
p . t ocf l the hatred and
, scorn of thi~. gloo") y b"I'
L lOLL
wn~- PO"""
s d d
ra orIIliS countrymen.
lao
" h" h rhe fragment'!
.
.~" ... s In ce co nLO u erances w L
e may give cau~('
I"
"k
. for ac cLlsa I"Ions 0 r tus
sor I b u,
lal I'nwnt" tle
I y are
. I II e many of Heraclitus'!!
.. olh"r
~- s
not Single-valued and att'sl to the d.al ," I' I
r h" Ih
h""
h
ec Ica c Hlracte r
o
IS
oug t. III t e COs mos govern(>d b Y II IC WIS'
" Logos,
)t
dt,tll l !ift, ~,nli i!::"nohlt (lPl.ltli awuil th,,!i{' wil'I (10 lI"t follow its
prcs(.L" ipl ioll' alltl hOilst of tht'ir
TIII'y art' wil
(
{til ,IIHI arro}!:ant alLll "0111' shouhl tl'ulH"h arroganlt' ratbpr
t han a ("I)IIfla~rali(Jn (B II:~)_ 011 tht, other IWILlI, 'tt1f' think in).! facu lty ill ,11111 111011 to all" (II t 1:~) OilLd all m('11 havl' till'
r apHc ity of knowinl{ tht'lIIs!'lvt's and ading with !IIt)("h'ration"
(B 11 H). 'I'll(' Logos is "c(JmIlH)II" alii] ev('ry\)()(ly run g rasp Lt
an d at t a in wisdom howt'vt'r, anordinl{ tf) frag:mt'll t 2. 'most
flwn l ive llS if tiH'Y had it privatt' ILlld{'fst<lnciing uf !tw ir
own. "
Th (' aCCOIHII of I h'radiluss ('thiral views pn'st' nts a
s, pC'c ia l pL"oh ll'm, as thp ohscurity of his style cfJlllbinps in
thi s fI (' ld with the llH'agr{'ness of ull(lueslionab ly gt' n ui nt'
passages. Fragment 11!), which has b(>('11 the object of m~L ch
uis putt', says: c.haractt'f (ethos) for man is destiny (daimon).
Th e d iffic u lty in the int('rpr('talion of this pas..;ag{' Sa'fl_ls
largely f rom the ambiguity of thl' key wor~s ethos a~d dalmon
whi ch had morc t h a n ont' ust' each. It IS most likel y t hat
Herac lit.us,'s s tatement. is directed against the mylholo~ical
belief in a daimim liupposed to look after an individual man in
th e manner of a guardian and empha~i~{'s man's. own respon s ibility for his destiny. Commenting 011 thiS saymg, Eph Lcar m us was lat er to paraph rase it as follow::,: "Character fo,~
ma n is good desti ny- but fo r some men. bad also
( OK 23 B 17 ). Heraclitus left us in the dark as to whether
ethos is inn ate or sLlbj{'ct to change (for the wors,e or [or the
b{'ttc r) , but we do k now his categorical
statement::-:.:Q.a~
.
.n.
,.
(OK 'J') B man
'9)
to me is [ wo rth 1 ~l'n th.o tL~awL If h IS be?t. ..
....'I . .
Give'jl lte ra clitus"'s p{'!:,simislll about the abLlIty of most p('op le
to ra s p the Logos, oll e can only wonder why he s hould
tak~ pain s t o ad va ne{' hi s principles" make sp(>('chcs, preach
aga ins t ig norance a nd wrongdoing and "weep" over wfl'lC h{'d
i~II'IralllI'
Ihl
human lif ('.

.
Hcraclillls'li fl'<l gm('nts 85 ("It is hard to fl~ h l agaL nst
impul s(' ; wha l (,v(' r it wishe!". it hu ys at Ih e e '(pe ~l.se of th e
soul ") a nd 11 0 (" It i.s not b{'tler for men 10 obta LL~ a ll tl~al
th ey w i.~ h ") .se{,l1L to fall in \inC' with lhe gp ll{'rHI ~th L cal, pnn
ci pl Nl of hi s lim (' a nd (''(press advicC' 10 rest ram one s d t'si res and pll t th (' "soIL I" lin\~.
.
.
Earlv G r('c k morali ty is dLfC'ctly iLn ked Wit h and merg~s
int o p~lili r~. Comin !>t frolLl i\ ro~'al ela n ~ t E pht'.S LLS , l-.l{'f,\c h -.
tLL S was op('n l y h ORtil e to tradt> a~ld LI~dustfLal ~hg~~cI~~
th at had COILl C' to powC'r in hi::; natL \'e cIt y a nd C'stabil ~lll .t
iiI
give us the name of the ty rant. Heracli _

So urces
C
g th
' If I
tllS\ contemporary Melanchr~s .. ",n,surln doe ~,l "hll.ess of
th~ "ri ch. Heraclitus contrasts It w~tdl llIm an _gill ,Y,W Jeh he
a~sociate. ," th ~bJ_e_ ~e~c~~~, WIS om an d mo~a Integrity.
/! {"rao IlV
,,' '
cialion of wealth
may wealth not fail YOU men of
IS enun
.
dr' k d
Ephesus, so that you may ~e COllv ~ cte . 0. your WIC e ness!"
(13 125a) I was combined wl~h u.ndl~gUlsed conte mpt for, dem,t'c tendencies and egalltaflan Id eas after the fashion of
ocra J
d Th
'
h r '
,
ari!'llocralic poets Alcaeus an " eogn.ls ~ 0. unDU S y Co.OIcrolled wealth and all kinds of noveltlCs. At the sa me tim e
~It'raclitus
exalts law which should be defended by rightminded people as "their city's walls" (8 ,44) so far as it is
ill accord with the on e divine law governing th e world, the
Logos.
Heraclitus' s universal "strife" was undoubtedl y a 1'('f1eclion of the class struggle which unremittingl y fl a res up and
subsides in an antagonistic society. The truth, accordin g
to lIeraciitus, is that. peace and rest which seem to peo pl e a
drsirable order of things are not. based on a harm ony of agreeml'nt, but 011 an cY.,ui.!ibJ:illm of ten sion, 00 a!1 incessant.
slruggl(' of opposing forces. This dialectical idea oT universal
slrif(' as the real harmony of the world, the co nvi ction that.
war is the father of all things and of the true peace is the
e.'iSl'n('(' alld - the tragic fervour of Heraclitus's phil osophy.
IIt'rariitus had no orthodox follower s. Though ancien t
sou rC'('s often speak of the " Her::.riiteans," t.hey usuall y mean
thos(' who s('iz('d upon the Ep"luslan's doctrin e of flu .~ and
brought. it into a ollc-sided prominence. S uc h phil osophers
ironically r('ferred to by Plato as "e ternally flowin g" held
that ('V('r changing and contradictory reality does not lend
Ils(' H to any determinat.ion so that no statement regardin g it
t'IHI 1)(' tru('. This eonduslOn carrif'd tlleHcraclitean doctrine
of thl:' nu~, of ('very thing to an extreme and filially deg rad ed
It to SO I)ll1stry. Ac('ording to Aristotle, "it was thi s beli ef
IhHt .blosso llH'd into the most. extreme of the views above
II\I'nlloll('(l, lhat. of the professed lIeraclileans s uch as was
twit! by Cr:llylus, who iinally did not think it right to say nnytllIlI,I.( hilt only. moved his fmger, and criticised Herac litu s for
~ay lllg that It I~ Impossible to step twice into tl
.
f(Jr h(' thought one could lIot do it even once" (Ale,sa,nM,e ',lv,e ' ;
!i. 101(11) ,
rlS .
e . V,
Th{' I'rofotillt! illnuence of Herac'I',",'
,'
"
,.
s eae, "lmg h'
ru ns
Imug I r(>nturH'!-I aud clearly .shows up in "
I
.
Ie p IF DSOP lea
I
I\
works of diff('rent period~, ("g. in Parmenides's poem, Plato's dialoglle~, in the works of Ari~totle, the stoics and
the sct'ptics, in Christian tht.'ologians and the "fathers of
the Church." According to DiogeneJ; Laertius, "the commentat.ors on hi!-; work are very numerous, including as they
do Antisthenes and Heraclides of Pontus. Cleanthes and
Sphaerus the Stoic and again Pallsanias who was called the
imitator of Heraclitus, Nicomedes, Dionysius, and, among the
grammarians, Diodotus ... Hieronymus tells us that Scythinus,
the satirical poet, undertook t.o put the discourse of Heraclit.us
into verse" ( IX. 15). The a nswers given by Heraclitus to the
fundam ental problems of philosophy two a nd a half millennia
ago have not lost their sig nin cance in mod ern times and he
is as popular nowadays as in antiquity. It wou ld not. be an
exaggeration to say that of all early philosophers Heraclitus
is the most deserving of the title of the founder of objective dial ectics. Its eSSt'FlCC, the doctrine of th~_ S~! lIgg~ c
and unity of opposites will be forever linKed With hiS
name .
,
Chupler .1
Italian Philosophy
7. Pythagoras and J>ythagoft'ons: Science, Hdigion. Philosoph y
Italian philosophy which includ es the Py tha gorean and

Eleatic thought had its start some tim e aft er th e emergen ce of
the Ionian School and partly owed its exi sten ce to t he Ioni an
innuence. It originated in Magna Graecia , i.e. in th e Creek colonies in South Italy round about the end of t he sixth centu ry
B.C. The Greeks started planting th eir coloni es in South Italy
and Sicily in the late eighth and in th e seve nth ce n turies .
wards the end o( the eighth century th e Cha lcidians, Megareans and Corinthians setup the cities of Nax os, Catana, Leon
Lini on the eastern coast of Sicily. Th e Corinthi ans found ed
Syracuse which was to bpcome later one of th e ri c hest citi es of
Sicil~. The seventh century saw th e found ati on of Acragas
(Agngcntum ) . In the latc eighth century co lo ni es were al so
planted in South Italy: Cumae on the wester n coast, Spartan
colony Tarentum and Achaean coloni es Sy baris and Croton,
the~ Metapontum and ~oseidonia (Pestum) , in th e east. Sylians, Croton and their Achaean dependen cies formed an
AcI~acan confederation with Hera's sanctuary near Croton as
their comm on religious centre. In Lhe sixth ce ntury B.C. the
Pho~~e~ns wh? had earlier planted Massalia (Ma rsei ll es),
Alalia III Corsica and other colonies began to settl e on the
wt~ter~ coa~tof Italy and set up Elea which becam e th e centre
~h:I~~~/S~:~~~~ ~~02mBt~e ~hoccan cit.ies after th ~ir. fa ll before
tum and Flea hecam tl rotoln, Acragas, Leontllll , Metapon-'
e Ie motlerland or lh I
r
I I
galaxy of ouL')tanding thinkers
e lOme 0 a w 10. e
th e history ?( philo:;ophy.
and left a profound trace III
lI avlO g a ri sen as agricultural I .
v('nient harbours, these cities ra f~1 Oilies and p~ssess i ng confir centr('s.
i de P y dcvcloped Into la rge tra.
pended on crop growin g anim al
'
To-
husbandry ilnd export of agricultural produce (wheat, bariE'Y,

~Pl'lt and othE'f ('('rt'a ls. calth' ami therefore meat and hides
Will('S, oil, Ptc.)
.,
. :I'hl' SOUfC('S Wf' ~ppPlld \lpO~ for our information on the politIcal system of (,reck colonIes do not warrant its accurate
ass.f'ssm~nl.. Tlll'Y l'xpli~itly show, however, that there was no
un iformity III the constitution of city states. For instance the
Spa rta n colonie!; tl'ndl'd to preserve the monarchical traditions
of their mot.her-country. By contrast, the Achaean colonies
g rav itated towards slave -owning democracy and were the
sce ne of acute struggle between aristocratic and de mocratic
fa ct ions. T ~ e Ion ian co lon.ies continued develop ing the advan ced SOC ial and econom iC re lations of their metropolises.
Th e history of Magna Gl'aecia of that period was charact.erised
by co mpa ratively peaceful development and it was only in the
fourth and. th ird centuries B.C. t.hat it was terminated by
Roman expansion (the Naples fell in 327, Syracuse in 21 1).
In t he absence of any threat of foreign invasion the relations of
Gre ek co lonies were chiefly dominated by conflicts wh ich
nar ed up not only between the Dorian and Achaean (Tarentum and Sybaris) polises, but also between kindred city
sta tes, s uch as Croto n and Sybaris. Of no small importance
was also in terna l str ife which often came to the forefront in
th e polit ica l life of G reek cities.
The predominantly agricu ltural character of Ital ian colon ies, as we ll as the expanding contacts with cu lturally underdeveloped su rround ing peopl es accounted for the preva lence of
reli g ions c ul ts, particu larly the cul t of Dionysus. Merging
with the re lig ious and mytho logical conceptio ns constitut ing
th e fou nd atio n of suc h cults, the inc ipien t rat ional thought
brough t from Ion ia prod uced pec uli ar philosophical doc trines
,'e flect ing t he inn ucnce of religious and mythi cal out look a nd
g ravi tat ing towards ideali sm.
In other words , re li g ious problems played a far more important role in the te,achin gs of th e Itali an phil osophers as compared with the-Ion ians, induc ing the for mer to develop elaborate doctrines of god, so ul , its mortality and immortality, and
to d efine the relations betwren god and the world, god a nd the
man . It was a new t rend that adva nced new philosophical
problems, I'('assess('d t raditional ones a nd sh ifted th e foc us of
atten tion from nature to man. The new pa th opened up by the
Itali an philosophers was circu itolls and highly co ntrad ictory:
a rev ival of the prerational mytho logica.! outlook was to be
,,'
65
;,
(I; \~ I
.
. 1 >1 "harp crilici:'lll. Till' P :v th ag(\flan. WPH' t hf'
combined will I S .
fl -I to embark on tills pJth.
m;
'" lor of pythagorecllli:'1ll ('n n nn\ ~' lw prt'~I'ntf'd III Ih t'
The fils
1 o"llioe TIll' Pylh a J,{OI'l'H Ii Ihl'lH'l'ticl\l doc

fornl
.
. oSllP 1II ca 1 It',H' 1illig took
. 0 a genera
I> >OUS .;;cientiflc
allti 'pllll
tnM as a re Igl
..
~
.
.
.
shapc at the end of the sixth century B .C. d Url uj,t tlH' hr('tl ~lI p
of pythagoras, the foundcr of thl' 'sc honl. Hntl Ills Jlupll s .
>
>
The ' relig ious community fo unded by r'y lh a,:toras atlain l'd
real political influence and ('\,('11 3!'1Cl'nd ('d to power in
~roton, Metapontulll and Tarcntum . Howe Y(\(', a::; a result of
a r('\'olt which embraced the whole country th e Pythagore a n
brotherhood as a political organisati.on was sm.as hed ~nd its
members wcre either killed (accordmg to an Cie n t eV idence,
they were usually burnt ali~e with the. hous es w here they
gathered to discuss state affairs) or ballished. I n t h e second
half of the fifth century B.C. pythagoreani sm was mainl y
represented by its philosophical teaching as e xpou nded by
Philolaus. In the late fifth and early fou r th centuries
B.C. Pythagorean philosophy grows i.nto and m erges with
Platonism in the activity of the ancient Acad e m y . These
~tages ill the external history of t~e sch ool a l:e rl"presenled
respectively by early (the later third of th e s ixth a nd nrst
half of the fifth centuries), middle (the later d ecad es of th e
fifth century) and late Pythagorean ism. In view of th e
predominantly Platonic character of late Pythagor ean ism we
shall confine our survey of the Pythagorean th o u g h t to its
first two periods as .best representing the spirit or th is tr end.
A . Pythagoras and early Pylhagoreani sm. Pyth agor as, th e
the son of Mnesarchus of Saroos. is said to ha ve s tu d ied in
gypt and probably ill Babylonia where he a cquired the
knowledge of mathematics and astronomy. In abou t 532 B.C. ,
Pythagoras left Samos to escape lire under the ty r a n ny of
Polycrate!:i and settled in Croton where he es tablis h ed h is
brothe~tlOod. His life was surrounded by a haze of leg e nd: he
w~s said to be a :00 of Apollo or Hermes, to have a golden
t~lIgh a,nd .to retam memories of his soul's past tra ns mi gration s . ~ torles were told that he had first been Herm es 's son
Aetilahdes. then Euphorbus who was wounded by Me n e laus,
t~lf'n Hermotimus , Pyrrhus and rlilally was born as P yt hagora s. In Croton , he prea ched a new way of life which, accor ding
to Plato, ~as hand~d down by him to posterity so that his
followers are to thiS day conspicuous among others by what
they term th e
way of life" (PI a I 011. Resp.
X, ()OOh) l' ytha~ol"a~ 8 tl'adlillg was a great success and till'

rapid ly grnwin~ lIL1mlH'r~ of hi~ pupils and followers inrludl'd
polit idan ... :'IC"il'nti~ts. uhysil"ians and .. . wom('n. which was
i n it~1' 1f sonlt'thing quill- (Jut of thl' ordinary in that period.
P yt h ag(Jra~ dHI nn.t Iwlf! any flfru'ial positions but enjoyed
th l' rl'pul.ltlon of a WISt' counSl'lior. His politic-al influence may
hi' ill ustratf,tl by tllf' fo\lowing fatt. In about 510 B.C., Tl'lv5,
the It'adl'r of til(' popular party at Sybaris, banish{'d five h~n
rl red of its dcht'st eitizt'ns who took refuge at Croton.
Wh en Te lys d{'man(\ed that ttH'Y be given up Pythagoras
interv l.nt'd and persuad('d thl'! Croton ian assembly to protect
t !H' Ol . As a resu lt of the war that followed the Sybaritean
arm y wa~ defeal(ld and thr city itself was destroyed. This
eve nt m ust have g iven the Pythagoreans real political power
wh ic h t hey held t ilt the outburst of popular discontent at the
end of t h e crntury as a result of which Pythagoras was
c6mp ell ed t o leave Croton and take refuge at ~1etapontum
wh er e he soo n died.
Th E' Pythagorean community or brotherhood was an aris
toc r a ti c pol itical organisation which sought to concentrate
pow er in the ha n ds of the "best few." The aim of Pythagoras
was n ot to r eanimate the old landed aristocracy which had
alread y lost its political and ideological influence. but to
create a n ew "aristocracy of spirit': in the person of his pupils.
" the best" fr om the viewpoint of ethics. i.e. religion. science
and phil osop hy, who, according to Diogenes Laertiu~. govern
ed th e s t a te so well "that its constitution was in effect a true
aris tocracy (gover nment by the best)" (Diog. L. VIII. 3)
Th e P y thago rea n way of life was described in. detail.by
Aris totl e's pup il A ristoxen us whose evidence merits a high
degree of tru st . According to Aristoxenus. it was ba~ed on the
convi c tion th at a na rc h y co nstituted the greatest evli fo r m.a n
as his we ll -be in g cou ld not be attained with no authOri ty
above him (Jamb\. V. P. 17~). The supreme powe r belongs to
god. S peakin g of Py thagor as and his fo llowers, Aris toxen ll s
says : " Ever y di stin ction t hey lay downas to wl~ a~ shoul? ~e
don e or not do ne a ims at co nform ity with the dl\, l~e. Thl ~ IS
th e ir s tartin g-point; the ir whole \if~ is or.de~ed With ~ ne~
to following God and it is the governlllg prmc lple of the ir phi.
losoph y" (ibid. , '1 37). Supreme justice comes from th e pow~r
of th e gods whic h is n ot to be challenged by a 0 y' 0ne . Ne xt In
au thority after th e god s a re demons (creatu res like p ythagoi
ras ) , th e n co me th e rul er s. the parents a nd the e ld ers, as we I
.'
a~ tile law. The Pylhagor~all way of life also la,id down Van ?llS
rules of behaviour for ddlerenl groups of pl.ople d('~elldl llg
on their social status, gavE' medlca.1 and ('ug~nlc pr('scnptioll!<,
demanded the fulfilment of vanous physical. and mU SICt
e\.erci!-'('s, etc. The ancient sour('~s ofT~r no ,ratlOlI.al cxpJ a na
lion of Pythagoras's moral code IOvartahly InvoklOg th e will

of till' gods. The purp.ose of this code. howe.ver. ~een~s to be
clear enoogh- to subject man to the authorIty of diVInE' r u le
and extol contemplative "theoretical" life free from a ny
practical interests. Its injun~ti.ons,. howevN, were in marhd

contrast with the actual partiCipatIOn of the Pythagoreans in
till' political life of Greek city states. Pythagorc8nism appears
to hav(' been the first philosophical school to fix a gulf betw een
lhf'ory llnd practice, the "book" and life which is!:lo characteristic of a society based all th(, exploitation of man by ma n.
I)l'!:ipitl' the fact that the Pythagorean ethical ideal contain s
a number of moral injunctions of general human value, flot t o
!lpeak of the practical r\llps of ev('ryday communal life , it
tlf'arly f('v('als the underlying nexibl(' sociopolitical con c ep ~
lion that could lIP lIs('d to advantage by various ruling sections
of <lnli(llIl' society, Bas('d Oil divin(' authority and law , it d e.
lII'IIl(h'd, according to Jamhlichus, adherl'llc(' to the trad i
tional customs and laws, ev('n if they w('rc flat perfect, as it
(lid not I)('fit a man to rejert th(' existing laws in favour of
dul~illus innovations (Jamb!, \'. P. 176)
11~t, ft'ligious and I)hilosophical t('aching of t'arly Pythago.
rpalHSIll took two forms according to til(' natural tal('nts of th e
dlst'll)h'~:. (l(,Il.~/~iflla or saYin~s al1(1 mfllhemata or knowledge
I'WllI'r, lilt' 1)llIiosnphy of Iht, first form cOllsi::;ted of und e m IlIIHrah'd silying's, without argUlIll'lIt, which were intendl' d
tn III' Prt'st'~\'l'(~ hy thr pupils tiS di\inr re\'('lations, TtH'Y
lII!"liHit'd .(h'llIlItIOI1S Illlt'grtlly tli!'c1osinJ,( till' ('!'Sl'IIC(' of thing~ ,
~1Il(1 \aI"lOIl."i moral Prt'('('Pts and rrc()mnH'ndation~ fol'
IIlslan('I': \\ I~al art' th(' islands of tilt' blt'~s(>d? Th(' 8U1; and
Ihl' :\fooll. \\hal IS the Dt'lphian Oracle;'lTh(>
b f
IPlh'}
f ...
, n U l l l e r o u r,
,.
,t Il.\rJllI~ny 0 "Irrlls (tht' music of the !:Iphcrc.s). Wha t
I~ 1111 most Just? Maklllg a sacrinc(' Wh I . I
h.I'~IIII .. ftk~I?f lJarmony: It was I)rt'scrib{'(i not s~:e~ l;h~n~:!
\\1 1,1
III (', !lol to Sit 011 a bush('1 Ill(> S I 1
'
1"'lldnlht's Oil risill~ anti Slll~th - Oll~'~{~' to r()~1 up one s
IlQ1ly, to rub out tht' mark of a lit
II I Illprlll I of th'
1111' 11I'<lrl, In put on tht' ri ht sho~ In the asill's, not to eat
fir!!:' 1'((' All th('s" cllriou~ I'r~('(' ll!l~s,t, t,o wa.sh Iht' .Idl f.oot
I
lad tl my thologltal ring
;0
net Wt'rf' supposed to poss('ss magic power, Despite the at

~empis of I~h'r inh'rpr~tl'rs to ration.alise som~. of the injll~c
t OilS (for mstanc(', DlOgenes Lat'rtllls says: By not eatmg
\,OUI heart hl' lllf'ant not wasting your life in troubles and
jlaills' [I)iog, L, VIII, 18}), they clearly reveal the primitive
llagical lit'lief in univ'rsal kinship or sympathy which
assumes. for instaHc(', a clos' relationship between a man
and the imprint of his body in a b('d and implies a po!<sibility
of callsin~ him harm by ex('rting evil infl.uence on what is
a~sociat('d with him, H('nc(' the numerous Pythagorean taboos
intended to prot('cl a man from witchcraft. Some of these
ancil'lll pr('scriptions, however, sound quite modern: for
in::;tance, on Aristotle'~ evidence the Pythagoreans demanded
from th('il' discipl('s not to hurt their wives who were depend
ent on th('m.
A . . regards knowlNige proper, i,e, mathemata, Pythagoras
is cr('dited with important contributions to geometry. sllch as
the famous theorem about the square of the hypotenuse of a
right-angl('d triangle, Ih(' discovery of incommensurability,
the theory of flv(' corr('ct bodies, and to arithmetics - the th('orv of ('\'ell and odd numbers, the fundamentals of the geolllet
ric il'lerpretation of number::;, the application of arilhmetics
to Illu:-;ic, etc. There was evid('ntly a close afflllity between the
doctrines 01 nature d('vl'loped by the early Pythagoreans and
the lonians, On the evid('nce of Aetius, Heraclitus and Hippasus of M('tapontulll consider('d 1h(' universe to be on.e, in eternal motion and limited, its principle being fire (DK 18 A 7),
A similar t('stimony, without any comment. is given by Aristo
tl(' (1\1('1. 984a 7) and Simplicius who quotes Theoph~as~us
(A 7). Our sourres giv(' us neithl'r d('tails nor substantiatIOn
of this doctrine,
We are drflilitely morr lucky with the Pythagorean, t(,<lch
ing of soul. Pythagora~ must have a~opte? the orphiC can
c('plion of th(' immortaitty and transnllgratlo~ of souls: M('n
lion has alr('ady been mad(' of the incarnations of hiS own
soul Pythagoras purportedly r('membered. all of thrm:
.. ",And th('n h(' told of th(' wanderings of hiS soul, how It
migrated hitl1('1' and thither, into how manr plants and
animals it had come, and all that it underwent IIl.. Had~s, and
ali that the other souls there have to endure
(DlOg. L.
VIII, 4). Again, no details of this teaching are known to tiS,
The extant rragm('nt~ alieg('dly tak~n from SOlll~ boo~ .b.~
Hippasus come in fact from a later ." \eopythagore.ul trpallS{
8?d fE"pr,escnt an ob\i?us l~lOd (' rn isali~)!l of till' pl.-ilo::;oJlIH>f s

VI('WS. :'\0 more credible IS th(' h'stHlIOlly of :\(,Olll-\t
"
"
J " J J' "
"J'
Oll iS!
Jamblichus accor d mg to Wile 1 -llppaS Ii S inkt'd soul w'tJ
number and considered the latter to be the' Crt'alors organ' o~
thought and the ftrst model of creation (A 11).
B. MiddLe Pythagoreanism. OC'scribing th e \'iew~ of " tho'
are ea.lled Pythagore?lls," Arislo,tl e devoted
tlOn to their famous doctrine of opposIlrs in its developed f
associated with the name of Alcmaeon of Croton
" t JH.' ten P
h"
ost~,ng
yt agorean
pairs 0 r opposites, Aristotle notes'
Alcmaeon of Croton appears to have spoken in the same
.
and either he took this doctrine from th em 01' th ey fro ~.a y:
for as to his period, he lived in the old age of Pythag m I, ~l ,
Both Plato in Philebus and Aris.totle in Metaphy sics,
refer to what appears the earltest version of this do t' '
According to Plato, "the ancients, who were our
nearer to gods than we are handed down the t dOt"
that wh a tever th"JOgs ar~ said to .be a.re composed'of ra
Ion
oneI and
man.y, and have the finite and mrullte implanted in tJ
"
Aristotle's, comment is slightly
~v'd~ntl,), then, these thmkers also consider th at numb . '
\~'ho
~p('cial attl;' ~~
( J~rm
B~~~ l'
bette~/~~l~
,~Ph~1. 16~).
diffe~:~\.
l~:~;:~e~~~~~~~~sasa~at~~:i~orp~~~l!~e~~d s~:t!~~n~in"! El~
and that of these o:hen~~t~:; ~re/h~ even and the odd ,

unlimited, and that the 0
IS Imlted , and the former
(for it is both even and o~~) proc:eds from both of these
and that the whole h
,an number from the One'
A .
eaven as has been
.d .
'
rlSt.
Met.1.5.986a
17).
H~nce
sal,
IS
num
bers"
(
of the opposites whose rei'
,.the Pyt~agorean co nception
reality can be schemat" asonshlPs constitute the basis of all
Ica y presented as follows'
A ccording to Plato
. '
One-Plurality
A.cc?rdtng to Aristotle
Limit- Unlimited
Llmlt - Unlimited
(their accretion or
Od~-Even
mingling)
Unit
Being
Number
Numbers=Universe
. Both versions of the P
~~l~~t1y differ~nt in detail, re~~~::o~ean conception , th ough
thr e evolu~lOn of the WOrld - t~ one and the same scheme
unl~~~~e~~e /~te:~c~ion of one and em~~;r~~~ct
7)
o.f all thin gs

r word~. the P th'
Imlted and the
y agorean conception,
Whf'IIlf': it Jri~illat('d ill the (arly period of the !:!chool or is

Il PIO ill(' of two.stages of '~icldl(' ~ythag{)reanism. rt'pre~enl"
r('lliity not as a ~Hnpll' totahty of different combinations of tllf'
unliJllill'd ur "prim,ary substance." but as a unity of the
hnlih.d ilnd th~ lIul1l1111ed, as an orderly cosmos. a complete
wlwll'. In phYSical terms, the evolution of the world. i.'. the
('fllf'rgl'ncl' of things is cOII('civcd 8!:! the "limitation of the
uulimitt.d": tlw t'lIdlt'ss, the incomplete is drawn, so to speak,
into till' process of world formation. Commenting on this
conccptio ll , Aristotle wrote: "The Pythagoreans. too, held
that void exisl" and that it enter!:! the heaven itself, which as it
wpre inhales it. from the infinite air, Further it i~ the void
which distinguisiH's the natures of things. as if it were likr
what sepa ra tes and distinguishes the terms of a serips. This
hold s prllnarily in the Humbers, for the void distinguishes
their nature" (Arisl. Phys. IV, 6, 213b).
The cosmology and cosmogony of the Pythagoreans are
based on their conception of the limited as order and perfection . The universe as a unity of the limited and the unlimited
is a sphere evolving in limitless void by breathing it in.
expanding and differentiating. This is how cosmic space,
celestial bodies. movement and time come into bein~. The
centre of the universe is occupied by fire referred to, according
to Philolaus. as Hestia (the goddess of the hearth). the horne
of Zeus, the sustainer and measure of nature. The nearest to
the centre is the counter-earth, then come earth, moon, sun.
the five planets, and lastly the sphere of the fixed stars.
The counter-earth was inve-nted to bring the number of ce-Ie-st.ial bodies up to ten. [t was lIsed to explain lunar eclipses. The
celestial bodies arise from the central nre and revolve- around
it. being fastened to crystal spheres, All planeb, the earth
including, revolve from west to e-ast facing the central fi re
always with one and the same- side which explains why we
nev(' ,' see it. Our hemisphere is heated with the rays of the
ce ntral fire reOected by the sun. There is yet anothe r fire,
presumably identifIed with unlimit.ed breath which occupies
the hi ghest position and encompasses the universe.
The cosmology of the pythagoreans which had much in
comm on w ith the Milesian. particularly Anaximand('r's piCture of th e wodd wa~ a remarkable step forward, The
rejection by the pythagoreans of the traditional ge-ocentri c
views, the postulate of the spherical shape of the- t'arth and its
revolution ahout the ('('otral fire within a period of 21 hour:'.
"
the explanation of sola r ('d i pse~ by thl' passlIJ.{I' of the m
between the sun and the ra rth li nd of the ('hllllgl.' of
OIl
s'('a sO
on the earth by the inclination of it s orbit to that of the' ?ns

was a brilliant conjcctur(' th at antirillstl'd Ih(' truth
contributed to the subsequent developm ent of
heliocen7;ic
theory. The Pythagoreans al so advanced a unique COIlC('pt"
of the harn.lOuio.tlS
of hea v{' nl y spheres
caught the Imagmstton of many su cceed ing generation' f
poets and philosophers:
t? th e Pythagoreans,
speeds of the heavenly bodi es are .. n t he ra ti os to rut . I
.t
1
k
1
IS l ea
In erva sma m"g up a comp ete octave so th a t th e sound of th
bodies as they revolve is concordant.
e
The Pythagoreans did not confme themsel ves to th e el b
ration of the physical picture of the world largely
0earlier philosophical notions. They went furth er and I'
it with a
logical system correlated , in turn ,
cal values. ThiS aspect of the Pythagorean world o utlo k .
represented in their teac?ing of opposites that has
been
to. Immediately after the passage about
oppoSllion of one and many, the limited and the unlimi ted A .
h ,,stotle continues (Met. 986a 22)' "Olhers of thi
say th t th
. . .
s same sc 001
a
ere are ten prin ciples, which they arra n ge in t "
columns, namel y:
\\In
~ovement
acc~rding
defini~e
.r~ferred
Iimit-even
- unl imiled
odd
~he
Sll~
wh~~~
St;e
base~
kO~
withl~t~i
al r~adls
th~
at rest - mov in g
straight -crooked
one - plu raHty
Jigh t - dark ness
right Ieft
good - bad
.. mal~ - female
square - oblong"
A!i. IS eVidE-nced from thi s labl
I P
the limited and th e unlimited i \ l l e .y tha goreans brough t
nine wI!h good and bad res pecti ve ly. This in fa ct was
theory. r~ted in the wisdo~1 ~~\~en,~~1 Idea o f t~e ir ethical
pr~scrlptlons to observe measure:n d e.ve~ Sages and thei r
thi S theory, Aristotle wrol(> ' " E ' I bhmlt. Comm en t ing on
th e unlimited , as lhe Pyth~ ~; ~VI elo.ngs to the class of
to that of the limilNI " (Ftl N~ cans conjectured a nd good
ho e
1
> 1.
<C. B. 5110Gb) 1 . ' .
.
. w vcr, llat the Pythagor('an c n ' .
. tiS s lg lll fica n t,
different from the 11 ...... "I.t
0 ('eptlOn of opposites i~ very
h . I
... ' , I ean one ad'
P YSI('a : the opposites arc no I
n IS essentially metamak e a Ulllty of identity and ~ . ~utuaIlY repellent and do not
mixtu~e. Characteri sing Pyth~ erCnce, but rather a un ity of
Ja.mbh c.hus.quoted hi!l) as sa ing~~~S as a. moral reformer,
e\'erythlng IS mixl'd , earth wrth~' n~ eXlstmg thing is p uce
llrl', lire \\,'tl
;2
I I water , air wit h'
ho IUIlI tlll'y \V.illl :,lir. ('V('n tI~(' fair with the ugly and thl'
th
jll;;t Wllh thl'. 11l1JIISI (Ja"~bl. \. Pyth. 130). This integratl'd
physit' ul, I,tlllf and al'~thf'll(' approach is highly characteristic
If till' p yth aJ.{or("1II !Uoral theory and brings us to another
illl~()fta nt dO"lrille of the Pythagoreans-that of harmony.
( .('IIt'ra ll y !ipl'akIllJ(, the doctrine of harmony is onl' of the
key ('il'lIle nt!i of Pythogoreanism, underlying both its cosmolo
gy a nd t ill' tearhing of the !'.oul. For one thing, according to the
p ythagor('a ns, the ",holt' cosmO!i owes its perfection to the
harmony of numbe r~ which constitute its ultimate elements.
Sources quote Pythagoras and Philolaus as calling the soul
a harmon y a nd refer to Alcmaeon of Croton, a physician of the
earl y fifth cc ntury B.C., as one of the expounders of this theory . Al cmaeon is said to have been specially interested in medicine and ph ysiology and regarded all things, particularly the
human bod y , as the product of the mixture of opposites, their
harmoni ous combinations. According to Alcmaeon, "health is
equ ality ( isonomia) between the powers- moist and dry, cold
and hot, bi tte r and sweet and the rest, and the preva lence
( monarchia) of one of them produces disease, for thE' preval(' ne E' of either is destructive ... Health on the other hand is the
blendin g (symmetra krasis) of the qualities in proper
meas ure" (OK 24 B 4). It was just this "blending in proper
measu re" th at the Pythagoreans called "harmonia"' and madE'
on e of t he central notions of their teaching.
To d escr ibe the relationship between opposit(> forces in thE'
human bod y AicmaE'on uses political terms isonomia (equality
of rights) and monarchia. This terminology betrays hi~ 50('iomorphic app roach to nature and throws light on thl' source of
his natural a nd sodal conceptions. In point of fact, Alcmae
on 's teaching represents a clear tendency to spread !'oocial and
eth ical noti ons to the sphere of natural phenomena and thus to
holstel' up. in the face of growing class cOlltradiction~. the idea
of soci a l harmony by mak ing it the basis of the world outlook.
T he deve lopment of the Pythagorean thought in the midd le
per iod see ms to havE' hee n summed up by Philolaus who was
active in t he seco nd half of t he fifth century. The a nti
Py th ag orea n up rising C8usl'd h im to emigrate to Thebes, t hen
he return ed to Ital y and settled a t Tare ntu m, probably
his native city. Philol a us was t he teacher of Archy tas wh o
la ter form ed n lasting friendsh ip wi t h Pl ato and broug ht
s
h im in to d irec t co ntact with Pyt hngorE'anism. P h il olnu , too,
may h ave m('t Plato. Oiogencs Laertius informs li S, with reo
h'renct' to Demetriu~, that Phil olau:-; "was tht' ftr:-;t to ')uhlis n

tht> Pvthagorean treatist's to which hI' gan' Iht' titlf> rJn.
Yilture" (Diog. L. \-111. 85). I~ m<'alls that Pythagoreani.<;IJ'
b,' that time had already lost lis character of a s(,('ret "Pcl
community.; It is difficult to say if the book attributed
In Philo!au:-. repre;.:enled a genuilH' Pytlmgortan trpatis!, that
hiHi been kept ,,('cret. or wa~ a (omtn('nlary on concl'ption~
or
lauQ'ht oraH~ . in alllikf'lihoor:l. it was hi.<; own work as<'ribed

8rCClrdiuI! to tradition. to the TeachN. PhiJol all~ is al,,(;
crt,ditrd with the 3uthof.;hip of Bacchae. On flip Soul and
()n Rhythm and .11I'lrt>, TIl(' f'xtant fragnll'nts of thcse booh
art' flOW bplie\"C'd to 1)(' f()r~l'ri(s.
It shlJulli tH' nolNI. that thl' authenticity of till' treali:-<(' On
_\'llflJrl' has al:-<o bell II ('<1111'11 in qupstion, partl y 01' completel\'
011 lin(lllistir Ilrounds, th!" main ohjr('tion h~ing thrir do~~
ilrtillil~' with Aristotle'"" wl,rk" IHI lilt' PYI~\agor ('a Jl s, Though
!l1i'_ arllUlllf'nts ar(' S('riOllS I'Il(lUllll , tht'f(' is no rl'(\:-<Oll to dis(,ard
Phllol;ll~S as a !'our('f-' of vallJllhil' informatioll on th r logical
tl'lIdl'Il('I4'S of IIl1ddh' Pythagorl'anislll .. nd its link with
Ardlyta'-, (Jllr chilf aim IH'ing h) rl'('otlstilutr th (> logic of til(>
I\thaIo{Off'an li(,vploruu'lIt , tll(, r('al <llJthor..;hip of Ph ilolalls's
fragnu'nls IS of "('(,o/lrlar~' illlll()l'lalw(' to our purposr, sin('t'
II~I'''I' frallllll'nb arl' illl.liI'<lli\'I' of Ihl' ('/Hilinilit y of Pytha gn
rtll~1 t~lIl11l{.ht and ('llIItalri a II 11111 IlI'r of important idt'ils fully in
1111f ..... llh lIs trallltuHI!!. Among Ihl'lII , rlrsl ,Inri fnrrmo st, j..;
Ih .. IIII'M ') sYIIIIII'~IS or thl' lilllill'd ,11111 111(' 1I11limit('(1 whieh
IH,"I:'r.I,It,~ 11'1' ~I'.'IIrati')ll ',If thill),('1 : ".\11 p\i:-<liIlK Ih inJ,{:oi mu:-<t
III, ('I !:<,lrIl~ ,I)!' I'.thl'r I.lIlIItllll{ , or \011 -Limitl'd, or hoth Lill!
111111{ IIIlII .\oH-.Lllllltl'll... C!j'arly tlll'lI IIII' uni\-'(' rsp ,\till its
:"II"ln.ISWl'r~' httl'll IlIl.wthl'r froUL hOlh thl' Limilillll ';1](1 I";'
,ull ,11111\('11' (1)1\ 1'1 H 2)
\ I)111 I~ (';IIII111t III' !lilly
11011
.. , I
I' ,J
I11111 1'( III" 011 Y 11111111111{' Th
I 'f ., k .
.
\ rt ('(III III 111)1 1'\'1'11 IH ' ,1I1 Ohjl'('(
t
1/ III I
111)\\ 11'(1),(1' II) III').('ili witl
'f II I
!.lIllill"I" (B 'l) \\'..
I
I. I il
1111111" Wi'J'/' :\011
. - !'1.III"Idhl'rl'lh'llif'lI11'
I
1111{ 111,,\ \\'011111 hu\'l' 1I0lhilll{ III Iir~lil1
IIIlI{S WI'I'I' 111111
,\nl'plllllo{ Iht' \'il'w 1'\\Hl''i'iI'II 1 .
lo'~ PJ"lf'lJIIs , I'hiloh!l" '1.1' .. lilt U' ('.. Ij'd Ila'<:-<al{l' from Pia
. I ,I )l)1,IIts II I!lflill'r I
)y ,II II
I III ~ tl,,<
".t
nf
nil'
IIq'llH ' IIII. Ill! PHrI)' l'ylhu!l<ln;'II. '~Mid

rl'Yt'"I,"1t I" lh,' WIITI,\ ~'."'" Ilh r"I~ "r II",
t"
I I '
I"~ 1'"\" h".,,, h"ll\ ily IllInil'h.,,\
J.IIlIoIIr'hll~, I". Wll~ n,,' ""h' .\ 1'1' 'r ~I
"'I("f";I" "llrhilll{ ...\'Tnrol
"' tl... "III 'f('" r I'f"p.. rll"l! H'''\ .

P, n'm,
II ...
",. I',
. lor"
" "'r , I ..,,,, r"r ,\in]]"
I
'" 1I1!"'''~lIrll , I I ,
'
n~ ''';Ill H'M"\ In till! H~ if d"o.',' 11111'
." , I" I' ~ :!~Ii)
,.. I", !luiul"H','" . 10111
d of odd lnc! ('\('tl (Ihl' lInlimilt'd and the limil!:'d rt'!'p('("

:t' ~) n..; two forms of II II III ht'r: "'A("~tlally, \'umbe-r ha,; two
jis, net forms, IId,1 and ('\"(,11. and a third compouwl!:'d of hoth,
II t' vt'n~odd; t'urh of thtst' two forrn:-< has many a,;pects. which
1dl ';1~parJtt' objt'c\ ill'llltlll:-<tra\!'s in it';IIf' (B 5). :\mobrr.
:1 nrding tn Philolalls. i~ what drrllws a thing and makrs il
(''Jgni:-<ablt' : Actually. cwrything lhat ca~ be ~nown ha~ a
numhrr; for it i,; impo:<:-<lblt' to grasp anylhlllg \\"Ith th(' mmd
or to rN'ogllisr it with this" (B 4)_
~ow, till' worlll and ('\"'rythin~ in il e\"ol\"(',; as a mixture of
nppo,;it('~, yet :-<uch ~1I\. t'.\"ol,t,ltinn would b5' impo~..;ibl(' withol~t
a harmony und('r1ymg It: It would he IInpo:-<slble for a UII.I\"('r,;e to hr created with tll('1ll unless a harmony Wol;; adll('o, III
which way this (harmony) did come into bC'ing, :\ow th('
things which WNt' likl' and rl'1<tted IH,'l'd('d no harmony; hut
the things which wrfe unlih' and unre!ah,d <tnd IIIlC'qually arrangrd arC' lH'cr,;sarily fast('n~d togelher b~' ~\lch ,I ha~'~lOn~:
through whi('h tht')' arC' til'stmN\ to endure Ill. til(' ullI\('rs~
(86). In olher word,;, thing!' can only emerge If tht'~r con;;tll'
urnt oPpo:oiit(';; ;Hr !'lIbjC'cled to some .external IIlnu~n('e,
nanwly , 10 Ih ~ dh'('t of a ratio, proportl~n wilich doe:-< not
deri\"e ffom tlll'lll, hut b impo,;e~, as ,t ,~\',:re" from th~
o\l1,;ide in ordl'r 10 arrongl', harmolllse the dlsslIllllar and till
unrrlat('d .
I'
H('rr w(' cOlllr to thl' ('t'nlral dodrillt' of Pythagorean p \I'
\o:-<ophy wh i('h is SUIlIIl1t't\ up in III{: slatellH'nt that ,"IIII,I~~S
ar(' nlllllbl'rs." TIll' rool of tIll' dodrill(' was 1'\'ld('ntl~ ", \t ~\
('(I n(' !'t'll' ., nHl It' riClI" notion of n 11m Iwl''; as sonwtlll n~ ~ ".h nih d
in spa('r, p('r(,l'in'd hy tIlt' ;;l'!lSl'S tlllllmi.lking lip tll~ uhJ.I't'l: Il~
lh(' SPIISUtl\l~ worill. Thl'Y W('f(' ('(lnt,t'l\;~d a,; the fi,r:-~ l~rtI~('It:l{_
of till' ullin'rs(' in tlu' Inni'''l :-<PIlSt'. I hl' g('~lIlH Inc,11 Inlt r,
prt' lation of IlUIlIIII'rs !t'ads lo th(' "ndt'rstandlll~ of.tl~l' I;.n't~
"S'l ,wint ' t wo Iloin ts !II ukt' CI lim' IIm\lhr('t' pOints:," Jl,lllt,
o . . '
"
'
"
".
,
"'\Il!l 1'1'('lall),(1\1'11('1' Iht' nl)ti on~ of tl'l an~lIlur,
SlltlMI"
1I\;lr" II llIll ll1'l's:
n"""
\
+
1)
-., - - -
u (u
111
tril\Il~"lllr Illllllbl'r {I)
_~I]II"rt' IIUllilwr I:!)
n (11+1)
,:I)
fj'I',,,nR",,lllr n"1l11wr
,t '("il 1l"l1l('1"1l'- whi ch wa,;
r
HI'llrl'SI'III('11 ill tIll' forlll .II ~t'1)1l11
rI,'
.
k r I
I ,n nUllrl''';
wOllll1 100 ,I;; II
rl').:1I1 1Ir l'yllHlI{On'llIl PfC1dll'I' 1 \('s,-,.,
lows:
,..

( I)
~.
(:!)
(:i)
Palternll- (2) and (3) are obtained with tlJ(' hl'lp of a '
I rumen I w h'1(' II Ia k
J..:tlo
mon-an '
Ins
' ('s 'Ib nanH' , ro m tilt' ('ar,)
'
,
h
' I
.
(11
ler s ~('t square or I e Uprlg It pOllller on a :s und ia l. ApJllyi tl~
a gnomon produces the same pattern. but of a larger sizE' TI
application
of gnomons made up of an odd ntllnbe r'o",III Its
Ie
.
giVE'S a square. those of even llumb,[:!I, a rectang\('.

Triangles form pyramids,
.
squares make c ubes ' elc . 1
S,I)5 ('lIt1enl Iy t IU~ Pyt.hagoreans related geometrical fi g u res to elements: fire parlicles were supposed to be pyramidal in sh
earth particles .
represented
cubes ' ail' particies-oe
l'h
ape,
'
.
" ed rons
an d water particleS - Icosahedrons. This trend , howevc l' wa '
'evel~
already chB:racteristic of late Pylhagoreanism a nd may

have taken I.ts start from Plat~ who developed Pyth ago reanism
along the hnes of mathemattcal symbolism.
The conc.eption according to which numbers were t he elements of thm~ and almost the material fro m whi c h a ll things
~r~ made CO~stltuted the basis of the tea chin g of E u r y t us wh o
e d that t~mgs were determined by th e numbe r of similar
peb~le~ which he ~rranged in the appro priate way to for m th e
outlt?e .of man, animal or plant. This theory de ri ved from the
conYlctlOn
that a bod)' consist so f a certain
. numbe r of m a t erial
d t. A
o~i;inar ~;:!I:I\~ o~,~~.\'astating criticism "by the E lea t ics th e
" th'
..
mgs are numbers was c h a n ged to
Ing!'. L1nltate numbers" which tl
d b
tl1('ir propNties and relati~ f\ A I e l 0 y re producing
reduced in status to idealn'~o3e~egar s 1.1lI1nbers, th ey were
Archytas, magnitude and numb s o~_ tillngs . A.ccord ing to
of b,ei~~(' (OK 47 B 1, 8).
er are the two primary form s
Fmlshmg up with the genesi f P
just add that Philolaus was cr~Ji~ d y.thagoreanism , we may
of the immortality of the so I 0 e With an elaborate l heorv
him the following words' ,,~Ih' ne ,of the Sources ascrib es t~
alflD bear witness that bee',
e,anclent theologians and seers
,
k d
use 0 certain p 'I
IS yo e to the body and buried"
~nlS Hnents ' th e so u l
III It as III a lomb" ( DK 44
B 11 ) . Aristotle considered h
had at h'ast four different c~n ow~~er, that the Pythago rea ns
to 011(' of them, " any SO\11 co~~~ \~~l~
the soul. Accord i ng
('othed upon with a n y
ff
76
t PI ' Hi l ma I '~, '.(711) allolhl'r hl'hl that it was

. flf opposite!>! ill Ihp l)fltly. a thinl one re~ar<h'd
IHOll V
it . 11 II IIJlIi I;c,llioll of IllLiIIl)I'r. Whf'rf'3S in tlH' fourth 'iariant
.;oll'i"' p yt h;l g"rt'i1 n ~ d"f"iarl'd Ilw soub to Iw motrs in thl' air,
~.nd ulill'rs ills isted thai till' SOli I was what mfJ\'pd thrill:
titt's!' [\I olt's wt'n' !"!'fl'rrl'll to Iwc<lUSI' tlwy are ~l'f'1L alwavs
in mOV (>!lWJlt. 1''i1'1I in a ('ompll'lI- ('alm" (ihid .. I. 2. 40'1,;)
\, il' wpd as iI wh"ll', tlH' I'ytha~nrean philosophy r('nectrd
the q llilntil a t iVf' i\s~wd of things that rev('al('d il"'eif to thl'
astoni s hl,,1 It a li an th inkPrs tlw i-ipatial world of geometriral
proporlion s, til{' .onll'dy IlHl'irllWlIt of cl'lestial bodil's govern
ed bv IlHl.th l'IIHltlra l laws, thl' quantitative formula(' of
Jlll1si~al harill o n y a nd s(,on's of nthel'discoveriei-i, HowevN,
in th('ir exc it elll(,lIt owr till' pow('r of human reason th('y
absolutised q uantily and ignored entir('ly the qualitativ('
a5p('ct of thin gs. Describi n g the Pythagorean method, Aristn t
Ie wrot e : "Si nce. t ilen, all other th ings seemed in th('ir
whole natur(' to he modelled on numbers, and numbers see med
to be the first t h ings in the whole of nature, they supposed
the elem (' nts of n umbers to be the elements of all things.
and the w h ole heaven to b(> a musical scale and a numbe r.
And a\l th e pr()p('flie~ of [\\lmber~ and scales which they
could s h ow to agree with the attribute5 and parts and the
wh ole arra n gement of the h('aWlls, they collected and fitted
into their sc h eme; a nd if there wa~ a gap anywhere. they
readil y m ade additions ;.;0 as to make their whole theory
cohere nt" (A ri st. Met. \, 5, 98fib).
In hi s com me n t~ on Pythagor('anism Aristotle con~lIles
himself to t he analvsis of its abstract philosophical doctnn('~.
In rea l id eologica( lire. howl'vl'r. the Pythagorean teacl~ing
repres(' nted a n extn> lll el y compl('x, eV('1l grote~qllt' combl~a
lion or sci e n tifIC notio ns ~ou ll d ('wn from the modern pOl.ilt
of v iew, wit h re lig iOUS pn~j tldic(>. magic prec('pt~ ~nd mysti
co
lIl
is m of numbers be l i('vNI to be instruments of dn t',p wers.
Th e inad equ a('y of P y t hago rean ma th emat ical pllLloso ph y
s oon beca me ob violLs a nd com pell ed the Pythagorean~ t h('m'y
selves, eve n t h e NHl y O Il ('S, to tu rn
Ionia n ph il o.soP,h.
with its na ltll'alis l trend and em phaSIS on t he Qu aiL t.atn e
as pect of rea lity. I-\(' Il c(' t he ('oll('e pt io.ns of fi l"('
Ll1
air in lIippas us,
organiC a nalogl(,s 111 the II nd erstan d g of
cosmos. Th (' pl'o bl (, lIl s of one Hnd ma n y, moti on a nd harmony
of o ppos ites t ha t loom ed la rge bef.or(' til('
COUld.
not ue !:.olved o n th (' bas is of 111('11' theor y of n u mber:-. Th('~
h. j(' ,
;lr
~o
hi~
and. IHl~ltl ('ss
Pythagor('an~
7;
call1'd for a dillNI'nt ;lpprnHrh , allli it

tic ~chlll)1.
\\;l1;!
,!l"n'l! II} tht, f "
1"1, :\rllophanl"- of Colophon
\l'nopham'~, tht' ~()n of Llt':\iu~ t. r OrthnllU'UI'!'I or th~ IUIII

an city of CIllophon, dt'pict ... in hi ... !lol'm II \\1'11 f .. d nllllpl,
Cl'nt Citill'lI who, lyin~ on <I "oft ('1111('11 Ii\ thl' lirt' ~lIh' III
the winter ~I:'a~on, :-;ipping :-;wt't'l \\ illt' ;11\1 1 I\ihhlin~ !I!'H" ill
(Iuirl':-; of a ~tran~l'r: "Who lHl' you lln~oll~ 1111'11, <Llltl whpj(

from? How old are you, m~' R'0od frlt' nd? \\ hnt Hlort' Wt'rt' VtIIl
when the .\Iedt.' came?" Tht' i\lbWl'r i~ ,\.I'llflp lulIlI'S'" ';\\'II
~lor\': "By now sevf'n-and-~ixty yt'ur" ha\l' 1)('1'11 tn:-;~inlot Ill,'
car~filled heart O\'I;'f the land of I-il'llat', Frolll my hil'lh till
lhen {that is, till his nilel, 111('l'e W('rl' tw('nty-n\'(' y('nr~
to b(' added to thesE' if ind\?f'd I [1m abl(' 10 1('11 COI'I'l'Ctlv of
lh('''l'matters'' (DK 21 B 22, 8), Proc('('ding from thi 5 IHls~ag('
and knowing that Perp,ian conqueror lIilrpagu s th(' ~It'il(>
.. eized Colol1hon approximately 5~O B,C" w(' Illay put his birth
about 56.1 B,C, He ip, known to have been still alive at til(' ag('
of nin'ty-two, i,e, in 473, Having left Colophon . Xenophanf's
Iiwd first in Zande (~Iessina) in Sicily, then in Catana and
;-';yracuse. HI:' i~ known to ha\'e vi~it('d the island~ of Paros
and 'Ialta. as wl:'l1 as the Lipari bl(lnds, Hl' \wotf' an ('pic
r~m called The Settlement oj a Colony at Elell in Italy, yet
It I~ not known if it was devoted to th> fo undati on of EI('a
lih his poem The Founding oj Colophon. or described his own
"ettlem~nt there during his wonderingli "over the land of
Hl:'lla~, Xen?phanes also wrote {'Iegil:'s and poems of mockPry
(slilOf) an~ IS considl:'~l:'d to ,be the founder of the satyrical
genr,e: He IS also credited With a philo~ophical poem called
traditionally On ,Valure of which we hav(' about 20 fra gments.
ThE' total number of the extant fragm(,llts of his poe ms runs to
about forty,
hold<:' Xenophan es as a wllty and cau s ti.c man
.hTradition
I
v. 0 o\'ed freedom, and , hat ed l yranlly and oppr(>SSIOIl
.
. He
recommends speakmg With a lvrant as littlf"
. 'II
sw(>elly as possible adv'
h'
"
as pOSSI ) e o r as
o .,
,'
Ises t f' Egyptians not to mourn ove r
lrls 'f h'
: J e ISIBn ,H~mortal god, and not to oll('r him sac rifi ce
I
I." IS morta , rIdIcules th(' ('xaag'
l d
day and cautions h'
l
~ (ra,(> . athll'tidsm of th e
IS coun rY"l('n a{talllsl 1I
r
r
mup,cie to brains as "wisdom ic;, 1)('
h'
If' pr(> f'r(>I1('.(' ()
or of horses" (8 2) casti 1 .ttl',r ~ an t~H' str(,lIg1h of mrn
There is hardl
,ga ('s valllJ,tlnrlfJlJ!<I fopprry , ('le.
y a more resolutl' Opponl'nt of tradition .
r'h
78
lUlmar Iv
IotlflU" lind IIY' loluJ,t1l I. III till' h turyof ,cit ,"

rIHIH~ullh~' Ihllli XI IH.,dlllIlC !Ifllllt'r ViII the ), ; of f"dUCl
liun 11' . n'ec,' ill til 'I" I)tI \ HI ,filing to Xl'nopllltlH'
h 1tll 11"IIII'r 11111111' 1111\ !lIlVI' .Urlhuh'd toth(' io::flfl!JlIl
lings
Illat afl' ~IHlILh"r II 111'\;\ L'{'prIHI'1 lIIlf.1I1l manklnll: thl ;HIIiI
It'n'
IH 11) 111I1t'd. 1I.'rme
. , IIId mutwl ,11'1'('pllOli
lr I,kl'ry t'xalh'd III 0111' 01 IIUlIlI'r hymn .... gods am"fL,1
'1I1\'t'lItlll' ,~, tht' llOtl/riu HI lo\,(' aO, r of IIf'phlH'!JtIlS's wlf
,\phrm li \l' alill Arl'1 dp~crltll'tl In th,- Pighth book of {)dljuf!fJ,
tht, slorips of Clirollo" who 1'lI1a~culat"d hiS farthl'r OU:"HIOS
and of ZI'lJ~ who oVI'rthn'w hi~ farth!,t ( Iron"!, I't(', (,8nm:.;
S{'rH' as t'x<llIIph'i to lit' f"IIowl'll. Yet XI'llopharu's was mill'
than II morali"ing lilt'r<LrY ('rilil', TIlt' rt'al tilrJ.!:l't of hi" atla('k~
on til(' old bl'lil'f!' ,lILeI IllIhious !ltorif's a\Jout thl' ~od:; was liI('
[r<lnk anlhropolllorphism of pOPlllar Ihf'ology .-\mollg tht,
l'xtant f'\'idenc(' ar(' Ihest' fral!lTll'nl .. from ~Ii" p<Jt'IlI": "Hut
Illortal ~ belit'V( tilt' g"d~ ,10 he nt'at('11 by birth, and t,o han
their OWl! (nlOrla\..;') raillLl'lit. voic'" alld ~od~'_" :\(:IIIIOP'<lIIS
ha \,(' god!' with snuh 110"I'S alld hlack ~alr. fhraCI<ln" have
gOdli with gn-y l'Yt's HILII rt>cI hair, .. Bllt, If OX"II (anll hor"e:o-)
and lions had hand~ or c'fluhl Ilraw With hand:; an~ ('reate
workli of art likl' tho~e m~Hh' ny 1lH'1l. hor:,l:'s, wou d dra ......
pictl1re~ of gmt... likt' hor"r", .wd (IXI'll, of god:, ~Ike own, and
thev would makt' th(' hod ips (of IItt'Ir O!;lJd"1 "~ ac{"ordanc
with tl\(' form that 1'0('\1 liPI'ei('~ its~1f po",,":'''''~ (8 tt. 16.
'I
15) .
.
Id
l
Thesf' pas~age" pn>st'rwci hy (.Il'nwnt '?f ;\ (,X,ln na no
onl y di~close the main w('aknl''''" of polvthe'~',n, b~lt n'~rt~~"~t
one of the most important arguuwut:'> of alh~,:'>m HI.':~I.n, t
anv r('Ii gion: the a~sertion that thl' ,trll(, crt'ator:'> of,,~od- a~re
pie who s ha pf' them in ttwir (lwn Irna~t', but not' Ice \N a.
peo
t X
phaul" wa" an at I10I
This dof'~ not mean. how('n'r, lin . eno
:0-'.
I" I
ist. To popu lar polylhl'i"m hI> cOllnterpn"ed t~t' P~IIIt,NI~ ~~{'.\
conception of god which latN becamt' klltl\\ 1,1. a~g)nt H I~I\I
{Gr. pan IlH'un;ng "all" ,lIld tI/l>fJ.~ ml'anln~
'1.\'"
eha rac tNi si ng Xl' nophane s 's IUI\(~IN~tan~'t:~i~ lI~lt::-t:r~I~~~I'
t 1.1
'ote' " \Vith !'l'ft'n'lIct' tn tl(''' 1Il (' III
.
If
o C \\h' O' , is (;od" (Ml't. t ;) 986 b), Xenophan('s hllll:'>l'
says t (' fI( , r II
.,' "Then' ili ,Ul(' goo,
descl'ibt's the 1ll\lurl' of god ,I:'> 0 0\\""
,
I .
..
I
I ' ,t not at all ILkI' moria " III
among god" !llld 1lI1'n t 1(' I.':rt'il I:'> ,
.'., I I ' " l(, r lac1'
b d ' or in IlIind,., And hI' alway" n'lllilLn~ 111 l~ ~a,n
.','
n~t ~ll{)\'ing HI HI1. nor is it lilting for him to changt'
P~l"lt'~~'
at diffl'1'(>nl tinw", ,, But without Illil h(' "l'l.'i l'Yl'ry t ling III II -
g\
tIS
'"
lion. b\' the tho ug ht of hi~ mind ... II I' st'I'S liS " \\'11011' , thi k.
"
11 t' "(lj")"j')'
11:-;
as a whole.
an dl.war:,; as il WI()
-"
_h, 2;), 211)
This undNsti.lndlnf! of god CO IlH'S \" p r y Ih'HI' to thl' I Ollh
concepti on o f living naturr whi c h i~ th l' ('(l U St' of its own 11)' II
lion and change. In fact. X C' 1l0phUIll'S iil t' ll ti fil'.s god not Wi:~ l
the spirit. but with Ihe world . i.l'. hi s ptllllh ('is lll i .., niH II I'al
istic. Hi~ search for Il single d e tC'l'IninatC' s ubs tance wa~ Wrv
IIlllch in the Ionian tradition. but th e an ciC'n t ('\" id C'llce abou't
its nature is connicting. Acliu s a::;s<-'I'ls th a t Xeno ph anes Con~

sidNed earth to be the source of ever ythin g: " 1"0 [' eVI:' I'vthing
('omes from earth and eV('fylhin g goes ba ck to ea rth at last"
(B 27). On the other hand , Sextus Empil'i clI s, hav in g cited a
similar passage from Xenophanes, has ten s to ad d a no th er quotation from his poem: "We all have our ol'ig in fro m ea r th and
waler" (8 3J: confer Sext. Ad" . Math em . X 314). T hat water
played an important role in the cos mology of Xe nop hanes is
also attested to by the fact that he deri ved a ll meteo rological phenomena fr om water (sea ) : " Th e sea is the source of water, and the source of wind .. ..The mighty m a in (sea) is the
begetter of clouds and winds and rivers" ( B 30). Xenophanes
held thatlhe sun and the heavenly bod ies co nsis t o f luminou s
cloud s and are renewed daily , b('ing quench('d in t he daytime
and rekindled at night. The moon is a fe lted cloud . The phenom:no.~?f Dio!';c ures known among the Gree ks as St. Elmo's
fire .I~ Itltle clouds glimmering in virtu e o f th e ki nd of
motion th.at they have" (A 38 -A 46).
h' Borrow,Lng fr om the ionians, Xenophan es did not identify
lInseif W,lt~ th~m, For all his .a dherenc(' to "sea " and "water"
the onginatlllg. cause of things, in contl'a s t with Th a les,
.1(' stf('sse~ the prtmacy of earth, \-1(' knew that it so me ti mes
Immerses
' . In water as e VId encC(I I>y s Ile I Is found in moun ta ins
~~lal;:tl~lt~.. o!u~s~~s and h seals discovered in the Sy racllse
the Sf'a like in Th s ea~t does not float on the s urfa ce of
limit of the eartha~~s~lt has no bounds: "This is th e up per
the air; but the part ~ w\~ee at our feet, in conta ct with
On the evidence of M eneba . goes down to infinity " (8 28).
acro IUS Xenoph
I I'
to con si st of earth and wat
A
anes )e leved th e soul
orphi co- Pythagorean th('oer ( f 50). He wag .famili a r w ith t he
and rl t>arl y ~howed hi s atl~~\1~ th~ ~rans!lllgration of souls
ra ~:
e to Lt III thiS gibe at P y th ago' They say t hat, pa ssing a belaboured
if(', full of pity, s pake thes(' words of whel p,
doll':
fS
Of,
' Stay. smilE' not "fi:i a fri~'nd. a human soul;

I klH'w him ~tf"ltight WIIf'IHI~ I ~H'ard him yelp ...
(lJiog" L" \",". :16),
X l' nO ph "I1H ~
was th" i'lrst among tlH' ()repk philosophers to

C3!-'t d ou bt upo n tlu' possibililiE's of tauman knowledge. Hav in g
di!'cardrd th l:' a nth ropomorphic gods, he declared man's own
necds to b(' th e gu i<i (' to knowlC'dge: "Truly the gods have not
reveal cd to m ortab all things from the beginning but morta ls
by long see k in g di scove r what is better" (8 18), However,
one should not be too optimistic about man's ability to gras p
absolute truth : "A nd as for certain truth, no man has see n it
nor will th ere ever be a man who knows abo ut the gods and
about all th e thi ngs I mention, Por if he succeeds to the fu ll in
saying wha t is completely true, he himself is neve rtheless
unaware of it ; and Opinion (seeming) is iixed by fate upo n
all things" (8 34). As distinct from Heraclitus who cla imed to
speak on beh alf o f the Logos, Xenophanes must have exte nded
his scepti cis m t9 hi s own pronouncements: "Let these things
be stated as co nj ectura l only, similar to the reality" (835).
It is not surpr isi ng, therefore, that the sceptics of l at~r
periods r ega rd ed Xe nophanes as one of the founders of the Ir
philosoph y.
,
.
What is th en th e true Significance of Xenophanes 5 ph ilosophical her itage? Are we to regard him as a pantheis.t o~ a
sceptic, a m oni st conv inced that God is One, or a duah~t 111 sistin g th at eve r ythi ng der ives from earth a nd water? ~Id h,e
believe in th e progress of human knowledge or co n.sl der It
unabl e to ove l'ste p t he bounds of opinion.? The c.onclus lon th~t
sugges ts itself af te r s tu dying the anC ient eV Ide nce f~r ,h iS
views is th a t it woul d not be correct to t reat his confllctl ng
statements as e la bonl lc conceptio ns and to attem pt a ~ at
an s we r to t hese q uest ions. Xenopha nes's utterances tes.tlf y
to the embryoni c s ta te of his philosophy,. p~ a.st ic and am b~ v ad
lent lik e a ny nascen t sys tem. Its poten t lah tles were r~a h se
in the fifth ce ntury B.C. by the Eleatic sc hool and III th e
fourth -third ce ntllr'ies B.C. by the sceptic ism of Py rr ho and
Timon of Phliu s .
d
d ( U pts
A s imilar a ttitud e shou ld ('vidently be a opte 0 a em ._
to affiliate hi m wit h a definite tr~,nd ~f. thought and ~hoote
between th e Ionian " phys~?I~glcn;. ~\'I'I~~~lg,~~ i~l!~~~~~ ~I~;
Miles ian tra d ition or the d18 ('ctlc la n:s \\ 1
.
'_
inves ti gati o n into the co nt rad ictory nature of log Ica l notions.
 WI

Ill' wa" 011l' or till' foundl'r:< of "lIlljl'('\nl' t!wlt'clll'S, 1111' 11';11'11
ine: or thinking or log-k..

\ri"tnt\e j:.: known to 1I,ln' Wrlth'lI
wili,h
it \I'I';\\ISI' ()'I
'
"'IIII/,hUII, s
a small Irpali!w
On Xl'nophalles. Zello and Gorl[illS whi('h, as thl' philnlngit':d
illv('sligation in thl" righlN'nth-1I11ll'ti't'llth n'n'lIl'It's "lw\\"l'(\
:-;hOllld bp call1.''d On .Ileli.~sll.~. X,'r lO l)halil'S IIlId (;(lrJ!ill ,\, lis
allthor was an unknown perip<tt('tic COlllllH'lItatnr or lIl!' li .. ",
('{'ntur~' .-\.0. who !Hay ha\,{' used Ari4oth's ~l'nlliIlP work
when writing the section on X('nophanl'~. Thollg'h thi:-; :-;('t'tio1\
ran by no mean~ be relied upon fot' aCCllratl' {'xpo:-;ition of
Wil"
laIN \osl. lush-ad.
'
WI'
IHI$'
Xl'nophan(':-;':-; arguments, il gin'>s certain \aluahll' infOl'malion which is worth quoting. According to its iluIl101' , Xl'llO phanes mainlailll'c\ that theon(' ('l('rnat. uniform ,\lui splwricul
god, the cosmo,,", could b(' n('ith('r unlimit('(1 nor limit!'l) ,
Ileither moving nor motionlpss. In<l('ell, till' Ont' Bt'ing mllst he
either lInlimited, infinite, or limited, finite, If il i~ unlill1it('li,
it do('s not ('xist, since in order to ('xist it must $(' dplel'mined
hy sonwthing, i,E'. limited. Ir it is fmitp and limited, it cannot
Ill' OnE' (sing\e), as it must haw something whicb limit s it.
whi~h i~ Other, So, being b not One hut ~Iany, The prohlem of
mollnn IS Irpated in a similar manlll'r. The nlOtionl",ss i:-; in fa et
idel1tical.with till." n.on-px[stelll, !'incp n('itlwl' anything (,,11\
~om(' to .It. nor can It comp to anything. On tllP other hand,
If. i~l1ythll1g. move!'. i.t must 1lI0W r('lativl;' 10 :-;onH'thing (',,"I;'
~~l1~h 1I11pi1:~ p.lurahty, many-a'ia H'slllt, th(' ullity of Iwing ,
It. .slnglenf'ss I!' lost a~aln. Thf' con,Illsioll i~ th'l! Ihp OIl(' i:-;
I1l'ltll('r
.'
. nt'lther
.
\1.. at r('st
.; no r Hl(~,:'lIlg,
,a!' .
It IS
non-IH'ing nor
.(Df' .'IXG III 91~b 1h: cr. DK 21 A 2X).
. 11)\\ does tlll~ conceptIOn agrt'l' with Xl'lIoph'UH"';S Ilanth ('
l!'tn
aoov('?
.. I)l> Iwo way!' 'to l'xplain
"
. .If\f'otlon(>(l
,
. . ' Th;r(' ma~
this
appan lit contradlcl1on. I- irst 01ll' nn .
"I I
!,llIllptioll that X,
I
- ,
'~llrn('l't'( 1'01\1 tilt' i\!'nop lanes attl'mptpd to "'iv" I " I, 'I' ,'.
of lll{' ('oncpr"'o", I ,I
II
- ... (,\
ogll a allet \.'il~
_
) ] { I 011(' a -pml"',e
h
.
t,llIg I'
)('llIg I('I l'ntl'I"1('(1 bv
1111 With
C<l."" Ill\' \I'l'all"I'
,..
i ('j.(IIIL , In thilt
I
. (),' -II I' i1,,'SI/S, I' 1'/1(1) I'
/11
/ IS III/(
If}rK/([.~ 'i wlllil 1)(' 1'l'g'll'Ilt'd '1-' II
- ..
IH'lolo(ll' aI IHl]",lIloxl'!' l'()IIIW('II'II'wilh ,',;" ,I ~OI,I'(,ll()fl III aponils
thill WI'rf' olJtlill('(1 by X('1l0 hUlH's I
!' pIO.) 1'1I~ 0
0111' Belll K
I(lt~, I'I;,to's rii(llf'l'tirs ;11111 (~XP()l1;l~h::~\I::r~I:!'('(I. III till' ~Jlir.it of
Ii'iwfl If)gil'. S('rnnd, tiH' tn'alis!' 1 . I .' rlll'i of thl' Arr~lo
1\
. lIa"I'\]('w('rl'"
'
lOll II . ('nnph<ll1f's's latN Ilnrtrilll' ;'\'( 1I"\( II hy hlln
~ 'i an
I'XpOSI
111\111'1' thl'
.3'\,-,
"
k'
IIi: I,m'!'
t-)'W.;.fl t ,
f 1"lr1l11'111cll IIlId
'pi ('i Ill. (111 till v
1111\11
111 I \"1' /Jf
1\1'1lt'1' litH
WI'
!\trong 1f'Jlfl(,lIry
hU\'I' Ihl' rlr~t j'X
pl.':JfttI4,1 ;]I'P _! fllOl ~ f' .nVI11f'II1g:.

TI.)W,- Vl'r thaI 111ay h('. X"llllpb n-!J wa~ 11' fir!'; philm;oplll'r
() llh IWI' Ihl' cl)ll(,l'pl1011llf C)ue hl'ing wll1( I W S to 11'(")ml'
('nl r I , 111(' FII'alil' ! hom
, ) /Jllnnnlities, Par1l11'11idl's. a latlve of EI('1-I. sort or Pyrp.;,

callH~ .rom all arislOl'ralic ffi1t1ily allli took an artivf' part in
the pniitl('al lih' of hi~ dty. \lis norllit (til(' age of 4fJ) i~
put eithf'r '-It ;)O(), or (hr Plato) at n :) B.C, Hr> is ..aid to haH'
bpl'n a legislator <Iud giV('l1 Ell'<l some of its la\'::-;. Latpr,
unril'r thl' influ('I\('p of Pylh,lgor(,<ln AIII('inias, Ill' abandonpd

political adivity <lIHI df'vot('(1 ili:-; lifp to eontemplati()lI.
According tn AI'islOll(' and TIH'ophrastus, he was thl' pupil of
Xenophanes but tradition holds that h(' did not become hi!'
[0110\\"('1" (:-;pe Diog. L.IX. 21). :\(-'\"erthell's:o;, a c10sp affinity
helwef'n their vipws is obviou!': Parm('nides, like Xenopi1anes,
foclls('d on the rC'lation~hip of Om' B('ing and the plurality of
exbtinf.{ things, ParmC'nid('s is known to have written a poem
called traditionally Oil ,Vature, large pxtracts of which came
down to liS from Scxtus Empiril"\1~, Simplicius and some othf'r
doxographefs. Thl? f'xtrellle complexity of the extant fragment::>, particularly tilt" allt't;!;oric prologue to his po.em. as
well as the glaring lIiH'r(' pallci{'!' between different
manu.scriptf; aCt'Ollllt for grl'at cti\"l'rgencf' of opinion re~arding
the true mf'aning of Parml.'nidl'S'~ ,iE'w!'. In pomt of fal:L thc
interprf'tations of his pllilo~ophy range between a rehglOu:-;
revelation and a purt'iy dt'ducti\"(' logical !'c.heme .
The most anri('nt doxographiC tradition I~ f'xpressed. by
Theophrastus in his Ph!lsicol Opinions, Book.1. It c\amls
that Pa1'lll('nides a~st'rl('d tbe elprnily of the llon'{'fSe an? at
the same time ~ol1ght to ('xplain how it ~allle ~nto being,
He maintained that only lhe 011(' eXIsts,. l~lmt1table,
immovable and sphcric~t1, bllt. cal('I'ing of the ?p11l10nS of ~h('
mob that believes in change accollllt{'d for It by adoptlllg
"two principles, fire ancl (,Brth, on(' S('fvlng. as mattpr, the
other as callS(' and mahr " (01\. 28 A 7), T1.11~ pa~sag.(' from
Thf'ophrastl1s qllolN\ by AI('xanlll'l' ;\phr?dl~-":.t.ensls gIves liS
a glimpse into th(' problem of twO ways of l1)(llIl~Y brot1~ht .~l~
bv Parnwnic!('s: on(' trm', and til<' otl1('r fabl'. fhe frn.,t \\a)
leads to th(' appn'lH'n:o;ion of till' IlIle pINnal .;pif cnmpl('l('
;on
d. tn
,Il l' "l'ron
:<t't' lt l~
to il!'lLo[" 'Ill
be'll~.
"IIII'IW
" 1 .'~. I!>
Thl' Wily to tr u l h, ,H'l' OI'I IIll ).! III 1'HI
th 'll it i:< ;lnd thai it ;:-; i mp()!'i~l hlt' ,for it IIn\ \11 lit
"h ,l\
IUOf
I.
Ih.>
Ill('
iDh. 2~
B '2. 9 ) . liNt' WI' 11 ;\ \,1' in [ad Iht', 111":-<1 :<\.11i'111t'nt of III!' In!,,;
cill 1<1\\ of idl' nlity in it:-< 011\tll ogH'a i inh'\'pl't'lilliotl 11I1I""!L
h;l\"in ~ di:-<con'rl'tl or. r a tln'I', g Ut'!'i!'itd ~I I nj! I('a l 1.\\\ tlc'('onhng
to which lIn' Ihollghl eonll'nt \l~ a nO \l o n nw:,, 1 11 0\ challl.{l' \11

thl' cour:,-!' of n>a~oning. ParuH'llltlt':' dra ws fro lll IllllI.Olltologi.
cal conclusion . lIis ar~unH'nl r~ln!'i ;~!'i [ollow,,: (I) \~ h at i:-;, is,
(2) What is not. is not. (;n. \\ ha ,l I:" ~' ann () t ('on,1t' In to IwinI!:
[rom whal is not. nor can It ~wl'Ish Into wh a t I" 11 0\ as Ih"
lallt'r do(>s not exist. ( 'I) Spact' ( void ) ilnd lim l' ( d i~tincti()ll
hl'tweell llil~t and prl' :-;t'IIt). ;11:(' 1.101l :l'.'i.:-iIC'IIt. i5) lh~illg .is full.
(6) Being ha~ no part::.. It 1:-i. lndl\ l sl1~le . .( r ) BC' llIg IS Olll'.
a:-i tht're i:-i nothing apllt't from It. (8 ) He ilI g" IS ("olllpl l' tl' (llI'lIt!'
fInite) and perfect. (9) ~Iotion dtw s no t e xist Il:-i tlll' I'(' is
nowhere for being to move.
As i:,:. e\"idenced from thi:; ah.;trilt' t sc heme of r('asoning
which claims to soh(' thC' philo~ophi("all)['oblp!ll of t rup bei ng.
ParllH'nides concei\"('s "'being" a:-i f\lllne~:-i of ('w l'y th ing,
something likE' mas,," nlling the univi.'rs('. Being m> illwl" e\"olws
nor dis~ohes. it is indi\"isihl('. continu o us . immova bl e a nd s('ifcomplete. It is like a rOllnd hall beyond which th pn' is pure
nothingn('ss. This b ostensihly wry closC' to th (' m a teria list
world outlook and Pa rmenid('s's philo...ophy was so m eti me ...
l'on~tru('(1 as a kind of matt' rialisl or its prototype on Ih('
ground:- that he IInd('fstooti r<'lllitv as IJrimary m otio n less
corporeal sub:<lan ce ext('nded in spa.ce Ilnd tlH.'re fore "materiaL" with nothing l' xisting apart from iL l
Such a view. howewr. can hardly DC' orcept('d. Parm eni d E's
conte nds t.hat "to think i~ tlu.' samt' as the th o ught tha I it is;
for you wJ!1 n?t fill!! thinking without Bl'inj;(' (B 8, 34 ) 0[".
f'\":,n more pla1l1ly. that "it is the sanll' thing to think <ln d to
hE' (B. 3): That m~ans that thinking is conceived bv him not
~~ a :rtt('fl~n of bC-II~g:,.,bllt as bt'in.!.( it ... e\f: ThC' slarting po int
. r .Parmc-nldes. th~ aXIom ht, consl(\('r('(illll])Ossibl(' to ["ej ect,
~\as I~()t th('. mate.rtal world. but tlw thought of it whirh ht'
IdentIfied with beIng. Tht' jeh'alisl Ir('I\(1 in Pal'llll'nid t's's 1H'1"Itage was therefore at It'ast as Illuth pronoul\('(' d as th(' 'lI\ <lt('
Sf'(' J. Burn t'! . f:arl y (; ul" k I'IH/r)Jf'ph"
p_ 182,
~UII 'lfl .\.
& C !ilill'k , 1 ~17;"
. Ii"-' ollt TliI' I 1"11114 Sf 1/)01 n ~ gt fI(-is pavl'J th> wa,,'

,
th for I Ie 110 11~" ,11 ~'l t41
(:ontra ..;tilll{ Itll' Wly () HIIIIIIOIl
() the
way of truth
]'arrn4'llidt.s wril('s:
"'1'114' UIII', tltat It '" IIltl la" it
impc iblf> or it lot
In III' is tlw path of I't'rsua~i(lIl. The )ther. that illS not 1111
th,l t it [\lust 11 4'nsgarily 110' h . that I decla:- w lOlly 11\.
di~I'l' rll ihI4' t rllck: fIJr thOIlI'oull11t not know what is not -thai
is impnssi hl p IIlIr t\4,1"I;l1"I' il. fIJr it is tht' .;arne thinl.t that
ca n ht' thoul{ ht a nd ('an 1)('._. \\"hat tau be spokt'n anrt tholll{ht
of nltl sl 1)(', {o r it is possibl!' for it to ue, but impo~"'ihh' for
not hin g t o tw. Thi s I hid tht'!' rOllsitlf'r, for this way of inquiry
is th l' first frolll whi ch I (Iwld thee bark). But also frOrtl
thi s on t', on w h irh 1il rtais. knowing nothing. wander
t wo. he aded; for he lplt'sslll'ss in thl'ir own brea~t::; ~uides thei r
e rr ing mi nd . Th<,y arl' horllt' along. hoth Maf and hlind.
ma zed, ho rd('s with no juri.'!;l'Hll'nt. who heli('ve that to be and
not to bC' are th e ~allle and not the ~ame. and the path of
e verythin g is 011(' that turns back upon it~,'lf-' ~B 2. 3-6; B 6).
An a lysis of th ese q\lotation~ shows that Parmenidt"~. in
fac t , (\ esc ri bNI th ree ways: (1) '"the way of truth," i.E'_ thl'
conv ic t ion t hat "'it is"; (2) a false way leading nowhere, i.e.
th e d e nial of being and the a!'~t'rtioD that only non-being
e xis ts; (3 ) a con fusion betwel'll being and non-beills;r: bo.th of
whi c h a r c be lieved to exist. The third way, III turn. adnut:< of
three varia n ts of t he r elationship of being and non-bE'ing: orst.
be in g a nd no n- be in g ar(' tht" ~ame: this variant is prac.tically
equival en t t o lh t" s('cond way and can be i~e~tified Wlt~ th.~
" n ihili s tic" pos itio n of Gorgias of Leonlllll. P~rmellldl':-- s
youn ger con te mpo rary: second. being and non-~IIl~ are tI~~
sa me and not the sa m e: the reference to the t\\o-headul
mortal s" wh o be li eve t hat things come into being and peris h
and that the " path of every thing- is olle that turns bac.k upon
itself " c le arl y points to Heraclitus. Thi r d. t~~r(' are .belllg a nd
non - bein g as ind e pe nd e nt and opposi ~e entit Ies wh ic h do no~
pass into pB e h o tl1('l" . Th is is the doclr1lle of th E' P y.t.hag-orC'a ns
which llndc-rlil's th p o pin ion of "ig-norant mortals. All o ther
ways a,'C' di fl lllissed a:-: u narceptable.
. .
lll
Proce('(\in g to th e wo rld of appraranc~, Pa r,I.Il.e de :- r~e
ser\'(.>s onlv 011(' pllir of PytililgOrt'llil Op po:<ltes~ .lrg ht- nrght
") '" T, '11"" hOwl'H" r. h(' add s contrarleshor f() \\ed
k
uar
n{'s.s
.
l
s.
I
..
d h
(
from Anaxim (, ll es. na nlt'l y .. t ill' "rare, -l el~~~ . an
t ,
b
""wartn CO 1..1\1 . " '1'111' an , ,1,
"" of "war m -colu c a n no t II
I
l~,
i.::
. , "" of \lcmal'o[\. \ri~t()tlt' :-;;ty~ that Par n"'~ do

II,,'
. ' "
,.
o!-'ih'O Iwt and rold l1l(>anlllg' lin' alit pari I, t U' to:'Ut'
rt'/UIJlt
, IHiin, to being and tilt' laltl'l'. to \loll b{,l 19
(IIrr(''''11I
['.'
r " .
'n
ilfllU'IiU t'S II ~ CtlliSIJOuS (jf

IH'tng alld lilt, false w ,rid
IIH..i l i ,pas"abl(> gulf hptwl't'n,trlH'
. , . .,.,.
of opinion. puts asidp ',IH' Og"lca IIIcompiltl II lt~ ,of bl'11l2
lis acco1lnt of ap~ll'ar<lnr('s
and nOJl-lwing and brlllg'" hac~ Ihe (,(,3i oPpo",II('" w.1I

known froUl Ionian physiology. 1 ht' world of npUliOll, I ~ of
-",'nst' t'XpNit'Jlcl'. is ('()nlradirlO~Y, hut Pilrlll~'l1i.dl'~ dot's not
nineh from it. Till' way of s(,pm.Jlg. fabC' as It 1:-<'. IS thf' 0111'
foJl()\'n'd bv common morta]:.; who cannot hut COIH'l'jVP f('alit\'
in l('rllls of plurality, ('hang('fllilwss. gt'Il('wtioJl ilnd IlI'ri:..;Jling
of Ihiul{s, Th{'s(' prop('rtirs of l/H' "iI'IlSUOl!S wodd call he ('x
plaint'll ill physical terms, with thE' ht'lp of tht' ab,o\'t', cOntra_
ril's <lnlIIIU'ir combinations, btll t\H'Y rail also ht' dlsrllrs~C''' al
\oJ,(plill'r if Wf' l"mhark 011 thE' trlH' way of inquiry and go

IlI'yond Ihl' bOIlIl(1-- of S('IISf' (H'rft'ptions to 111(' world ('Ollt'l'iw(\
flllly hy rI'aSOIL
It is worth nol~nll; Ihat Parllll"Uilll's 1101'S Iwt follow Xello,
phallI'S who rl'l{arlhi this worlll of <th,..;olutl' kuowll'dgl' as god,
P<trlJlI'niril's it'aws no mom for god ill his con{,l'ptioli of )wing
'tnd tiu' ,;toddl'SS in thp prlllol{lIf' to his POt'lil who instl'lJrts him
ill the ways of srirlltiii(' inquiq' is a lilt'rary pt'rsonagt', a tribull' In Iradition, rat)H'r than ,I Iit>ity in the prnpl'r st'l\sr of Ihe
word, As rl'~arf1s the SpllSlJIIIIS worhl ,IS dl'S('filwd hy Parnlt',
nidrs, tilt' Iwart'st to his undl'rslalldillg of it ('nnH's tht Hpgf>lian ('onrt'p~inll IIf "objl'r\iVl' apPI'ar,IIU'p" implying tlH' IH'l'd [or
Ihl' st'Pllllnll;, tl\(' appt'arall('l', sill('p (':-'S('I1('(' ('an onh lit'
J,{raspt'd hy man to lilt' I;'xh'1l1 III whil'h iI rI:'H'<lls ib(;1f in
II IH' II I) lilt' 11<1 ,
PilrIlH'llilit's did not I'\'idplltly l'Ollrt'rIl himst'lf wilh tht'
prohh'~I,1 ~f Iran:-;ilioll frolll tht' world ()f opinion to Ih(' world of
Irulh, I hI." pr()bll'n~ wa:-; tn lit' forllllllah'd and sol\Pfl at a lalpr
~tal{p of plulo:-;oplural (\I'H\OPtIIt'IlI, \1 was not Parlllt'lIi(\t,s
whn dls('ovt'rt'd Ih,' " , 011 )(' \~t'('n SI'IISIIOU,," and rational
~1l(Jw,\p(,I~p, \('1 III' WilS tlH' fr~st 10 n'alisp till' filII import of
I 0111 r,ui u 110IIS Iwtw(,t'li 1~1l' ('vldl'II"'" r
. <In(
, rNI~()1l aliII
" '
) ,,"('I):-;t's
In ~ 10\\ IIIilI rl'aS(l1l can sOlllplillH's grasp IIH' Ir II' i ,fl.
of sl'JI~lIaJ I'x(Writ'IH't'.
U 1111 I ( WIH't
i'arlllt'lIirll<:-, faith in rl'a:-;on allli it,
"
W.tIIS so greal Ihal II("
r' " s SIIII'<'rlOrily ov('r sl;'m:p:-;
III art nl\tol()j.!I~\'d" tl
d
'
lOug 1 an
Idt'nllfi('d it wilh Iwing rp~ar II, 'r
.,
I {,os II Sf'II..;\, data Up r"t'ct 'd
UI)!"tall (' ngue <Hill cOllstanll\' changing .. , '
tJ \
,
{'\ II I'n('1;' of :-'PllSt':-' a:-i
",CI','"I, ".
't
th(' x JI\lt 01 apPl'arall(',t'. "opinlnn" iJ~ favour of the trill'

wo rh1 of pI 'rnal alld lllotlOllit'SS ht'lng which can only hI' COIIc'Hl'd in thought It was tIll' flrsl ~ll'P towards objl;'rli\'e
idpill:-,ITI,
,.
.
Tilt' cosllloloj.!H'al VIt'WS of ParmE'llu\t's I:'XpotHHll;'d by him ill
:le 'urrlann' with Ihl' opinions of mortals do not lend th{>llI..;t'lws to rN'ollstrndion within un ord(>rly "phy~iol(Jgicar
-:\,:,h'nl. Thl' ('('nlrid irll'a of his cosmolog~' de~crihNI in d('(ail
h'\, ,.\t'liITS (A :~7) I'on:-;ists ill the gt'npratioll of the st'nSIlOll!i
",'orld fmlll a mixlul't' of "light" (f1r(') <tllil "night" (dar\.;nl"~~
(11' parth). This dl'sniplion is partly ('onfirme(\ by fragm'nt
B 12. Tht' singlt' world is t'llcompasst'd by ('thl"r heneath which
"is rangC'fi thaI tiNY pari whirh w(' rail heawn," then come~
what ~llrrlHlIIds lh(' (,<trlh a Tlumhl.'r of circular rings or
hands. on(' in:-,ir\t' 1IlC' ot\ll'r, SOTIIP bands are rlery, otll('rs
ar(' dark. <lnd thost' belwp('1l them ar(' fill('d with fire bUI
jl<lrtly, "And in til(' ('t'lItr(' of these is thp goddess ~'ho
guides ('\'l'rylhing; for thl't)llghollt she rules oV('r cruel BLrth
and 7\.tllling, sending thl' f(,l1Iale 10 matI' \vith thl;' male. and
COII\'l'I's('ly again tIlt' malt' with th(' femalt''' (~12). According
to Apliu!', Parlllt'nid('s i\lso callNI her ":-;teerLng godd(':-,~ and
keyho\dl;'r and JustiCl' and ~C'('('ssity."
j>arml'l1it\l;'s's"circular bands" are highly rt'miniscellt of
thl' "rings" of Anaximandt'I', par~i('ular~y when we lea~n that
"till' sun and Ih(.' rin'lt' of til(' 'll1ky \\ay are e.'\halallon~ of
rul;'." his cC'ntl'al fifl' rt'H'als a clost' affinity to .PYlha~o
fl'an !-It'stia or tilt' goddess of hearth, (Ole, The ongl,n of life,
as wt'll as s('nsalion and thinking, was evidently attributed by
Parnwnitit's to Ihe intC'I'actioll of t'al'lh and fir(' (cold and hot):
"Thought \'arit's according to whethel' Ihe hoI or Iht' {'old p~~~
,'ails hill tl\'ll which is du(' to lht' hot I!' better and pt1r~r
, " 'O'ls'llion i~ ri\uspd by the Sll11l
' " ar (A ''')
Speaklllg
/,1')
IV
'
'
,
(,\
,
"
,
"
,p,
n('lIIc\rs
of Ih(' pCO,IJrralioli of ,lIlitnab and human }elngs. arl
" WOllll'lI al'(' warnH'r ((,VL,
d ",n tI y, lht'''J arC' h\'llN)
lII(1inlains thaI
and PIII'('I' though 11(' .IS no l qllll, expl1l'lt
, . about till' ma\t(,r
" ., r
.
., r
I' 01' f('malt' depends on \\ IIC I 0
than l1I('n; lht' bll't I () a 111(\ (
f tht' foptll~ in tht'

tIl(' pHr('nt~ lu'('vails ilnd on the locatIOn 0 . ,I. " (' B 17)
"
,
.. "
boys on th(' left. gil s."
'
womh: on tit' Ilg I ,
.,
r
'[,
go"a~ was adopll;'d
"
J l'l Z \0 SOliPhlo
(l
I;' ('U a ."
( 2 ) Z('no 0 ~ ea. ~PI "
ht' was ~onH' Iwt'ntyflw
by Pal'I11(,1I1(\I;'S, Ac('ol'd,Lng t~ r-'faliwr and Apollodoru:-, in
y('ars YOllngt'~' thiln IllS ~()st(' forI\-' '('ar!', Tradition hol(b
('reases this dlfh'n'I)('P to, ,~b.():\'ildl;'~ ~'hO {{'II \ictim in tht'
him a~ a ('ollragt'ou:-; pol1UC(l
c"
"
struggle against an Elean tyrant (th~ IHlIlIt' or tilt' tyrant

varies). According to ooe stor~'. the ph~ltl~opht' r who Ill'adt'd
a conspiracy against ty.ranny \'",as S(,IZC'li a~HI put tn thl'
torture. However. he did not gl\'~ away hl:-; fn ('nds. htlt
defamed the tyranfs confidants. Bel,ng unahl,(' to l'lIdul"t, th('
torture, he said he would whisp('r their name!' Into th e tyrant's
ear and. when the tyrant bent to him, Zeno dug his te<'th
into his enemy's ('ar and was killed by his servants. In anothN
version he hit off his own tongue and SPAt it into the
Lyrant'~ face, whereupon he \~'as thrown into a luge mortal'
and ground to death.
According to Diogenes Laerliu s (IX, 29). "his views
are as follows. There are worlds. but there is no empty s pace,
The substance of all things came from hot and co ld , and
dry and moist, which change into one another, The generation
of man proceeds from earth. and the soul is formed by a union
of all the foregoing. so blended that no one element predominates," If Oiogepes did not confuse Zeno with somebody e lse,
we have reason to believe that the Elean deemed it necessary
to expound not only the "truth," but also the "opinion," as
was the case with his teacher Parmenides , Zeno is mainly
known through his acut~ attempts to substantiate Parmenides's doctrine by the dialectical refutation of hi s opponents. The method he used was based on the ru Ie of
contraries and consisted in adopting his opponent' s pos iti on
as a premise and showing that it leads to absurdity, An cient
~our~es ascribe to Zeno {orty arguments "against plurality,"
I.e. In defence of the conception of one being, and five
argum~nts "against motion," in defence of the immobil ity
of reailty. These arguments are called "aporias" or insolubl e
p~oblems. AI~lOng the aporias that came down to us some are
dl,recled against motion and four against plurality, dealin g
~Ith the numerical and spatial aspects, They were aimed
slmulla.neousl~ against sensuous knowledge in genera l.
I ~, hiS aporias ,Z,en~, inv~stig,ates lhe logical structure of
tht', world of opinIOn which IS dominated by numbCl' and
motion and demonst~ates by inductive inferences that th ese
concepts are contradictory and should therefore be re' ected,
in other words, the very fact that lile bas'c
J t'Ions
f
.
h'l
I
concep
O anCI('nt P I osophy, mathematics and eve d
'
ness turll oulto be contradictory so that
;y ay COnSCI?lI Scan be drawn from identical
,~on rary conclUSIOns
" .
premises IS rega d d b Z
as su f 1I('lent reason for eliminatin tI
r e
y eno
g tern from the realm of
lwlt'd.'I' , Zl'1I0'S "llPgalivp di;III'('li('s" is in fact based

Irl ll' k'I'
~,
.
tlu' appliC'<lIHJlI of thl' laws of ff)rmal logiC to til('
ull . 'Ill of tlH' unit y of I'l'alily. \\'1' "'UlIIot say with cNtainty
('IIIHI
'\
formulat"d thps,' laws ilill I 'III W Ilat fOflll they WNt-'
\~!:: by 1111' Eh'atiC's, yl't till'rp ili IlO doubt that Parm('niri('s
~'(l\\liri;)ll~dy applied tlIP laws of icif'ntity and 1I01l-contradic
t'on and Zcno also llli('1i tlIP law of the f'xcilided middlE'
~i!'i 'aporias c\('arly proce('ll from tilf> a!'o!-illmption that if we
ha~'e simultaneou s l y A and non-A and if non-A proveli
contradictory, it is bound to b(' fals(' and A is bound to be
true in accordance with th(' law of the excluded middle,
Such is the logical stru ctur(' of all Z('no'li aporias irrespective
of their content.
Aporias again,~t the idea of plurality, "If things are
Many, they must be both small and gr('at: so small as ~o have
no size, so large as to be infll1ite" (OK 29 B 1), ThiS c?nclusion, revealing the self-contrad ictory nature of the notIOn
of plurality was apparently aimed at the Pythagorean conception of things as cons isting of a number of corporeal elements
(dots), Zeno's argument runs like this (Lee. 9 and to, OK.
fragments 1 and 2):
(a) Infinitely large. If a thing has size ~nd depth. one
part of it must be se parate from another, [ObVIously the parts
cannot occupy th e same space,] Now o~e pa1't of it mU,sl be
the outer surface, which limits it. and lies beyo~d the. IIlller
part. If it is mere ly a geometrical surface (I.e,. With n,o
de th) it is not a part of a so lid body at all, III fac,t ~t
is ~oth'ing, and the object has no limiting ~ur[ace; but ~f \~te
has depth (i e is a solid body itself), then It toodmust aad
. .
f
d n 'nner pa rt an so on
an outer part or sur ace an a I
,
infinitum,
'
'that the
(b) Infinite ly s mall. The on l?, al~e~[~~t~~e i~~nite numparts of each thing ha ve no magllltude'dd
to a magnitud e,
bel' of parts of no magnillld,e c~n neve r at t1~: same argument
Viewed from the quantita t ive aspe c ,
3)':""" 'f there is
L
11 ' OK fragment
, I
runs as follows ( ee, .'
fi' 't number of components.
a plurality, it mu st co nta
a n~~r: nor less than they arE':
because they mus t be nelt u~r
t 'n an infinite number of
on the other hand , it ,must COI~~~ se para te at aiL then ,
components, beca use If they tl e re will always be others
however close toge ther they ~rebet\~'een those, and so on ad
between them, and yet dt~H' r- I I'alitv must contain both
infinitum, I n other wOI' s. a p 1I
,lI:
a finj1t~ dnd all infinift' IIUlIlb,: of
1"011'
!,nn!' II~
a bsurd .
. \\ IIrh i.
Aporias against spact' and se'lse pt'rc{'I'I ,
.
I
l
lj"~rll
o Ih
I (> nollOn 0 space. Pun pul::. )"rw (rei II
'II
l~pO"
.
r
hmenl. 1 d t mg
H ' ) O\\'tll'
~
SPUCt' tills "., .
~ ;~II.
~ ."' a( I' III'!'!! t

I d manu! pr~pa('l~.J.nd:-;oollild Illliuitlll y. -. It' Nt
cose
n
plurality of
at a II .
.
Or.CU)lI(,:-O .1
spac('~
i:-:
ab~urd.
To discredit sen:,ation .
thpl't'fort'
Zt'1I0
"'I",e
I'>'
flfill1 4
1111
.\.I"tlt'
.'
'l
10
('\ISI
(1,1.1
"<"""
. " ,,""""
;.,
I'W II'll I"IT
HlII!B
It;
~rguIll('nt which df'al:-; with th' fl'lation or P<l1'1

_I' I E'rt'Ht
IS known as the "!lulle! .'1'('11" Z(,1l1l ',<k' I,'.
\\ wi" HlHt
, I
....' IS PpOIll' , "r
sing e s('rd mak('~ a "'Itilld ill fallilltJ' If Ih,' .
11 t a
. II
II'
.
.
",.
oP1'01l{,1I1 !'PIII
In
1(> a lrrnatlve. Zt'1I0 a.-:h wht'IIH'" h'llf. . I
H's
sid
'I'
<
,\ .... N'(
ma k('s. a
OUII(, an . . 01)11, I) till' Ilt'gativt' rt'I'I\ hI' ",' . . I
w'lI b
h h'
.
tJOIn . . t lat th"
I
P no SlH'
t 1nJ! a . . sound sinn' a . . um of l('!'O(' .... i" s -\~
l.('ro. In thIS way h(' . . upport . . ParlllC'ni(h'",;,s v', ' I . . .tl
art" not to br tnl . . ted (Lpe. 37 alld :{r;.
\Jl~~(ll)Hll S('/lS,,,
The.p - .
, / -, .
"
orJa~ agaIn . . ' the notion of plurality tl'stin.d I
U ('n!HS of ancient th
t
I k
.'
, ()
kind
('ore le8 'no\\'I('tlgt', tIll' flr . . t of its
. . Is re~olullon III mathE'matics c'llh'd r ' . I. .
llvt system f
I."
<
or d Sll ). . Iall
losoph\' the ~r~~reera t~lom~ de~'l)l{)pE'd by Eurlide ..... III phiwith paradoxe' .. ~ ~ I Plllg whlc~ turnl'd out to be fraught
,4p orUzsaga.' wta . . ::-?d ved by anclt'nt atomism.
.
1h
.
In.'li
(' 1 ea of mol'
Z
'
I~ Verv simplp. if
th' -IOn. {'no s gl.'neral argument
plan' 'where ','. a, mg moyE'~ It must mOn' eithE'r in the
, .
I IS or In thp, placP'h
'.
'
IS Impussible (0 th'
\\ (>f(' It Is not. Thl' latter
isn~t). aod wht-'r;~ a ~~~ ra.o act or tw aelpd tlpon whE'fe it
~'h\('h ~oves, moves ~~.i~s. ~t mu . . t h{' at .r(' . . t: HellcE', "that
In that 1Il which it .
I .. er ITI thE' pla('(' III which it is nor
a~ "The dichotom .I,~ n~l (B .'i). His ,!;pcond paradox kr;own
~lIe point to anolh!r :~(is that an objp('t which lllOv{'S from
.itst pass through half th n(>~pr reach its df'stinatioll' it Illll.!'t
lit must travers(I the hall" rd"ht<lIlCP, but Iwfol'(' it can' do tili!;,
1 m('ans ,I, a ,. motion
. c 0 t . e half arlcl so
. Oil ae IInrllll
tll Ill.
111
. knan neither ('II (I 1101. I
A.ccordlng
,
th the thir (I aporia
)"glll
h e Oeet-fOoled Achill~:n ~I'I "Achillrs and tI~f:' tortoi . . e;
ecaust', whilt' h '
WI
neVl'r ov t k
torloist"s Slart' e I~ reaching what.
er a'p a to:toisP,
As AchillE'S all~: PUlnt, the tortuisf>
1II01ll('lIt I. . the
Oc.cUpied by the Ys m.ust reach first the aV_.I.Hoved fu_rthN.
wllh it I h toruuse, he will
POSItIon prpvlOu . . ly
Z
. n t e [ourth
never be abl
.
...pno arguE'S th t
aporia. known as "TI e t.o catch up
a an arrow who h
Ie nying arrnw"
Ie
appe.
~IO
rs to Ill' flying
ilK
:111v stat,ul,:'" y lH'rau. " It allY IIIOlllent r its righ' I;

'!I,I_I (J('C,lpY n Sp'tCI' "Ilal I ~ it. "If:
f'lnnove Delttl(>:'
111 11<; 1)I,l4 ,. 1I'1r If" tho pi!'" WlPr, . is not T~r M'll apolia
(';1114<1" rh t.II;'IH: is 1:1 f,,: nW8. In the ta~ 1m tiler,' ~;~
1 fjrl't' IU -i.'~ ,"If h '" ,utallll . gel (qual II Hllber
r eQ lal .lzl"d
OhJPfl'" ,1fT'all~('d Ill; ,lily a
Ih"Jt<
"
'.
w:u hOY,
nCc
The A I'"W IR ~tati()na, y he IJ C Ie! ( rows beglfl f ) mnve
in opposite clin'ctiolls wilh f!qUC:l \-'eloclty until II tl ree
rowS are opposilH ('acb oltIPJ':
(1))
,1,111,1
BBBB
('(('C
The B row has pass(,ri half ttlp t W wTile the ( row has
pa . . s('d til(> whole of the R row. ~ow, TOWS movin.; with eq lal
velocity musl takr thf' Sillll(' tilor to pas . . an ~qual distance. ~.1
the rows are l'qllal. hilt it take . . row C a~ much time to ;)ass
row B, as it takes row B to pass only on" half of row A. Hence,
half a given time b equal I~O the whole whkl s :tbsurd. This,
according to Zeno. again . . hows that motlf-n IS unreC1~ (DK
A 28),
Analysing thesE' puzzlr ..... a modern readf'1 Wl~, have 14
difficulty in solving thelll, Indeed. the aporias aganst "1f'
notion of plurality are based on the fallacious axiom oi tH'
ancil'nts that a sum or an infinitl' number of magnl1ldes i~
bound to bE' infinite. It is w('11 known to II.!' that there exist
intlnite convergent series. \Ve call accurately calculatt" when
and in what point of thE' path Achilles will catch up with ,'tUl
tortoise. Suffice it to recall till' elementary p:-ycholog1cal
notion of the ltll'{'shold of perception and WE' sltaJl"top IlUl."in~
OVl'r the "millet . . ppd." Again, th' author of tht'stadlUm
puzzle appl'ars very /laiv!' indl'{'d ill the light fl.f the. rull' of
the composition of vl'loriti!'s ... ':l'nrthe",.,~ ..... Zt'flO ~ argu
ment!' continut' ('xt'rcising th(' I1l1nd" or phl,loso.pht'r~. h~gl
cians and mathrrnatiritlll" en'il in Ollr days. fh:lr 'lI~torlcal
signirlcunc(' cOIl!-li . . ts in that Ih('v :eve~llf'd th~ dlfticuI1It'." of
thp formation (If "rit'ntilk C(HlC(~pt~ of space,.:lmE' and m~;lOn
rooted in {Iwir dialecti('al naltlft' and. plI~,d thE' pro ,<'01
of cxpressillg tht'ir objt'ctlve contladlctortnl'SS I,n logical
rl)rms.
It is this cnlllr,ulii'll,r'lc . . S .llont' Ihat. Z,~no \S In'Plr.,ted

0,
in: he proceed:-; from till' i\ "~lIll\ pt i(ln that whal IS ('o nt ra

dictory cannot be thinkable .lllti. l'(lll :-;t'qtll'ntl~. r;\11110t I'xist
The conclusion hi that helllg ca ll on ly ht, l'fl ll ft'IVpd a~ Ollt' UlO.
tionless and immutable rE'ality . Thl' tlllli'nabdity of Z" llos
conclusion is obvious. Fir.st , Ill' dOt'S no t Sl't' that the ("utln' lIt of
one immutable being invo lw:-; no h'ss con t l'iul!ttory con sl.'.
()ul.'ncE's as was already ~ho~\"n
Pl~ltl . St~roll(\. Zello is uot
awarE' of the fact that tlllnklllg It.self IS su bJ E'c t to chang<' and
genesis. and that therE'for(' what we canno t ('~ pl'ess in to-da y's
concepts will make no probl(>m for thE'. log iC o f to-rn?rrow.
Third, he is 5tili unablp to acc(' pt the IdE'S of the objecti ve
contradictoriness of reality , contrildictorinE'ss to him is incompatiblE' with bping, ~e\'ertheless, Zeno's argum e nts emphasised, though in the negativE' form , the dialecti ca l nature
of motion. ThE' real question that wa s posed be fore scientifi c
thought was not whether therE' is moti on, but how to express
it in the logic of concepts,l
(3) Melissus. Melisstls of Samos, son o f Ith aegenes is
known to have been elected admiral during th e war with
Athens and to have defeated th(> Athenian fleet in 44 t B.C.
Later, however, .Pericles won a victo ry over the Sa mi a ns an d
took the city after a nine-month seige . He rased t he c ity wall s.
seized the ships and imposed a heavy indemnity o n th e citizens. Ancient sources give us no information o n Mel issus's
Further fate.
As a philosopher, Melissus remained firmly in the Eleatic
tradition and was called a follower of Parmenid es . Vve possess
ten fragments of his book On Nature or What I s. two of which
being of considerable length. What with the extens ive com ~len~aries of the doxographers and the exposition of hi s teachIIlg III the tr.eatise On. Melissus, Xenophanes and Gorgias
(M~G), mentlOn.ed eariler, we can form a fairly accurate id ea
of hIS views. Mehssus elaborated the arguments of Parmenid es
?y
The problem Of. the dialectics of motion has given rise to enor mous
literature, The claSSIcal solutIon of thi~ probl(,llL in Marxist philosophy
was h gl~enl by Engels: "J,,~olion itself is a contradictioo: e ve n si m ple
mec anlca change of posItion can only com
b
h
h
.
at 00 1' and th e same moment of time both
I' 8 out 1 roul{
a body bemg
abo not io it" (Fredl>ri ck Engel~, ..1nlL.lj~h~L:ne and the '111~C place ~nd
( bOII ~ d0r,n to a stlltemenLthu Lilolio I
g. p. t48). TillS qu otatlo o
)
i.o slat"
u
Id ... "., . I. fLlnl!~'lh(>_ ~.xpreswd non
. rollt.rad ic.\ "':
If no on!; l'S<.'tt )lIIK ~ Illf)\"1Il1( 1i I
.
,
tllll{'- ~ p 8C e positioos . 51'(' also A.!-', Bo om! IW'~.. !Hi oj:CUPYLllI{ II s('n('s of
a od Its Solutiou " , iu : PhilofOphy In ~h
1)1I11('('tlcal Contradiction
.
0"',,
.\falerio/ism.
92
Prostrl'~s Pu bli~h('rs, 'lo~ro=',
;.IIV.
I!ift I'roblrms of Dialecticol
IllI' l i~h\ of Ihl' problf'UI$ of ancit'nt physiolugy

nd till' dl'd. ri ll"~ of hi~ 1l)n~l'n.lp()rary EIOP~cl()th':-; ami ,
os",ihly 1." 111"1 1'1'115. ,\ dlaractprlstlC fpatllre of hiS Hrgllllwnts
P ,<,.:;t" HI tha t III' lIPI'Ii".1 ttll' Parnll'flldean thpsis "what is.
,01 .
I
.~ 'llot (lilly 10 Iw ill g a~ a who 1' , bllt also tl) indivirillailhings.
;'),'nyin~ plur ali ty and all st'I~~iblf' objects and properties,
\ll'lissll s assI' rls Ihilt if Ihl'y I'xlstl'd. pacl! would h" slich as it
;\JlPPilrl'!I to li S ,, \ fln;t. allll. rH?t ('hangl' no.~.bf'comp differf'nt.
hut t"I(' 11 mll s t a l ways lit' as It IS. However, It seems to 115 that
till' hot Iw conH's ('0111 a n d thE' cold hot, and the hard soft
'\l1d thl' soft ha rd , and that the living thing- dies and conlf'S
into being Irom w h at is not liVing. and that all th ings
change, and that ~ h a~ was a~d what now is arc not at ~11 the
same but iron w hI ch IS hard IS worn away by contact Wit h the
finge~, and gold a nd stone a nd whatever seems to be ent ire ly
strong (is worn a way); and that from water, ear~h and stone
come into being . So that it comes about that we neither :-;ee nor
know existing th i n g~" (B 8 [3]).
Thp ('x!<'n s io n of the law of jdentity beyond the ~phere
of abstract bein g and its application to individual things
reveals at o n ce t he fallacy of the reasoning whereby thp properties of sen s ibl r obj<'cts are deri\"ed from the notion:-; of
thelll , i,p. from thinking. I ndeed. ;::0 long as we regard the
speculati ve "('ss('ncE" a~ 50methir~g I~ing beyond 'p~~nom.~
na" w e Ill ay sti ll attE'mpt to malOtam a theory of Ib ba~ l c
differe n ce from appE'aranc(' and cont~nd th~t e~sen c~ can only
he di sc('r ned by reason owing to theIr contiguity. "tel a:-; :,oon
as we pass to ~<'n~ible object!; and declare them e!'-:-;entlally
immutabl e we challE'n~l' elt;'llH'utary common sen;::p anti ~1E'arf
Iy re veal the untenAbility of the "physical" intE'rpretat lon 0
being a 5 m ot io n less and dl<lngeless.
.
d .
M I'
1"01' all h is a d herellct;' to the Elea lic tfa ItlOn, I e I~
SllS does no t blin dly follow all its teuets and m a~es a rnub n~be r
,
.
I b sic conceptIOn 0 e ln g.
of impo rtant i lll pro\"~nH'nIS .10 t ~E' (
.
) both in space
First, he d e flll e~ b(> lIl g a;:: IIllnllltd' a,Pn,",r,~nb l e an d thererore
b
., .. l'terna an 111 I "
ane I tlm (> ('callse I IS . ,

d S ond h e con:-;ide rs
. "I
b(>!THHlIlI~ or en . ~ec
,
,
cannot Iun;.e t l wr . to> " 131 ob'ects) motionl e:-;s \Il -"pace
being an d Its parts ( 1Il~1\ I~..;' "for lthe Em pty is Nothing : and
bt?,all sl' th ert' 1:-; 110 elllptlllE'. ( b ,. [O K 30 B 7J) and the\'
. I ',r..; )th11l~ cannot e
"
so tha t \\" IHC I 1:-; . (, I . . t) This arg ument was e\'1dently
,ha\"<, nowhert' to wllh( r.:t"c\loctr ille wh i<' h W ol ::; based on th e
dirl.'dC'd .'lgains l .tl~(' a\~I;'llis;u:-; thus lin ks r('a lity with space
assump t ion llf \OId ..
,,\(1 /(' UI) i ll
thrrehy {'mpha<;ising its matNial chnrach'r, Third, \1.'Ii~sll'l

.Il'privrs being of allthropomorpl.lil' c ha r;l('h'risti('.~ a~s.'rling
that it feels of'ilher pain nor grll'. and, c(Jntrar~' to XPIlO_
rhl1ne~. does nol "l'e, Iwar or th~lIk ... Till' tl'rnl (;oJ IIse(1 h}"
\Ielissus as a !'yuonym of rt'allty has notilln g 111 C()IIlIll!Jn
with the traditional idea of God in (~rl'ek mythology. It is in
fact the god of philosophy, 1IH' II 11 iY{'l"sa I concept of Ill(' world
Finally, Melbsus substantiatE's and elaborat('s Pa l"nl{'llidE's'~
implicit principle Ex lIil/ilo nihil fit (out of noth in g COnies
nothing) which placed an f'xlrcllll'ly important part in ererk
philo!'ophy.
The grorral trend of ~1('li~"lIs'!, thought c()nrlfl ed within
the framework of EleaticisOl sllgg('sts nn obYious inclination
towards materialism. The exlanl fragm('nls of hi s hook givc no
evidence for his adherl'llcl' to thl' idt'a of idf'ntity of thought
ann briog His recognilion of innnitE' reality gavC' Aristotle
cause to assNt that \1E'lissus, in contra!it to Parmenides, SPOkl'
of onE' reality "in relation to matlN" ('\1el. I. 5, 986h). but
nllt in relation to notion. Thi!i vil'\\' was evidC'uth !ihan'd
by r.al(n (A 6).
It is intere:4ing that \f('li!i~u!i attacking Ihe idea of

plurality open~ tllf' way to atomi!im: "If Thioj;!s were ,\lan\
they woull\ haw to bE' of thE' sam(' kind as I sa\' thc One is'
(88.6), Yet this is precisl'l" what thE' atolllisl~ averred: thp
world c.onsists of a ,plur~lity of atoms, E'ach p ogse~sing tilt'
propertJe~ of the Eleal1C~'!i Bl'ing ,il i~ 0(\('. indivisibl e.
ungE'neratE'd and unperishable ...

. To cone.lude, t~e Eleaties made an iml>orlant ~tcp forward
1Il the philosophical cognition of the world by focusing on
reason
.
d t andd lhinkino
.
.,. Tlley opene d Jl('W IH)f)zons
in philosoph\'
:ir~n ()~r;hr lit ~rom cosmological speculations to an examinaIpm f d' e Ogl,<' of thought. TIl(' Elcatics advauced the probo . rs rIncllon. r\'en <'ootrnsl, hf'tweE'1i being and a earance. E'!iseoce and plwnolllrna t Ih d . '
. ~p
thE' mortals. Parmenide!i and' . ~u dn <Ir.bltrary Opllll0n of
". Be mad- a
( .d
hiS follow('rs In tht, fihh cc nt u..
"gorl'a a \"In
I
"exi!'tin o thin"!i" a"d
ee 1Ipon t H' Ionian concept of
'"
.,'
rosE' to a I I h
.
phllo~ophical gl'llerali:-;alion, 'l't I ~ ~IIC.l rgller le\'cl of
df>wlopa fllll-fledged ah,. (~
.tH~ \\('rE' strll unable to
.
. M
11011011 of I, '
. the
Platrlnlan sense.
f 1Il~ as such 1Il
Elf'ali! 'I~1Tl wa~
iml'ortant "tagl n thl

\l-I\('tl'flllilll
tion of philosophy all" ha!1 profound alld hi'thly c .11 IIJirtOf\'
f(lIl~!'!IUf>llC'l'S. Fir~t. it l'xplodl'(1 tllf> initial unity of GrPI'k
thuught n<l'iw ill its ,lri"tillf' simulicity hut reprf>spnting thl'
roval rmul or philo.;ophi!'al dl'\'l'lopllH'nt. SI'conrl. it pllt an
1'0'\110 tIll' IInjt~' of Ih l' ,1[]('jl'lIt world oul1ook. a~ much nai\"('
and hll~f'd 011 din'i't (ontt'mpl<ltiotl. On turlling into "Being'
n;lturl';I:o; unity in divt'rsit~ hl'rallH' Ollf> a:-; opp()~NI to ~1a1lY
"physis"' was di\'nr("l,d from "'ITlI'taphysis." Third. tbe living
<lnd changing dialpl'li.al rt'alily ga\"l' way to imm1Jtabl(' amI
rtlotiolll('ss lIl t'taphysiral "hl'in~. sllpranatllral and antidia,
[I'ctical. wiliJ!' intuiti \"\' comprt'iI(,llsion, immediatl'ly valid,
pictorial and contradictory was supE'r~eded by disc\lr~ivt'
and conclusin' r('asonillg.
This lalt('r circumstanct' was of ('norlllOus importanc(> tt,r
philosophical prOj.!l"l'ss. Thl' Eh',ltics r('Y('aled a IIE'W world,
Ihc world of concl'pts nnd i(\('<I'<, and laid it opl'n for explora
lion. The paradoX('s of ancipnt thought disc"oY('red b~' them
induccd till' phi losoplH'rs to fOCIl!i on their ori~in-in math ..
malics, logic , E'pisll'llwlogy--and to I(lok more c1o~ely into
man's position in the world and ~ocil'ty anrl his attitude to, the
gods. Contradicti ons in thoul.!ht clluld tlol bE' tolerat!'!) and
the Eleatics' negatin' di,dl,tlic~ wa~ bound to bring abol1t 8
positive dialccti c~ in the shape of the logic and epistemology
of GrcE'k classical philo~(lrhy Tht' impact of til(> Eh'atic
school. howcv('r, was not connned to the field of logie--ils
doctrinC's lC'd. Oil the ()lit' halHI. to a rnival of "phy~iolog~'
or natural se icn ce Hnd, on tilt' ()till'r, 10 the problem (If man
and socil'ty.
illi
.... l"\'lurllwr '11111 III y:>t It" \lily (. an 11111 W Illu 'Wlrk
. JII'" "I
,.
.
r til' I~ ~ul 10. It. 'Ie I lW Irl."II all ullgardlll' COflsplrary
p' I(.n' t ... ralluY
II '\I'raga , perslIBdl'd hi!! lellf)w
111'
' 'Inf, Hul (. dli"alc IHllitieal I'lllIdl
titl"1" ~ 10
allllHllml.
p;.rty
"
ty, allli f"r III " "WII parl lu ha v r{'luSt" I till' offl:' o( a king
~ir
.
I IH' I I'~
~toril':; of I.lIl1l1'l
Chap/a .,
The "Physiologers" of the Fifth Century

The Eleatic conception of being was based on 11 hypothet i
cal statement: if b'ing is one. no Illotion is possible. It lIev'r
occurred to the Eleatic philosophers to call in qu(!stio n th e'
premi!<e its{>[f. and this is precisely what was done by the
"physiologers" of the fIfth century B.C .. Empedodes. AlIa>;a~
goras and Arch{>laus. Taking molion for granted as a self-evi dent fact and following the EI{>atics' logic which they con sidNt'd infallible. these thinkers rejt'cted the unity of the world
as t'xpounded by Parmenides. Me lissus. the Milesians and
He~a.c1itu;; and arriyt'd at a concept of plurality of primary
(>nlltil"s or elemenu; .
. Th~ "pluralis~" as 11.ley wt're hail{>d by the contemporary
hlstonans of ancient philosophy Herred that reality is Ma n\,.
and not One. Echoing the Eleaties, til(>y professed lh{> ultimate
permanenc~ of the world and agreed that nothing could cOllie
out of nothlllg. yet they w(>re also keenly aware of unive rsal
cha?ge and mobility of heing. To reconcile bolh factors, th(>)'
altrlbut'd pe.rmane~ee 10 the elements Ihemselves. and
change to tht'lr v~rYlllg relations. Their great problem was to
account f?r motIOn and show how generation and chang'
were p05s1ble. They could no longer conrule themselves to 11
mere postulate of motion -it was necessary to explain ils
nature, reveal its sources and indicate the necessary condi tions.
10. Empedoclcs's Cosmic C)'de
EmpedocJes (C. 490-430 B.C.) of Acra a (5 .

wealthy and prominent fa '1 Ii' r g s
ledy) came of a
reputation of a champion ~lf~ieml~cr~t~ly"anMdetlo.1I enjoyderd tlh e
. k
. t h
liS gran at ler
"a5 . ~o"n 0 aw won a hor!le-race in the 71st 01
P. d
Tradition describes him at once as po,t a n d pllosopler.
1.1 ym I" .
n' I II ,. .. trllll\"\" r I
WI hHnl' all it
wonl!t.r-worl';.I'r. (llli' of tlwtn 1o1I:i of all "pidl'llIi!" III thl' city of
sdin lls (~lI11 .. t'll hy polllltioll of til!' Ill'arhy r;\"I'f. TIl{> plaglU'
W,lS stoPIJ('d by Emlll"t\odE's, wit/) divt'rlld two lU'ighbollring
~trl'fIIllS into tilt' rivN <11111 dl'arl'd ib ....-at,rs. A('cording to
~notlH'r story, lu' kE'pl ,\ womall aliYI' {or thirty clav~ withf)lIt
hreath or puls(' and hrollg\J1 hN back II) lIormal. Il did not
COllie down to Ill' what rt'a nilllatiull tl:'fitnitlUt'S he had used,
but the acr.ounts of his fl'<lts caused hilll to Ul' ngardt'd by his
superstitious contemporaries as a Pllss~ssnr of almost !;Up.Nnatural power>;. HI S death IS l'Ihr()lId('d III mystNY AccordLfig
to one uf tht' tal('s, h(' Il'apt inlo Etna in the midst of the
celebration of his victory owr plague when th{' grateful
Selinuntines were paying his divinr hOllours as he "'ant(od
them to belie\'{' in hisasc{'nsion to Hravrn and forever wOf.'ihlP
him al; a god, According to anothN story. he mad~ this
~acrifice after the woman's revival. but the vokano did not
;ccept it and Ihr{'w back his sandal... This latter.version has
a strong flavour of lllaliciO\l~ slandl'T likely to be Circulated by
Empedoc1el;'s political opponenl~, the more so as otht'f SOUfces
gi\'e a very plau sible e31lS(' of his Math: on .the ,:,,'ay to some
public feslival in Messina h(' fl'll. broke .hls thl~h. and .Ihe
complication pro\"('d fatal. His lomb IS III \Iegafls (DlOg.
L. VIII, 67-73).
..
Empedocll's s tl'achlll~. accor mg to

.'
f II .' . "there afe four
Diogenes Laerti us, COll!'ISls In tilt' 0 O"Lng.
.
. ' b'
elements fire watN earth. ,mol ;lir. brsld("s fTlt'nd~hIP ~
which these 'arc Ill:ited, '\llli ~trifl' by willch they ar:
separa ted " (Diog L. V Ill . 76). Em Ill'doc I{'s wrot(' t" 0 poem~
The
essence o f
Purific/iliOfl~. )TOOh~ f~~:t ~l~~ ~'I~! I~t~::
entitled On Natu;e and

books (rolls) and COIllI)flsl'd "houl
_l . 1I
. . ' ..
0"
wll~ 1lI one The sun 1\ lIlg
r('ligiou~ in con le nt all(I purp s{,
'11
. ,'ing to about
.
r
I
I
.
'\re
very
"lila
.
amOUI
porllons 0 )ot I POl'Ill S .
. .'
_
" . 1"- a~crib(' to
3/10 and 100 lines f('spt'l-t L\rly. ~f(1ll1\' .,~o\lrr/\;~~~s
-a Hymn
lO 1
"
I I '
0('1ll calh,tl Til t' f1!'as / o.
..
I:olllpe< oc es a p
, I ~ I It th.'\ art' of 5t'colldary
to Apollo. and sonu' olllt'r \\Tl l~g, 11 . '.
imporlanel' frolll thl' philosopillful \1f'\\POlllt.
!Ii
The ~tarling point of Emlll'llndt'~'~ n'a~"ninl{ i~ th. rt'''"

nilioll of motion lind lllultqlJirih in 111(' worlt! H~ att\~tt'd ~~
by ~en~(I~ and rell"'OIl. IINI' IH' di .. u,!{rt'l'" \Iith 1',lrlllt'nid,.,
wholl1 II(' Ill?Y ha\(' h('urd \o,l!'t,th,'r \\dh Z"IHI. Y\'1 Iw iU'I't'ph
Parnl('nid{'"" proof of thl' nOll p\lslt'nc(' of ('Iliplirl(>s" fir
not-btin/.!. This 1,,1\(,... him only OIH' po""ihild~' 10 IHTolint fur
motion. generation ,Inti !l1'ri;:hiulo!'. Oil thl' UlH' Iwlld, allli for Ill"
plurality of the H'nsihll' world. (III tht' olhN: th l' pUrls of
reality might concei\'ilbly chllngf' their pOsition wilh rl'f('r('I1('"
10 01lE' another, and plurality might ue COIl('('il'ed as varying
combinations of Ih(> four mingled elem('nl!<.
Hener, the diffNt'rlC(' between things dl'rive.'; rrom th('
correlation of elements that can be e\pressed in t erllls of
mathematical !lroportion~. As regards the One of Parrll l'nidrs.
it remains intact as one of the sta~e.~ of th(' world Ilr()C('.~;;
Announcing til(' IlI'W order. blb('(1 o n four el('nwnts o~
"roots"-fire. earth. air. and water Empedod{'s giw's t hrm
lli\"ine names: "shining Zeus and iife -bl'inginR Hera.
Aidoneus and Nestis, who I('ts now from hN tears the SOurce
of mortal life" (DK 31 B 6). Th{'y fill the unh-erse a n d are
in constant motion mingling with and separating from one
another. They are et('rnal and immutable. The notion of th('s e
deities is not prompted by the anthropomorphic tr adition:
th(' element:s preced(' gods and are gods th(>msei\'es (A 'to)
In other words. the di\"ill\' names are pllrely aJiegorical and
do not I~ t~r least atte~t to mythological thinking.
It IS significant that Empedodes conc('he.~ th(' elelllent~
~s im~ovable entities. Despite biomorphism which manifests
Its.elf I~ the \'ery t('rm "roots" and suggests the emerge n ce of
thlllgs III th(' man l.le~. ~f plants gr?wing Ollt of their roo ts, he
u n.derstands g('nes,l,s Ilk; the putting togethe~ of a wall Oil t of
bricks and stones (A '13). Hence another Important con~
equence: nature. (physis) is no longer reg-aniNI as the
source of.all things. In point of fuct, E:mpedocles ]'cjl'cts
the .\'er~ Idea .of generation and destrul'tion. "Thert' is JlO
('oriling
. ' -", I0 r any ('Il{ or It In
, IIIto , bClIlg of aught that ,leris'.""
1
woe u d('at I. hut onl\, min'din .... arlll ..... p " . . 1 , "
b
. '"'''' "
., ">,
.,,, ",,10110 Wltl
las
eell mlng eu.
\\ hen the elem(,lItli ha\" I
.
then men sav that ( t h ' )
.
. e lecn Illlllgled ....
.
IIlg~ come Into belllg' and when lh p\"
(~ 8i~araled, they call that, as i~ th> cliston;, wOl'fltl dca th:'
'r .
Trill.', Empedocles's discourl'e i<; nl I

.
biological analogie~. He <;a\,~ f .... ) e,'!tlrl'ly frel' frolll
.. , or IIllSt.ln(,(,: At a cl'rlain tim >
., """1"" ,
ollt of \I "II~, ,,1111 lit Hllothl'r ils.rrp.v"parl to I"

. .
\1.HI~' nil' of (J1lf" ( B ~Ii);"
11101'1111 that tlu-y ha\f' h'llrrlt'd
.'r"W 0111' frUlIt 1II;IIIY ;Hltl ;,'1 till' orl!' 1'1 Ih"lfl,'d 100rn fnto
:::.,;IY ;I~HI!"." (B 17. I 2). I'll th .. whol,'. II"WI'wt. tllf' i,II';1
tI;lint.:IiIl~'" IlTi,dolllilnll, 'S ;11,,1 it i'l nilly IJY wily of '"('ollJfJl)i
0 " \\ith ,"Islum " thilt till' IIhillNlplll'r II.~'~ till' wHrds "birth
HI"
, . ':> lIrf' ('0 111"'1':"1
. ")Y, .
"
,.
1I1I00dl'''.lh
, ....[111It.:
,',1111)1'( 01" f'" a~ crJlII JI
uatillih of t,j"III1'nts 1111\ 1',1 III d"\lnl\t' Ilro\lortloll'l and hI' s.r(W~
ull (0 ,'xplaill thaI nt'sh allll "Illod ('on lain I"jlwl (1IIHJltitip~ /)f
all d"IIII'nts. hnlll' is 1II 1Hh' lip IIf IWII IMrts of wllt!>r, tw/) put~
of 1';Hlh and fOUl' Pllfts
li n' ... t('.
Having ,lisclll'<I('(1 tht, 10ni,III dodrilll' IIf hylo~oi;;1lI or uni
\('f-aJ[\, i\ninwt('(1 nwltPT anrl Jll('itlJ,{ ttlE' prohl,'m of 1II0tlOn,
Enlp",f"d('~ is I('d to po~tul<ltP, in a(~diti()TI to hi~ ftJllr piE'
Ult'lit-. tWII contrary forct'.~, 1.0\"\' and Strlf!', a~ motl\"p cau~e~.
Tlu'.-!' IHo\"\'r~ UTe ubo IIndl'Tstood a~ rnal{'rial agents po~se!;,,
ing ph~'sic,ll JlrO per li ('~. 1.0\"'. fur ill~tanc(', i~ "pqual in ~ength
and hr('allth " to th e elelllt'flt" and pPT\'adl's the unl\"('r~(>,
i.('. is regard ed as extended in span'. Speak in/!: of ':c('m!?ntmg
1,(1\"('"
and " huneful Strif .. ," Emp",ll)cI\'~ a~~oclat('~ them
T'~p('cti\"('ly with moi",tur\.' ;llld fin'. i.e. ph)~ical elem!?nt5.
On th(' other hand. however. they ar(' anthropo- and ~I~
morphic forc('s, Love being also referred to as Amlt),
Harmony or Aphrodite, Strife, as halr>d. war, or Ar.es.
Empedoc1es thus brought to/!:tt,lwT, as It )~'>rr, the Itahan
and Ionian ~1uses - lI('ruchtl'illl Stnf" and I ~tha2orean h~rm
on\" Th(' r{'sult wa~ that th> li\'in/!: harmony of oppo"'lte~.
the' union of cOlltrast~ inlll'rent in reality gave way to
1>,,1'.'
(I
..
or
a cyclic chunge in time.

,
. .
'" of
The cosmic process d('scrih>d by hlllpl.'do('I"~ III term ... ,
.'
lIe-" ulteTlIIltion of two OppOSI e
mixing and ~epaTatlOn IS an ('1](
, ' .'nopp(l~{'
a e em~ I .t "~ ..~re
,
mov('lIIcnts. \Vhen ~()\"e ru cs \I
""1'
.
, k '1 s llll're wh('rea~ Stn e I'" \1"
fused into a II [1Ity ani lIlil e. 1
'.,
d b"gin~ to
.
.
""
St f 'II t ('f~ lh t' ~p H're a n
~
Its pl'l'lphery .
11'11, II (' lJ . . . . t the elemenl.,.; until it
dl'i\,(' Lo\'1' to lh~ ce lltre I.HII <"('ll~I~:\e('l'~(, mO\"('ll1ellt begins,
takes full possess io n. Aftel tI;l. til" tllf' "eparated el(,ll1eTll.o;;
Love r('as~erIS .itself 111.](l Irlll: is "\Jc'ce~"'ion go('s 011 for
togetiwf. I'estorlllg I hi'. tPh~/~. tlll~'J oi lowing words: " I shall
d"'"
'd"
~~I~:~/~~1~ro:I~11~~~7tl)~Io:,;:,;I
'
'
.
;
'
.
:
.
'
,
a
\
~~:('
a~:~~rl;~
i:~:l~~a:~ai~~
~:
~or~~
a Si ngle
Ill' Oil
I" . .
.
'.
. t be Mnll Y out of Oue. There is a doublr cr('a.tlon
apart so a,' 0 d ~ doubl e decline; the union of all things
of morta s an "
f;HI_~t'''
the_ hirth and dl'.-;\rufliUIl of tht' nlll' (rrn
'f ruorl.l hq
tht' (Itlll'r I'; r,'ared 11 ... tilt' \,I\'lIwub ),Cr,)\\' ;'p,\I'I, tWit thl'l n: '
a,;lInll,.r ... .. (Dh. .'31 B 17)

I
II'~
Thl' IHllurl' of Ih(' "r(WI'''''' j ... Ihu!" l'ont r;ldirtur\ f '
"
b
f
f
.
.11 \ , _
I~ol_ Oil fy unl {':" lit a ",0 ,,('par<l~t''' ,1111 d th"lroy", JUS! tik i
Strife wlll("h klll~ Ihlll,l.'('; hy rl',lrlll~ ttWIll.
Emp('do:ll""~ d('piction ,if I~H' cosmic fY\'I, fl'\'I',II" a w('ak
p01ll1 111 111:< ('oncl'pt of gt'.Il"s, .... Jr nothing can ('on\(' out o f
how can we {'x phil II lh. t'ltll'rgl'IICI' of bon e and nth,,1

wood 111,1
"r(lob"? lIis rl'fel"('II ('(' '0
, ... tOllt'
' f from lhe
.,
lill \'
Ilroportwil,,", III t U' comhul'.ltlOll'; of "[I'ml'lIts do('s not art'OU!!!
~()r till' fundamental dlffNC't1Ct' h(>l\n.'I'n a IlH'('hanira l
.Ig~r('JlatE' of cOlllponenb and tI]('lr structural combinutioll in
~-Il1Ch c~!l'ponents undergo quulilalive changl's and tI\l'
mnturl' _ llsetr cannot be reduced to the sum of its ingredit'~l~, ~rl~loll,E' who attachE'd great illlportanct' to this
dl"tlilctlOn pomted out that the feal principlE' was ,'o""',f '
'
-_
.
lin g
,"h
IJl 'erht"anI aISimple
mnture
or e\'ell a harm o nious
Ill'
I
~~IJ{ of el.~menu; in accordance with a cNtain law. Ill' ~all~T~
'Od tllY . "nature:' form." "idea" and contrasted it to ma~h:r
an lis combinations.
Following other physiologer~, Elllpedoeles l>xplained the
E'l1lergenceof Ihe sun. the moon ,Ind other cosmic bodi(>s bv the
~~.(>ra~on .of mechanical force~. HE' saw the ca use of eel i ps~s in
at ~ I' light from one ce l(,gllal body hi ob"c ured by anotl\l'r
~.I{- t e sun IS eclipsed whE'.n the moon passes bl'llE'alh it,
c~rll<:nted. f~~ thund('~ and lightning by the collision of clouds.
life T~e:I~. I.~~eresl ~s Elllpe?o~les's IIniqll(> Ih eory of animal
pro~e-,,~ ~n' t~~ ~aal;t~h~ ~kN d Istl ngu ishes fou r stagf's of this
of Low' "man' for' I Ihe fln;t stage markl'd by til(' adyan Cl'
arms wandere~ un:III~:t:dWI\holltr Il('cks sprallg for-th . ilIl(l
strayed
al'o"t
-foo-~ Il('e d"mg hro
Jere ...
t of shotlldNs. ' and ('v('s
I)
"
(il -7
'
!<tag-I' when Love ~\'a~ "
f \\S
. ,)), III the second
.
rlump
I[lnt
the
Ii I'111 I~ anf f organ s
cIIm b lIled at random I
'.
I.'r~ - "oxen with headso rye fI!le to all ~orL" of JlIollsl
ox('n.-- Thev were IIn~I'i" ,1n(,11 and meJl wilh Iwafis of
.'
.. II e I) SUfVI\'e "",i
i
' fi
poS , ('fIt)' a.nll liler('fore peri!<I\(';J. TI
"_
pro( 11('1' Hal EO
from the tidal rever~al of th
_ .11' third stag(' rt>Sll!tlflg
".... ,hol('-nal~l:ed cn'attl res Wi~h~:~n~l.c {1Jf('f'S hrought al~()1I1
tUIll of s('x. I II{' fourth ~ta"(' tl
lIubs. orj{OII1!< 01' dl ~IIIH'
f'li b II
. . , . IE' 0111' \11' li\'l' i . f
. Y Ie contilluing ad\'anrl' f Sl 'f
II. IS (. lara c ll'ris
naIl/HI. It i~ th(' familiar world" 'r "i(' .:111(1 growinlC dis{"J"i mio S(' r rl'prtJ(I 1I('lIlg
'
00
lIIall' and
IlUtlllllJ{.
,f"n ',,"
<lmi
.111.
1I1,-llmlnal.
IIi ~r1"lhin ~ Em}l{'d,lC" I'~'M ,. In,' Itim If 811 org-, nil ,.olll\n:lolj.. "'rllt-~: '\\Iwn""r Ih{'n;ll. tht p rL.. c m('
I ",
,hUIII
" jtl~1 wh,,' tht ,y ",ould hal'" IlI"'n II tho y )If 11 C 1011 0 W
i(lr an "1\11. ..;urh thillW; >!1Ir\'h'ld. 1)(,lIIg nrg.1U1/pi "plWn(
"1I~1\" in " littill j.(" W;lV: wlll'n';)'4 Ihmlt whidl gr" ..... otlll rwi!W
II.ri~IH'11 alill ('OIlli l1l1l' to [wrish il ... ElIlpedod,'s S :;5 his
\nan.iaC'l.tl o,pro~"n~" ,Iid ... -- (;\ri~t, i'hys. II. S. 1!Ji~",
For all lhl' fanriflllill'ss of this ("OIII'pplioll which Jlf'ar~
a \'('ry S\lIll' rfl ci a I r('SI'Ill h Ia nI't' t IJ iJtI rw ill' H t 11I'0r y of t \"11111 t ion.
it r('vl'als 11 clt'ar Ila{uralisli(' {rl'llIl, The Siciliall philfl,~lJpll'r
wa:<- 1Ill' first to try to ,1I'COlint for till' pllrpo"t'flll ('on!<titutioll
of li,ing ("f('<l{lIrt~ without rt'sorting to ~llpl'rnatur<l1 PUW{'fs
and divine pl'ovidell (,("
Empedocles's doc t rine r()llIh;I1t~ with <lttl'llIpb to gin'
11 ~r;{'nliflc I'xplallation of ps~'ch;c pror{'~:-I's taking plac(' in
a living organism, L'nd('rslalHiinJl "sIl1l1" as a harilloniou~
and proportional conslitution. Empl'llorl('~ c/)]~pan'~ b~t'a,lh
ing to the operation of a rI('ps~'dra (a devlc' for llftlllg
liquid from one v(',,~('1 <llld nI!;'1:Isinl{ it into 8I10lhl'r) . thp
inspired air corr('sponding to til' water In t~(' d{'~,;ydra. an.~
the blood to the retreating air (B tOO). :'wn~atlOn. too .. I~
explained as a purel y physical proce,,~: the ernu~nce~ which
issuE' from all things ('Iller pores in human botiu''; a~d ar~
p('rceived by li k(': "For by ,arth. he sly~. wt' !<,'{, earth. b.~
water water . by ether godlik(' !;'Iher, bY"fir!;' \\:a~lIng fir('. 10\E'
by love . and strife by gloomy strife.
(AmI. ~1et. III. "'I.
h
II
ilVull'lmtoli
i'
ur,l,
1~b~~ntrast
with th osE' who sanlt thl' praises of inbfallibl('

. -t 10 "t'lI~es' "l"t' w ate\('r
.
reason. Empedod es gl\"('~ prlOfI,~
" - .:- 31") Yethe
way of percl'ptio n makes cadi tiling rll'.lr. (A - - .
,
f o'r"c Jitil'" confrontllH! man on
does not s hul hiS ey('~ to I H' I 11 I'an'
of the , nll~efle:.
, - . ' . I ha ,
the path to knowledge ant f I~ WI' if a\\
- . I
blun; lhought." the fallibility of se n ~e~. til(' hrt:'lnlY ~J~ ~~~~~Il~
'r
i 'f
of l'XIll'l"ien('I> ('Ic. ,\eCorllllj.!
_. .
II e. t 1e IntH equacy
f'i"
i 'i"o ,-",f, to he ilUil inab le ~o
F
..
E
dorl(''')(' 1l'\ 1'1
"
~m plfl Cl1S. -, mpe f '
could reuch and mainhllllNI that
far as the reaso n. o IHU,tl"
". st' i~ Ir\l~tworthy, as the
"'h"" tiling
')
. ' p(,l"ce l\'('(\ b~I 'rach
" ,(II.
(~('xt. Adv, nut f1, \'If . I"_ 4.,
reasoll IS III con t rol of -' Illlil.. '" IH.t-'tation of Emp('dodl'~ s
. I~ roblelll
, - rglarin~
'
.'
TI Ie ma1l1
.
I111 tit' 111f'ntly
inC(HI"I~tE'nrleS
heritag(' c?nsl~ts In t ~(' TI;I~HlOl~l' lilat we haH' bl'l'll con~id
I)(>tween Ius twO POI',llI. 're) Irl'~l'nts i\ sci('ntiflc pictUf> .of
ering so far (all _\11I1l
(
WI
realih and aim!> ill _iI rillilll11l1 t'\phUl;Itillll ur tlw W Irl

wh('T~as Ihe other calh'd Purifi cations ~rl'at~ of tht, inunorlillli'
ty and tran;;milZratioll ~r stHds, tit':<{'nllt':< III\' w<lll,INilll{s 01
the :<pirit balli_~hl;'d for II:< sillS from tht' rt'alm nf tilt' hll'~s(',1
and doonH'd by ~0(1~ to undt>r,i!o a C~"f'lt of \\twful IIWilrlla!iU!I
in \-ariou~ form~ of earthly hfl" slll'aks of pruph"I'j"s and
purilication by magic ritcs, flhslenlion from !lH',I!, dr. What
is more, in the ~ecol\d POl'lll Ihe author hunst'lf IU1"IIS illto an
immortal god and. conscious of his supI'riority, addrt'sst,s
common mortals with lofty ;lrrogall('e. or courst'. 01\(' might
trv to account for thi:;: tral\Sfornllltioli by ;Ill incollsist(,ll<'\' tlF
a~ ambitious philosopher proud Ilf tht I\W(' ilnd r(,H'I't'lIc;' hI'
inspirt'~ in common folk: "~I go ahout you an immo rtal gild, no
more a mortal. so honoul'ed of all, a.". is lIIeet, ('rowned with
fIllets and flowery garlands, Straightwuy us soon as I t'nter
wilh these, men and WOIllt:'n, into nourishing town s, I 8m
re\'{'renced and tells of thousands follow, to learn .when,> i~
the path which lead s to welfare, s01l1e desirous of ol'<lcies,
others suffering from all kinds of disease, desiring to hear
a message of healing" (Diog. L, \, 11 ,62).
Such an explanation, however. hardly s(>(>ms convincing,
",or can we accept the opinion (e,g. Zeller's) that 1lH' two
poems were written quite independently of e3ch other or th"t
they represented different periods of philosopher's lif(', 8!;
there is no e\'idence for any chronological conclusion. We arE'
rather inclined to agree with Jaeger in that the understanding, of Empedocles's philosophy requires an insighl into the
intellectual world of a Sicilian Greek of the fifth century
B,C, In Jaeger's opinion. it ciearl\, re\'(,<lled th e intern al
heterogeneity resuiting from differe;ll ('ullural innuence~ in
Sicily and Magna Graecia, and at lht:' same lim(' -"howed thE'
aflinity of the two neighbouring centres of Western Greek
coloni,sation, Th: spiri t of this geographical region rnanirested
Itself III ,the duall~m of Empedocl('s's philosophy, I Empedocles
.'1ynt,ht'~I~ed, as It were, the naturalistic "enlightenment"
cOining' from Joni~ and lirst repreflented by X('nophan es
~Ith t~le local Orplll~ l,radi,lion, I lis "physics" which has vel'y
IitUe ,In, commo n With sCience in lhe modern Sl'nsc or thl'
\\:or<l IS III fact a pl~ilosophica~ s~stem aimed al ('xp lain i ng tht,
\\orld .a~d man III ,n.aturallstlC term~ , prl'li omina nU y hy
alJegoTlslng the traditIOnal polytheistic religion, and hased
'W_
Ja('j(H,
D'e
I\llhlhamUl('r, Stuttgart:
102
/}mk""
, """,,1 of ,II ,0[1 t'Udlrarlllj( 1'Ilhprifal Iil'ity \'N}'

"
,
' f" IIr Ie
,n Ih,'IO
hiunofth"()III'I.nt
n '
:"PII"pJalll'!l:
I(,fll (Of
.'
,
,
111\
'JiPIU'I\ with ;, 1111111;\11 IlI'ad Oil hl'l hm y, lIor rOIll
l~ !lIlt
'k'i' , ,,,,I hrandll'S start; \llI' itU"Ii_ 110 ,hOi't, nn ~wift
, h,r I n . .
11"
h'lir,' "I'llilal nr~an~: hut III' 1:4 \IUlIl, holy and
knIt'S, n o ' ' ' '
_
_ ,,[fahh', alul only \tillli. whw,l~ tlllrt~ through t~t' whole
Ill. . . i t h it:4 IIwirt tlmuj(hl:4 (Il I,H), A dl;;llncl from
11l11H'! "II' '"
'
' ,
Oil \(l/lIrl'
nlll('t'l'Iwd wilh t "JI' Inlt~1I , P p h
YSI('a
thl' pm'III
'
, "
.,
, Ie! ami tlH' physioloRY of liVing h('IUR'I, lht, pUrificatIOns
\\or
'c"tl';; on mail's illll,llt'dulIl and t'thi<'al world and
l'OEIl'CII .. '
"
" d " ,,'

d
rcat,;; the subjl'cl Ilrt'dollllllilllt y rom III' I I'a IS IC ~II
, " : '" ,,',"w,loinl. Tht, ,lrtJhll'ms of ('(Induct and moraltty,
n' IglOl
. "'" ~arc iutinHlt<'ly bound up by Lmpe d
oc' es \\1"1II
or one,
,
'J
'
opinion
reli ious ideas and practices, t IOIIR Iaeger, Hl our
"
ghat ov('r('stimates tht' gl'TlI'rai importance of OrphIC
~~;~~~ism and r~ligiolis' ethics in I<:mpedodes\ philosophy a~
""",h..
,..
8 whole,
d d'
th P 'hcalions
The religiOUS doctrine ('''POUIl e Ill, e,. UriI'
, .
,
1 lementar\' to Empee!ocles's "phy,qcal conceptlOn.s
IS con!n his hilo;;ophical \'iews in the language,of tradl-
~i:'::aels bel refs al~ images. Though t!d ;;un:~\:il::g~~rt:~I~f~a~~~
'fications is too small 10 repr lice I S ,

, l
,Pa;alle]s bedtwel'n
their afflllity and Intt:'rdepen ('nee, n,!'
oc di,'ine
I' ' tl e co.. mlC era 0
of their close relations lip IS I I'
hoed in the Purifica~
Sphere in t~~ poe1,11 ~lI,~~Q{~~:t:'~~\IUI~I:~ ;;ociety a" the reign
/i01ls descl'lblng t Ie 1111 1ft S
od Ac'" nor Battle-Din.
, L
., There wa.. no g
..
,
of CYprtS 0 K
ove: ".or C fono" 'Po,",'don
but
only
Cvpns
nor
,,,,
.,
,
nor Zeus t 1e mg, n
' It to please her with plOU:'
the Queen. These men soug I
'
r:\;~als ilHport~nt
~he ~~'~I~:~:~~,t~~~;:;~le~
Lo,,
I -..
gifts"," (B 128).
,.
that this ',Idaptation" ?f
It. shoH,ld ~e ~loti'd, hO;:I~~~~;lry m('ntality h,ad to be paid
philosoplHc<l1 Ideas to cont \ ~r wid~ lO ullrl'slratned religIOUS
dearly for, as it opened the (0,
to later cOlllmentators to
,
'
. I "av(' orCUSlon
"
(original
imagin ation ,In( !,'
h(' Purijic(ltions III terms 0
interpret the doct.n n,e of) \ ICIt inll'rpr('tations, ho,:vever'"can
sin, fall and e>;~'flltOIl, ", lie in vi!.'\\' of thi'lf ob\loUS
hal'dly be consl(\('red t('I1,\ I
arbitrariness,
Cr. (;, ~_
,: ,
Kirk, J -
n~wll.
h-" "11 3--'18,3[,5,

TJ,( I.,,$(lfra/ir Ph j I C>,'c>p, , '
103
t 1. Hirth of Philo-.oph) i n \lh ('n~, \n l\'I."J(orll~
Anax a ~ora~ of C la Wl1ll'lHh' (c, ;)00 ~2$ B.C ,)
r
illtl'rl',,~H,1I1
C<lI1ll'
a wcalthy and innu ('nti a l fa m ily. hu t sllmn'li 11\1

pra clicalmatters. g a \'e up h is inht'rita n cI' !llId til'volt'!1 hit1'I"t,;~
exclusively to the contl'rnplali o ll of IHlt Urt'. Il l' lall~ht phi
o phy. astronomy . ~ l' OnH'tr y nnd was ktH~wn as an intNpn'tE'f
of Homer. Ac('or(ltng to DlOgl' nl'S Lat'r \LlI s, lit' declared that
thc sun was n~1 ~ ~od but a n111SS of n'ci hoi metal, th"t
the moon was slIllIlnr to th e (';Hlh Hnd tht' l"e were dwellin ~
hills and ravines on it. He al so la u g ht t ha t comets -we '.
" f0 l
,s elluUlng
"
nanH:'S U ll d s hooting sta " .
a cOIlJunclton
pane
were a sort of sparks thrown oIT by Ihe air. tha t thundet: \~,~~
a clashing together o f the clouds., lightnin g thei r viole '1
friction, and
that t,h e whole flrmaHl e nt was mad('
ston('s. the rapIdIty of rolatlon can s('d it to co here and that 'f
this wer(' relaxed it would fa ll , I
I
Anaxagoras was the first to s ta rt teaching ph ilosophy in
Athens and the fir!'.t to be prosecuted and co n de m ned fo'r it
Accordin~ to ?ne of the a ccounts asc ribed to th e fourth centu~
r~ B.C; hIstOrian Ephorus. at the beginnin g o f th e Pe loponnesIan ~\ ar (c. 431 B:C. ) ,,:ell- kn own religio us fanatic Diopei
11,le~ lI1(r~uced a btll agamst tho!'.e who di d not a c k nowl('dge
dIVIne thlllgs, o r who ga\'e instruc tion abo u t celestial
phenome na, wIth the pa rtic ular aim of di sc redi ti ng Pericl e~
Ihrough Anax.ago~as. , Fearing for An a xagoras, Pericles
arranged for hiS friend s flight from Athen s ( OK 59 A 17).
Other accounl<; tI:'ll us that the philosopher )\'3 5 t ried and
!'.~nten c ed. to a fine of fiv e tale nts and to e xil e, Some sources
gl\'e a. ttnr.d version in which Anaxagora!'. was sentenced to
death 1Il hiS absence; Be that as it may, his pe rsecution was
rn~? ubt~fIY due to Ideological and political reasons and led
c~ty I:~x:he~ ~;oa;x,agoof'Has 'iinded his day~ a1 Lampsa c u s, a t rade
e espont.
Among Anaxagoras'
'1
j"
des, philosopl;ers ArC~~ll~::~ s~ra~I~10n li '! ts Pericles, Euripi Lampsa cus, He wrote as l('ast
t lC,n~ and .Melrod ort.ls of
known in Athens and
. S one lre<llise which was Wid ely
anybody could buy hi~ ! :: rk oC.rates says in the Apology ,
drac hma at most (Platon. Ap:tI2~~i book marke t for one
We possess 23 fragm('nts of A
.
were widely commented on' D
~Iaxagor.as's treatise which
. (,spite c01\!'lIderable diffic u lties
ius.
il~si.sted
Diogl'nl'" Ual' r t i u~. 0p. Cil., Vol. I, PI', 137 1~3,
104
~f
".1 ,'1' I in tIlt' 1IIIl'l"pn'\;ltioll of Ihl' I,hil"""j)h .. r~ dnrlrilll',

Iii
'k
i l til I'flHI!<trurt his \'i"ws
Ihl' ,'\tall llplO\allOlI~
mil I' '
It P"~"I)'"
with a f;lir dplotrl'l' nf <1l1ttWllllt"lly
It w ill lint I)l' silillilllt IIlo!ilillllt ItlP lr'lth to say thaI Ana
Xi\J{MllS'S ph ilosophy l'!'lItrl'd arnlllld tltl' pr.lJhll'Oi of
Ill'('ollling . T il l' surrolllHltllj.( world j.!1\('S 11<; Irrprulable
t'vidl' Il('I' of ('onslanl dUIII){I': Ihillj.!S rowp intu t.l'in~ alHl
j)l'rish , c h a ll ){I' thl'll" shap!' <Hul ('olollr. tl'1Upl'ratllfl' and tastl'.
dt'nsity and slIIl' ll. On Ihl' othN hllnd, thl'r(' is llO c\nllht
that bC'comin g lind pl'l"ishinll; llrt' ill1!l0s~ihll' anti "nothing ('an
COIllC from not hi n g," Anaxal{ora~ Jlre~t'nts til(' prohlem in
this concre te fo r lll: "How can hair com(' from not-hair, and
flesh from not -fl esh?" (B 10). For the Ionian philosophers
the an~wer was c \('ar: eVl'l"l(lslin~ and living natur(' iSl'lIdowt'd
with unlimit ed p ro(\ucti\,(' )lOWN ilnd all thing,.; are brought to
birth and a gain dissoln'd into it. Thl' EIE'atic~ held that
becomin g a nd pNishing, motion and rhang(' ,.;imply do not
I:'xist in th(' world of truth. Birth and death for Emp... ~oc1p;;
were "o nl y m ixture and sl'paratinn of whal has bcpn mixed,
\'et the p robl('[ll remains open as it is not cl ..ar how hone
~nd fl esh . wood and hair can ('lIm(' from water and ('art~.
(lir and fi re. Clt:'<Hly. they W('T(' not contained ~n the.:root~'
and could not come into b('ing out of "what I'; not .
Anaxa goras gives the following an~wt'T: al.' Ihin~:; co~~
from like, i.e. from particles of a definite qualtty or s~ed,...
The quality of a thing as a whole depends on the (IUanltt:.ti\P
predomin a n c(' of particles of on(' o~ an?ther kl~d .. At .~he. anl('
lime " there is a portion of eH'rylhlng 111 e\ ... r~ th1Jl~ .. bllt,lhE'
particles present in;l sTllllller qUllntlty are not perce~\ed b~ thl:'
he
senses a nd a t hi n g is named after ll~e ~luali.ty that IS tb ~ost
, f' I dlsl1ngmshes here etween
ras
conspic uou s, Anaxago .',,'
In ae,.<pt'ct" of fl'llll\"
I' I'd en ,'f"
I )1I1g
the quan t ita l ivc antI <iua I1 fI I\<-
"
.
'. I
f
qualitati ve d('fwi tl'[lCSS with the
qualitat ive parti clcs of Olle o~' un;\" I~;s ~\~:I1' b(' '"hown latcr:
however c r u de find cOlltradl<"/o i'
the prohkm of diarepresents t hc fln,l II ltl'lI1 pt 0 ac . .
Iccti ca l \I n ity of l!" ant~1 \ 11 ~:~\q ~~~~~~. thcon' of gene~is ha~
The intNpretatlO ll 0 t n,.,' j.! \' . Accordi;lg to Aristot ll'.
.
' t o lHllch contn)\NS,.
'
gIven
rl S('
. 11 by "l'paration from a I1\lxln rt'
Ana xa go rlls consITIICt.s,lI \\or,( ll'r~l and till' opposites" as
whi c h includes "the 101ll 11{OIl .
,
, .. . ,II;\;I' ,,,rl~" w&' ill\roducrd by .-\n~\"(\1' a:
,0
:luan~~tllJI\TIJ~~~~I~;;t~o~1
kll'
, Thl' ",UT,1
~>'nonyul"II'
UW,lIllI11l IhUlII;'
,,,,,,,r~' 8
,
",II .-" r ,
.. "d~' Th<1l1h Ihl' \I'rm 'honl()l'ornl'r

~"
.-
fril~lIl!'lll~ f
I
r"l1 l
AIH1\a~Or<l"'~ In'atl:<l' dl, ..,"rdllug I II' (,Urnp'lIlo"It.~ "I 111 '
lIrigilli11 mi\turt' "('I'1ll \n II\' f,llht'r a III. hiJ,(IIOII'l,
IllL till' 11111''
. _
,
h'lnd, ,\III'I\;lft0r,\$ spl'ak" of SUb"\l\lICt'" lIIitHlh' III Illlmlwf 'Hut
I'h,-.,
L'
11\,.1)
',"
, I.,
('11'lIlI'1I1-< (,\r;,,(
1'111 ' 1'\1 , 1111
i\l, till'!" Hlhl ;Iir

(amI. prohab ly. other l'i{'IlH'uts whit'll ,II',' rlll\IILI'HtiOlll',i ill 1111'
rnlglllt'nt rill'd). on th' otlH'r halltl, hi' rdt'r" III ""I'd .. \\hi('h
5mallnt'''-'', as we]la:; of unIHor,,!!II)
dOlHlllilllllj{
arc also infinite in numb'r and not at nil likt Olll' an(lt lH'r . nnd
nalllcsslich constituents of tht' mi\tur(> as "moist and dr y, hot
lind cold. bright and dar!.;:' as w('11 11 .. "a grl'lI\ quantit\" III
t'Olrth" (Dr;, 59 B I and DK [.9 B 'I. r<'''p('clivC'ly ).
.
This ,\'itlellce prompl('d a ('oudll!'iou that Auaxagol'as,
cont rary to hi" own premist':';, cOII(''i\"(';I til(' {'ll'Hll'ut s (a('tht'r.
air. water. earth. and fire) not as essen tifilly eombinatiolls of
various seeds (panspermia). bul flS "{IU;llity-things," direct
com hi nat ion" of {IUalili!.':.;. and that th(' specilicily or each
sl'parate element was d('tNmined by til<' quantitati\'{'
pr!.'dominance of "ome of tll<'se qU;llities Ovel' their opposites.
whereas seeds noated. a" it were. among lhe elel11ents
combining into things,
Thi:.; intl"rprelation which has gained wide c urrenc y in Ihe
rl;'leyanl literature meets with on' serious objection: how can
{'Iements l'volve from opposites, i.e. not-e leme nts? How can
al'ther coml' from not-aether, and fire from not-fire ? What is
more. it b contradicted by other doxographic evidence with
a sufficil'ntiy ancient tradition behind it. For instanCl' .
describing Anaxagoras's th'ory and evidently relying on
Thl'ophrastus. Lucr'tius quotes Anaxagoras as saying th at fire
comes from fire and moisture from moisture (1.835). i.e.
lhat elements are built up from their seeds. This testimony
is borne out by Simpilcius asc r ibing to Anaxagoras these
words: ' ... all homoeomers as, for instance, water or fin' or
gold .... (A 41).
Anaxagoras's views. comp lex as tiw}' a re, should no t be
overcomplicatl'd. He firmly adherrd tv Ihe pl'incip le that all
sllb~tances and all things call1(\ from like i.r, rroJll inf..lilrlv
divi~ihl(' p;lrtj('~('s or ~('('cls.' However: to maintain lhi~
11I1141;IIIlO'II1;11 1'I"I!wipl .. \1 \Ii"II ;Imounts. in fac t , to the ex
w _ " .. I "".,] by \n'''~~lOra~ l1i,,,_.lf. " a )11,
'"
..
...
4~"!'''r(' "f his doet.im.' wi I' I I

I ) OHII ~s Ihl' ull'chauI s\Ic
wilh likr.
. , I "''''(H.'''''('r~ 11.(' """'\l'd nul," likt' eornbi ne.~
I A~ 't'gard~ Ill(' QPposit~~ Qr conI' ',.
.
"ft"" r'"nmputed /)11 bl dn~~gra 1",,,H;;' ''''''II~Io!H'41 in Iht, fraJ{rn('n\ ~ a 1111
J'mi~n phil""'Jphir.al le,arl' wllP~(' ".' It',) art, ("'''!!'nlly Irac('ahlr I.. Itw
.
1111 illl,".'",
,
, .\ "a~ag()ra" s IIndl'r_Ialutins.:
,,"
f "'Y P.'HH"
.
, I C"II~ "
rllr.,It
I'Mi
. " "PP"'"'" CrJry and "",ist. briJ{ht nnd
1"lhin~ from 1t"llill1~) "rlllll\, thrullghclUl his

nillijf
\ .,_'''" .... W.I (""lIlluj\p,lt" 1111 ohlf
'" Tlwrl'
11'111" : 1\.. ...
.
I
IllerI' i .1 1",rlil)lI "i "VI'rvluuj{ I. ('Vt yl ILIng

I,
tul,tI's
.
.
.\t'rvlhlllJ.( l'UIIl' {r"HI ,."" ylilllW.
and 1~"'I1. ,h.~t>nhi.,1( till' i .. itilll ~tatl' .,1 III" JI '\'4'
Ami.'
1111
.. ' \11 Thilll(" Wl fl' IOl(dhl'r. IIIfLmt' n
'1/ b r
n~ sa\s.
,
.
\
d
II
!(H ': "11",'0, 1:411"11,,' Small .. h" W'I~ lu\llllb' ... n SLOI'4-' l
.,n 4\In"''''''
,111'1" "..lIot"illl( wa~ ,li~liH~uishilhlt' h('("all~"" f ~
I a II 'h IIlI1:S, IIf) ,II" f

,\"I'n' tU~l'
.. I' ,.. to- ." '\lid A,IliN II
fJlLlInal'"
. . Ihws:-.. " ;,
.
("I
~11101 I '
. nflllill' For thl'~1' ,In' thl' 1I1"~t LllIl'ortanl r t
tlll'ni
I
' mixtIlTl'. h"llI III
. lllllUJ{'r
I
' "s~~'."
, ~))l'''\~
in thl'
InIal
all' I 11.1
l1I{n \ 1 \lNt' the prinl'il'll' or "1'Vl'Tythill~ Lll ."\l'rythLIIJ,1; L"
(B l . d. ., "wl'llkl'r" s('Il:';1' i I' in Tl'\atIlJll 10 tht, Intal
I
11 f
lornHLiale 111 I S ' . , . ,
'.'
the init ial !'tatt' of tl1l' wor\!1. . ra~mput
, 'il"1\"I'S
IIIIX~U~(, ?;ion of the prill('ipll' iu thl' "stron~l'r"' "eu~~'. twcau"e
lhe (! I ~I lIa ... a portion of l'VE'rylhiul!::
..\ntl Slll('l' tt.l('r('
everY\:~~~qll;nlitatiV(') parts Crl'at and ~l1lall. ~fl 10{) ~Im~
are eq. evervlhing Ilwrl' lIIu~t he \,wrytt.lIng. It I~ .nol po,r
I~br~y 111;or th ~m I to l'xi)\t <lPMt, but all tiHugs ('ontam a.po Sl e
.
S'
'1 '. not pn<;sib\e lor the lA>a~t 10
lion of everythlllg: IIIC(' I IS
t being b,' it~l'lf: but
exist. il ca~not he Iso.lat('d. 1I(:r c~I:Yle ~~I thiogs a~e toj,tether,
as it was 10 the begllllllng .. n.
.
d of the thin~:, ~l'pa
In all things there are many tlh~ng~, a1llthe categoriC:'} Great
il there are equal num l(fS ,11
,
O
d
rae
'.,
2
and Small (6 6).
. \'. f a ment can be put thu~:
Anaxagoras's ~ rg utnent I~I .1 liS i r'I~' di"isible, but aha b
(I) everything \s not onl). Ilinn ~~ 'I,,~ible for Ihe u>ast to
actually divid ed. therefore II I" no. PI'illflllitl'~imalh" "mall.
exist. (2) particles of matll'r. l'H'n 'tuM ~I all '"ince in
c~nn~t be regarded as h<l\"in~ nlo .11I~~n~\hirh i" in;po""ible:
'ould b(' "nol- )l'lnJo!;
.
d th
lhis case t Iley \'.
t lally di\ided. thl' largl' an
e
are ac I
,',. (4) in ,'il'w of thl'
( 3) insofar as thmgs nber
of
compOIH'
1
..
I'
sm all have equa I nUl.
. I
decfcased in rl' allon 0
.
lot be IIlcrras('{ or
II ., ..
above, thIngs canl.
." 5 sinCl' thNl' i~ no ""ma e~,
the number of Ihel" pal"'. (: ~("into an\" .. pac(' howewr "mall
particles of mnt$'I' can pl'L1l'tr.l,. 'It"
.
.
b ..
inlO other par I( s.
. ..
'.
It may e, 1.('.
'pI o{ "'Ihllll:' "h,,h
,.,Ittl
or
.ilioll {nun til>' <"<Wei

{titi~ "
:;I~r;';,I;11I1 mi~lur\' h' 11.'.1' \',"1:(,;~.I'~a~l" T;~,t"lh'
dark. (>le.) i~ illd~~~ti,:~,,,::

"rpanlten"
'
I .... "Ihllll:~ . ' .
.
~1~I~r"'~1 II", romhiMlinll of ~\';:,;::nl~~ ,m 11ll'
he the ba:l~
.
'derNI Ih ... 1',"ol,lllon 01
"
"IIHl'r
p"cribt'.l
II\I~ cOlle~1l
"ho cong, .
. , e' $.., 11"11.'" eMr . .'
world buildlllg proet~, ~
lioll 10 Anata Rora~ .. _
s3
i:1
.\"riJl" .. ()I\. .)~ Ill.. 1'.
2 Ibi'\.. II. R't .
I ..
"PlI>''''''s '"
It i~ ~i~l1i1i('an t Ih al \11U \ :II{OLI'IS IllId /"1\1

IlgIIlI
lIIII
~e"1lI to n' prt' ~l'nl till' :-.11111' Iraul "I I I""/.Iltt l' hll tl
IIIIel1ll0lher, Clllnpan'. f, 'r 11I :-1 .- lIn', ~h" rollo", j,! "lall'lli ill,
Zello
, 11/11 IIIr!o m.~,
Eal'h thinl! i~ to it~,' 1f

hoth ~rt'at ,Ill.! "Ill;lll ( B :i)
Th,"'" thilll.!~ h('illl! thll:~l'parat ,'tl oIT. ('\IU' mll~t
,
IInder:-tand thlll ,Ill Ihlll$!':are in no wi"e II'~~ (lr mort'
(for it i~ nol Jlos~ibh' ror
tlWIlI to be more Ihan ,\11 ) .
buI all Ihing~ are fore\,('f
('qual (in 4uantity) (B 5)
If Thi ng:>! 1l"1~ \1.IIIY till'\'

11I11 ~1 hi' huth "'mall ,111;1
g r.,.II: "41 !tllLl1lJ ,I.~ t" 11'1 t" 11\1
.~il.l'. ~o la)'l{!' il'l til I ..
inli ll ilt, (O h, :!!I B 1)
If Tilin g" ,In' .\Iany, 1111'\
IH lb l Ill' Il~ llI a u y iI." Ihl'\' <H~'
alld IIt' ilh l'l' ili on' IIllr' 1E'~S
tlinn thi ~. BUI if lh.,,\' ,U'I' (I~
many iI~ lh.,y
thpy' IIllist
h(, finit(' (i n nll lllbl'r), If
Things a r{' r-.l any. they are
infinit{' in num ht'I' (/)1\ 29
,In"
B .1 )
ThE' polemical resonanc{' of IIl{'sr- ~Ial {' n ll'n l s is UIlOlistak .
able and we seem 10 haY(' hr-ller r('ason to s uppOSt' that Zenn
wa~ challenging Ana:o.:agora.'l than tht' otlwr way roulld, ~inl'l'
thl" laller's argument uppl'an; 10 br- too parad oxical to he
opposed to Zeno's rea~oning o~ten~ibly ha 5ed o n ('ommon 'l('I1~l" but leading. neYl"rlhell"ss. 10 absurdilir- ~ , It is ob\'iou~ thai if
Zeno's logic prOt'l"S correct. Ana:o.:ago ra.'l '~ a rg ument ba~l'J on
thl" principle "e\'l"rything contains e\'('fy th ing" i~ to be
rejectl"d, and vice Yer~a . :"io\\' Ir-t 1I~ express Anaxagoras's
il"~l'rlion~ in a malhematical form :
I'.
b. c. d. e.
A+A~A:
II
+a~ 10. b.
0.
d. e.
/I:
,\l-A =.\1=.11+ A.
whl"re [ 1 is thl" set symbol; a, b, c, d etc, ar{' Sl' t m em bers; A
is the derived set and '\fi~ the infinite set. On('e WI.' d o.'lo it becomes clear that Ana:o.:agoras'" stalrmenls are in a ccord with
Ihl" set theory. whereas Zello's reasoning r('flel'ts th e noti ons of
ancient arithmetics ha~ed on the assumption thal th e ~lI m of
an infinite numbl"r of magnitudr-s is inflIlitely large, In d{'ed,
B 3 formulates a well-known PI'OPl'rty of infinite St'tSI'{l lJ i potence of a \\'~ole an,d its part (l>.~, of a point Sl.'t of line
.'legment and ILc; portion. of naturel numl){'r series and evr-n
number. ~eries) , whe~eas B 5 exprl'SSrs lil(' prin('il)le of the
composllIon of sels: I{ a ~et is defiller! a.<; "all", l',g. a set of
tim
fth. w c 31101 IlC- !"'Il' iT

II
II II 1(111
11( "III' m"rl' 1II111111n;alu!4 II "
I, d
rca y )1' n lak en Int. )
II)
I Iov Ihl
I .It- 111111"11
'II
III WI'
, blr ('
1'1 1\II 111
JtI11 1(
t . I,e (I 1ILIIIIlIh t n IIl1mlwf,
It I II 11111111'1'
1I ..a f l . , IlitllIll. !l11IL I. p radl,x
)1 UHr I' \III1XllII:UI
,
. (. - luthematic!_ c;1
I '
t 'A'
fr"l11 I ,i' , ..... 10 -- ,I
I 1 .":> 11111 t< til.' le,r lIlll.llion "r 1111 Iwl 1\11 0 \'
c rth I. !I!I,
110 .1111<1,
'W
')('.'l! 10: thl 11"vd.'1'1I nto mslhl'm, t
I "I) III" lip \I
r
th
'b.1 II
.
'
''''
'rvt,d"
(III
11111'"
alii
,
f
me.I
or
II'
,1I11
" ' ''II 0 1 Ili!4 "pt.v,lt'al
y elll
1),111 .. /' 011111 bt. 1101 d th,lI \1I8xagora!4
tlll traOl' ,I lHl.ttrr
1\
.
, . I ..... 1I1I,h Yoen' I'vlll{>ul e1 e to all' 1('\'\
I (,\ 'r\ alll WI';11\ \10111 "
r" Sl'l"!I
I
1,\(
,
\" I '{ it lH!dv i~ lIuul, !III 0
Of 10
"1IIIIIk.'~ S~ I II. (I~ I ,I , bul ,;11 "lo(l{fI'j{al., whil'b fllLt bl'dl\'lIlo.d
1'();IlI~~~. i~: rll~ i ::~'II::::~II'r nl p;lrl~ ,IIHI lIl1'~" (or tlll'idr. b,kd ) ,'all
III n,
I
\
f;IIPf)I)SI' WI' tn' to
1\'1 I' a
he aga in 1~\Lt t~l{t'~ IN, , ~,W I hI' i,;e\'itably' dl'stroyed 1"\'1"11
huma n bt' lng, rh~ .11\,111, .'I, ., p. (IrIs sa\' the head and till'
.,
" di ,;i()('" 111m HI on \ Yo)
.. ' , '
d
I
1
. ,. k 01 di\,'icliJlj,t him into thousan s 0 par, ~
' we
body , n ot to Sptu.
, " ~ irltn ha\l" bl"en fTUSherllll
as was thl;' ~ast'w'~h 1~~~IIII:r~t",~~ ~I~ay ~llb~l'qlll'Htly t~y to join
a morl .lr . \0 ,ll1al~t f'l' IIl1l't.pl' ~CJc("'l",i in rl"~torillg hH~ to thl"
hb pa rts af,t;H!', ..... ~,s la.
. It'C''~~M\, not onl~' to JOin hl"
initial ('1)111111](111. In .10 ~I), II IS' t Ii:m thl" human furm
1111,1 also im,part, ',', .. C~IIL fu~,' thf'1ll into
PMlid,'s ,of mattl'r,
'
filIng to . TI'" 0 e,
.
whieh , (I (J IH', a('('o
,
"
unit\' of thl" nrgalll~m.
.,
,no
"I\'f'
t \1'111
I
' ('nll~i~tt'
d .11\ ., I,
a ~ in g t' OIJ('{'
...
I, judrinl'
All o lht'T " wt'ak,~t,~" III t ,\I ~ from a nnt-hair, and nl'~h
" " O U t l t fOf in.;tann'.
lo" owil\": if a half ('allullt t 011\\
,.,
n
,,,I h .. w ~'an Yoe
'
,
'h
('ilnno t l'OllH' Irom lIot- . I, I
., lIot-ran'lI Iran,'II,; nl'"
., C't'l'U rolll..
,
for t h t' genl'sl~ () I , "
. tnullo hat'e to conCN'>.
and b()J\t'~)? To b~' rnl1~'~~"~:~~t;~.~ 01 bOIll', ne~h, l'l. tHil
".'leeds" nol only a.; 1lI111t1lt ,I I'in~, l.te. Thi,. wl1\lld,hrLII~
abo a s minul~' r,l\'l'n~, humMI I~t ~lI'or\' whil'h dOlll1nawd
11 :-; r i hI to tIlt' prt'fllfm;\lwlll. \' and'maintaine,! that thl'
biolo: ) in tht'
like the matllft'
. , f 'til animnl (lr a plnnt '0\,1.
"
embl ~oo ,
I ' it t\'il~ \'t' ry ~TI\a ...
111 orga nism exet'pt t l.It "
'('Ii (lid not a r riw a l ~\Ich a cn lll' I .
'rho \lffh J\nH:o.:ago ra~ 11Ill~ , .
." , ",'('T\, l h inll" d earl y ll'al :., l' () f" t'\'('1'\'1
II n ~
,
d ' I f thl'
sion, h is, pr ilu'IP
, ' If lilt' wh t11l' and 10 a t' IU,\ I )
,
'.\ . ('OIH'l'ptwn (
tn a IIll'l' "1l11~ It
., 11' a nd il s pa rt!!',
,
dialectical. IIni ly ~r Il~~ ;v~,'n\hi nll ill e\'erythin~:,e\:l'r):~~l~:~~
If Ihere IS a pM Ion . , . ,; Thl> prin ci piI' of e\ l"f) I
ma y f'\'o , ve from 1'\'l'r )tll n~,
,
II"
IV...
t 1ft
J1 II 1l1l'I'
"r..
',no
1'.
'U
~I'vt'ntl'l'nth l'I'nt~I:'('~mpll'It'IY
from (,\I'rything"
]
_" i!' a chlUlu'tt'rislir ft"11l
,
I n' ! ) , lH'mvtl]
, IUO d {'o
en
t Uti] 'III.'%" accurdiu
.. to whi,-] I ,"n\'1I1l1l
_],
. ' I{ll)~i .
_
, _
. ...
mlo anyl ling
All". ,,,o,n'r'-;
.
e<H1 tUTU
." , (' ~l' lind a('(IUln'
'
lUi_ .HI,1
I,ua]',.
I h,~.
A,na\agorll.t-, IOIH'H'I', gIH'" an l'nlin'h' I-rr,
lIOn to this principII'. "EH' Tvthiu'" " (I
th'll!
1IIh'rprt'ta.
h';: d I '
1."
...
rom ('\I'f)'lh' ..
I,
or .rln.~, U.I'IIl.g Ju:;t 11 1l1lnlpiLrast' of th(' "1"-' ,!!l.g
in
('\{'ryt~l.ng
proposl~lOn
prlllC1ple, 1s an infl'rl'I1('(' fro m 11 . [' tr) U~lng in

which has nothing to do wit!
1!l1101[131 sCientifi c
same
it is dirl.'clf'd
wl~os~
tll11l'
Ilgain~t
doctrines c('nlerl"d 1I 1'0und a
~rIIlclpl.e and
<
th
,I
m,yllO
o~y.
At the
pl~nH~rn,ta.n 1b~hllosOPhers
ad ,r.
the ('Irlllrlll," out of whi ch

g:;Ianc{>, "th('
Into
!> COille aud
_"which] they a!! pl'rish. t\naxago<'
.
a:;"lccon ].lIn
III g loS,lI~. saw tlat l'\erything cOllle~ to be out of l'V
. unp Ici
directly then sl'rially (as air from fire
~rytilln.g, if not
from water. StOIH' from earth and fi' wate~
ag lll rOIll air, earth
and explained it in Ihis wav:'" B Ir.
fror~l stone) "
separal{>d off, all things were tog~lhee~~ l' (~I~S;) tlilngs Wer('
Though the principi I.' .. \" ' I '
.
indeed universal (what i"'(' ~r)1 ~lIIg frolll everythin g" is
slone"? Just strik(' a ston;'wi~l: lIIs~ance."r~re again from
stone and s{>{>, .. ). its main s II r a pl ('c.e o~ Iron or anoth('r
At first. all things were "to~e~1 e o!. ~pphcallon is cosmogony.
mass. Sillce this mass conlain~er. I.e . ll1att~r was a uniform
aether (fire) and air and I tredonHhiltlllg <llIanlities of
are infinitely small' the a t~O e~aus~ its component parts
qualitatively indefin\t(' tl ae \er~alr mixture appears to be
re~~sents a cer~ain q~ali~~~lg I III fact each of its particles
. ) contrast w,th thf> prima
.
dId not know immovable "mr:t Sll~~tance of .the Ion ia ns who
feature of the origina l .
ler, tlw Illarn characleri~tic
A
,
,
'
ml.~ture or wo-]d '
...
xagoras s system is .
' S lIllllal state in
conception is the One orlJl~;:IObi~ity .. The nearest to his
EmpedQCles. Yet un like the fO'f' Elea~lcs or the Sphere or
and .tI~e.latter whic h diff(>renttme~ wluch remains motionless,
the IIIlllal mixture in Anaxa tates. lln rle.r the effec.t of Strife,
(Noys). Anaxagoras'SgoraJ IS set 111 motion by l\lind or
engt~y d~bates among ilis un ('rstandi ng of Mind ca llsed
conceived
It as inl']"
comm(>nta lors'. some ]Ie ]d ]Ie
Ii
.... Igence . othe
tOYS
\\"~;::~'dsUCh
a separation'was :l~~r~~ so~ne kind of malter.

.
. not y{>t counterpos
'
0 n?xagoras him self
a~d still vlew('(\ natur(> as a w (' m,'.tter and ullmaterial s iril
'drent c,onception of the worldhOlT' ,In accordancc with th: anucto t h e
'
liS opp OSItion
-a l
erlp]uit)sophical
d. .]'
was a proC$> opment and d-d
I not exer-
'"
1'1~ th" philn ~l lplll"r ~ lIIil\1I~.lill at I,'ast Plato. TIJl' pfnh\!'lll

I'!! :\IHIXlIJ,(orlli Wll~ !!Ifkr"llt: roulrl thl' 'natural"' far
lhllt
\(lr~ arrnllJlI for .. 11 ph!'llollwJla ill thl' world and for Hw {'os
U1k (lrorl'ss ~It 11Irlo(l'. or wai. it lH'{"\'~~ary to """k ror "HilII'
illl1111llt.rial agl'lW Y 10 e:qllalll harmony and t)rn"r in tht'
I1Jli'il'r '? Thi ~ prohh'm ("oul,1 not in flld ari~(> before P<lrm~'ni
St
t!l's !In!! thl' EIt!l lir ~. as IIII' 1I11-J,(t'!If'T<ltinl!: "nature" (phYSI.~)
$ tht' !Hwit'lits did
not nt'I,,1 <lny supern<ltural al{t'JlL~.
I'Mnic ni des' s ahstraction of til(' onl' immutable <lnd nw\ionll'''s
being IHld onc importiITlt ('onsl'llueIH.'I': th()~e who wis\tprl to
a("co
fol' motion tlflE' I' him 1U'E'd('d <Ill Hlltside S()llrCE' that
unt
had lhillg:o; movill ~,
According to Arislnllt'. the COllct'plion of ~lind was a tr(>1I1endo\l!l !;t(>p forward: " ... \\"hf'!I U!I{> mall :o;aid. then. that
reason was present a~ in animal:o;. ~o throughout naturf'-a~
thc ClHI~(> of order illld of all arrangcmcnt. he st'emed \ik!'
a sober man in ('ontrast with the random talk of hi~ prt'dr
('('s:<ors. \Ve know thaI .-\Oll\agora~ ('t'rtainly adopted th.'~t
\'iews" (Ari:o;t. Mf>l. I. 3. 984 b) : Analpis of \:':dant
fragments show~ thaI AnHxil~oras ("ollccived .\"ous as ha\'in\t
a\l knowled ge of cvcrything. gr('ah',,1 power. ability to .. leer
all things and "purity" in tht' phy"ical (and. probably. moral)
!lcns(': "Olh('r thinj:\:s all contain a part of everything. but
Mind is inr.nite and self-rulinj:\:. and i~ mixed with no Thing-.
but is alone Il\' itself. If it wert' not b\" it:,('\f, but \wr(' miwd
with anything else. it would ha\'e had a ~har(' Of. a\l Thin~".
if it were mixed with ilnythin~; for in everythmg tlH'r.e I~
a portion of e\'l'rything, as I hit\"(' silid before. And the Ihm~s
mixed (with Mind ) would ha\"(' pr('\"ent('d 11.:'0 that II cOIIIll
not rule OV('f any Thing in tlH' "a me way as it can being alollt'
by itself. For it is the lin('s\ of all Thillg~. and thl' PUTt'St. and
has complete underslall(!ing of ('\"crythll\g. and has th,
g rcntcst power. All things wl~ich.. ha\"e}lff both the greall'r
a nd tlH' I(>ss, are ru l('d by l\IlIId (A L).
.
Il aving thus endow('d SOliS with c\"('ry imaginabl(' di\,lIw
quality , Anax agoras se('U1S to ha\"(> stopped at a l o~s not
knowing what 10 tlo with it. :\ccorrling to A$'\an~('r of :\phro
disias, II w('11 known COllllllC"nta\tlr of :\w:.tot!p III latt'r aul
I<Jllily . AtlilXagof;IS cOllcl'iH'd ~Iilld o~IIY as II}(> callSI.' of mot
ion. since "wlll'n ~I ind hegan tllf' mo\lon. there was a s~r!llrat
ing-off rrolll 1111 thut WIIS being mO"('(L and all that Mmd ~f'l
"If
TI,,' /1aSI( \I "rh

I'\" t;!I~>t;!It;
.IIt(il/a. I' ~\. Ill>. \ ~l!l 1\ I:!.
"'
in motion \\ 1I S_~l' lwrilt t' 11 (Int l'rna l' .$; lIud a_~ thin,,!! ""'r,.
IT ( lIIh'rllil II y) tilt, ,"I',,,IUlioll
...
"IIOV
ing and s('p;lrlltllll{
,)
~ . J
incr('a~('tllhis (inlt'rll<1l) "1'par,llioll" (H I:J). Iii
Ana,alloras \'olllim',1 tilt' al"llllll of .\Iind to s .. tlin. in '"
~
.
H lUll
thl' original illt'r! IIlIIS" illld 1',p/MIlI-d thl' rt'.~1 nf th, I"
CI('j'SS
by II vorl,'\ which "t',Mra!"" (til SlIhst.lrH'(-'S hulU "lit' an tI
it nd d i,' i d I'S t h!'m i n 10 sill II lit r rril(' t i UII S Ilt'f ort' ('om hi II i n.
1,1.' r
ollu.r(::::I\".
,f'
In 'HI (InII' I
in WI
10I
t' I
tlln,!.!'s
f .v runlllll'f.
J us!
7, ltm
as \.('l1opIl1l1l '
'.
thl' first ~anlhl'isl in th{' history of (;n'\'k phil osophy, so '~:I~~

\agonl~ IS thl' fir.~t deIst who (dlow('t/ c\lsmie l\lind to gi '~
thl' world thl' "initial push" and th\' 11 I,, ! it IlIkl' ('lin' of il~(I~f
11" bE';;' it ('ould foJlowill~ Ilatural l;lws,
As rE'gards gE'llcrlltioll Hud Ilt'rishing', Aml\agoras's vicw
arc vcry similar to those of Empedocles; "The G l'ceks havc a s
incorrcct belief concerning Coming into Be in g and PaSSi' n
'\way, ;-.io Thing ('0111(''''; into being 01' pusses away, bUl it is nll\~
\ed togclh(>r or s(>parated from e\isting Things, Thus they
wou~d be eom'~t if the): cal le(,1 c~llIing into h:ing 'mixing,' and
passing away s~p'HallOn -ofT '"
,(13 17) , lin fortunately, we
have no ?(>scnptlOn, of 1.1lt' mechanlslll wh('reby "seeds" jOined
IIlto bodIes. I~l aJlllkellhood. Ana\agoras undNstood the pro('ess a" essentially a mecha/lleal combination of minute parti c!,es of ~~all(>r into orderly things, a sort of " d ocking" of
seeds. On the ~ther hand, the infinite divisibility o f seeds
suggests a ~llore Inllmate ~rocess and leads onl' to supposc
t~at the phIlosopher concel\'ed .It a~ a real fu s ion . The par~'cle~. of matter or seed;; comblEHng En a body and fo rming its
IIldl\ldual org.ans and 1I;;sues penetrate, as if by diffu sion (ill
accordanc(' with the ."l'vt'rything in ('\"('rylhing " principle) ,
all ot~er organs and II;;su(';; and Ihe- body itself is conn ected in
a slmJiar man,ll(>r with th(> elltire univCfse ,
Anax~g?ras s doctrine viewt'd as a whole re-veals a g laring
~olltradlctlOn. 011 the .one hand, he- introduced Mind (Nous) to
account for t.h!' order III the- univer~e, On th(' other, he restrictI'd. the func\Joll of ~1ind to Ih(' act of the initiating motion in
prlJllar~ substance and mad(> no use of it to explain the- ca uses
of particular eve-nls and plwnome-na. Speaking of Anaxagoras
1' ' 050h s conception of Mind
. " Phto w'ot'",', " I fo lIn(I my pH
~therer all?ge.ther forsaklllg mind and making no appeal to any
. d
prmclple of order, bUI having r('COursE' to air and ('ther
an water and man, otl
.
'
,
.
1(11' (>cc(>nlfl('ili('s (Platon
Ph
aed
.98 b). EchOIng PlaIn Ar'sl l l '
.
"A
.,
I. 0 {' caustically I'('mark('d that
naxagoras uses reason as a d('
I'
.
.
,
us ex mac Hila for lh(' making
112
Ii. an 1 whr 1 he III at a 1M! to till frolI wnat causl'!

J! tilt. g nee
rily Ell, th"n h" drags reason in. but in all
1
0 .('
I'!lB, flbl
V nt.'i to anything rather than to re~(m"
Me' I 4, g~t1a} Tllis )pie_~1J was on the whole .....orrect. AnaXl gOl
iJ dm d r ort.ed to Now only in those cases when be
nUl/raJ far tors. UI h as separation off and divi!!ion. combina.
tion and disintc~ration, movement and speed did not work. In
point of rarl~ hl8 idealilm ~lI:!pped i to 611 the gaps in his
crude rl'd~ctJolilst expl~natlOns which were regard eo as the
most consistent expres.,<;lOn of matuia/ilm,
It f;hould he noted at thi, point that Anaxagoras eVidently
placed Mind in a l'IpeciaJ relation to the organic world and allowed it to rl'lain there some form of control even after the
prime impulse, Thu.s. ill fragment 12 he says: 'All things
whieh have life. both the greater and the less. are ruled bv
Mind. Mind took command of the universal revolution, so as to
mak e [things} revolve at the outset" (DK 59 B 12), The
phil osopher is compelled to appeal to Intellection for help in
his attempt to explain harmony and order in the world. -"OU3
after all is the moving cause separated from matter mo\'ed, it
is the principle of cosmie order separated from cosmos itself
The split of a Single "nature" indivisible, homogeneous and
everlasting, into the prime cause and the inert matter was pure
idealism and a step back from the real work!, yet it was at the
same time a prerequisite for the study of ~lind that made possible the science of logic,
Anaxagoras's doctrine which was the 6rst philosophiul
teaching in Attica and reflected conflicting tendencies in the
development of Greek thought had a tremendous impact on
the subsequent intellectual history of the Hellenic w~rld" It
mainly manifested itself in the all-round growth of SCientific
aod philosophical knowled~e.' glorificat.ion of reason and decline of old beliefs and traditions. The IDfluence of A~axago
ras's philosophical conceptions as. such was. le-"s conspIcuoUS:
in times when the intellectual hfe or society centred upon
humanistic problems, "physics" was inevitablyre~egated to a
secondary plan, Ethical problems did ,not rall wlthlll.the sphere of Anaxagora6's interests, though It cannot be !laid that he
ignored them altogether I In some of his dicta Anaxagoras
C
70'0
! Something or In I'IfO'l'tion il fUllmfnl oj, ....ith it. rllhff ob,curf rfrerence to ,"other world inhehilfd b)' p~ople .!m.llr to tholll ltvlnt on the
e.rth, h.\'ini ~imilar rili~., ,1,,1 mMn Ind lun and ct'lutlal bodlea, t . . .rt~
rowing ,Il."rt.~ or produce fut Ihem. 11 I. hard 10 ~.Y ~(th,.fulment .pel
~llh(' multitude of inh,bil~,1 ....orld. or lUll of ptcuhar mlcro ..... nrld .!tnilar
H-H3!!
t3
exalted the life of contemplatio,n And l('arni,ng whkll op'ns hl ,

way to freedom. Ana~agora8 did .1I0t a~Sll('lllte hnppillt>89 with
wealth and power saYlIlg that a bhssf u (man would look ridicu.
lous to the crowd. Wh~n asked why to be born was hettPf than
not to be born. be replied that a man would choosl' to be born
"in order to study the heavens and the whole UniVl'rSl'" (A30)
Ethical matters, the problems of man and society fE'ceived
much greater prominence in the works of Ausxagoras's pupil
Archelaus who was called the last of the physical philosophers
of the tifth century in Athens. Our kno~ledge o~ his teaching
Chapla 5
is very meagre and fragmentary. Accordmg to DlOgenes Laer-
tius (II, 16). "he philosophised about laws and things fair
And just." Sud a (DK 60 A 2) adds that in his opinion "what is
just and what is base depends not upon nature but upon CODvention." However, the antithesis between nature and convention was common to numerous ethical theories of the late fifth
century and we can only guess if Archelaus was its originator.
In his "pbysics"-he combines Anaxagoras's theory of "seeds"
with the teaching-s of Anaximenes and Diogenes of Apollonia
about air as the primary substance of things. He appears to
have shared the latter's view that air possesses reason and
therefore performs the function of the Prime Mover. However,
according to Hippolytus, Archelaus believed that movement
started with the separation out of the hot and the cold from
the original mixture, the hot moving and the cold staying still
(A 18). The only fragment that came down to us from Archelaus, "coldness is the bond (desmos] of the earth,"
survived in a corrupt theological context.
In contrast with Anaxagoras, Archelaus understood mind as
a mixture of special "seeds." His conception of the origin of
life was also different from that of Anaxagoras: animals' seeds
did not fall on the earth with rain 85 was stated by his t eacher,
but the animals were born from the earth when it was warm,
and it sent up an ooze resembling milk to serve as nourishment, and it was only later on that they were engendered
from one anothe~. T he ~osmol og i es of both philosophers,
naturally, were different In details.
A.rche,l,aus t~rmi,nated the early stage in the development of
ancient phYSICS. Now natural philosophy takes up its place
in ~he same r~nk with other philosophical disciplines next to
logiC and ethiCS.
'
to Ollrs. It is abo possible th.at ADuagoras here Vl'ulllrl'!! ;I hYP<)th{'sis that
a world lIke OllU call emerge In any part of the lIniv('r~~,
th
d
ing conditioDs.
. Iven l' correspon -
Philosophical Ferment in the Second Half of the Firth

Century. The Sophists, Socrates and Socratic Schools
12. Sophistic phUO!\Ophy
In the second half of the fifth century B.C. Ancient Grel ce

was at the height of its fame and power. The Persian wars ended in the magnificent victory of joined Greek force~ over
theidoruridabl e enemy and the Hellenic polises united in two
military coalitions under Athens and Sparta hel.d undivided
sway over the Mediterranean. The threat of foreIgn 1.1l,aslOn
was averted and the Greek world was consolidating It~ PO:'Itions vigorously planting new colonies. The thri"in~ handicrafts and agriculture, profitable both in Central Greece due.to
the proximi ty to densely populated urban areas aDd ~n fert.lle
colonial la nd s, the expanding trade linking Greek polls.,.s With
one another and Hellas with other countries of the ~ledltl"f.ra
nean and the Black Sea, as well a~ the extensive construe.tlOn
activities in cities stimulated economic growth and prOVided
jobs for rapidl y increasing population. Yet thi~ a~p~~ent prosperity did not bring peace to the country. Gr~ek C\y~: state~ ha.d
widely diverse political systems and occupied dl~erent pOSItions in the hiera rchical structures of the two belll~erent ('oaIitions - the Athenian alliAllce and the Peloponneslan league
headed by Sparta. The sharpening r.ivalry between them culminated in devastating Peloponneslan wars.
Social and political turmoil cou ld not but affect ev~ry aspect
of the Greek ci ti zen's life. Boming issues .were earned ~~ !~~I
city square s ha rp controversies flared up III the as.<;en:t b ~
d
law-cou rts.' The assembly had to hold freque.nt seSSiOns ~.n
.
d df'bate the court.. were lamparked \.\Ilh
engage III protr~cte.
. \' nlwull'nwnt. nonpayment of
Slllts for lugh tn'a~()n ,lIl( ('I
.
11 5
debts and corruption, larceny and blasphemy ... To rt'cllpt

the spirit of the epoch, one only needs to read Aristophall ~1~(I
comedy The Wasps which gives a vivid pict\lrt~ of the Ath~s.s
an society of that time, with all its bustle, everyday cares anld
conflicting tendencies.
n
Social and pol~ti.cal changes ?~lled for new skills and shili"
ties. Anyone aspmng
fOf
a political career needed an insight
into the psychology of individuals and the crowd so as to b
able to use
t? a~vantage people> tra.ditional beliefs and weak~
nesses. The mdlspensable qualificatIOn of a politiciall Was th

a~ility. to speak p~rsuasi.v~ly in public, to evoke sympath;
with himself and sllr hostility or even hatred for hi s opponent
to seize upon any loophole in laws and decrees . The social and
political conditions in the fifth century, the collapse of traditional morals based on unthinking custom proved highly fa~ourable for the emergence of such personages as professional
mformers and professional defenders, ready to take any side
and denounce or justify any action with equal success. No
wO.nd.er that the fifth century saw the birth of rh etoric and sophlstlcs as the arts of citizenship. Rhetoric, according to Aristotle, was necessary for everybody, as "all men attempt to discuss statements and to maintain them, to defend themsel ves
and to attack others. Ordinary people do this eith er at random
or through practice and from acquired habit" (Arist Rhet I
1,1354.).
.,
The !unda,~entals of rhetoric were expounded by sophists,

prof~sslonal teachers of wisdom" who trained their pupils for
f~eshm the art of clear thinking and eloquence. Till the middle
~s: e ,~f~h centurr the word "sophist" was synonymous with
ge,
ut later It degenerated in popular use and even became
.
Th'IS change is traceable to
a
ba term
f of 0 ppro b flum.
num. er 0 r~asons, not least of which being the propaganda
campa
agamstXthe sop h'Ists waged by their opponents and
rivals ign
Socrates
attitude was i~ fen~phon, Plato,. Aristophanes. The latter's
characteristic scor~c f an ~~prebslon of the sla'le society's
labour was intellect~:l p~ a ?ur. the more bitter as this
considered it below his dl .~cordmg to Xenophon , Socrates
he wanted to be free t g~1 Y t~ accept money for hi s talks as
0
and called the sophists e~f?y t e ~ociety of anyone he liked
was not better than 8:'~n~c pr~stl~utes as selling one's mind
J, 6, 13).
on. s ody (Xenoph. Memorab.
There was yet another , a mor e fundamental reaSOI) for the
116
AthenulTl pu~lic. s hOMtility towards the sophists. They taught

the art of thmkmg and strove to develop in their pupils the
habit to rely on reason and their own judgement instead of
tradition and old customs. The entire system of new education ag~ociated with the sophistic movement was regarded
as an apparent menace to public security. The leader of
Athenian democracy Cleon held that education breads conceit
and gives .men wild notions undermining the foundation of
democracy: ..... Ordinary men usually manage public affairs
beiter than their more gifted fellows. The latter are always
wanting to appear wiser than the laws, and to overrule every
proposition brought forward, thmking that they can nnd no
more important field [or their intelligence, and by such
behaviour too often ruin their country". "I The conservative
upholder of tradition Aristophanes, for his part, refers to the
sophistic art under the allegorical name of "Unjust Disc
ourse" making it boast in this way: "If I am called the
Weaker Reasoning in the schools, 'tis precisely because I was
the first before all others to discover the means to confute
the laws and the decrees of justice. To invoke solely the
weaker arguments and yet triumph is a talent worth more than
a hundred thousand drachmae ... ,,2
In modern historico-philosophical literature the sophists
are commonly regarded as representatives of the Age of En
lightenment in Ancient Greece-a movement in thought di
rected towards freeing man fromJhe grip of dead customs and
tradition s and opening thS" way for intellectual progress. The
programme of this movement was freedom in religion. and
morals, politics and science, the arts and culture. proclalme~
on beh alf of reason. It was an outgrowth of the SOCial and polt
tical conditions of the laller half of the fifth century and
could well have taken as its motto Euripides's proud
words: "The god is our reason in each o?e of us" (fr. 1018).
Understandably, the ideas of Greek enlightenment w.ere far
from universal as they did not go beyond a nar~ow clrcl 7 of
free citizens capable of paying stiff fees for their education.
As regards the enlightener himself. he eit~er had to. barter
his freedom for livelihood or to drag out a miserable eXlsten~e.
Hence a glaring contradiction: enlightenment as a SOCIOpolitical trend was a prod nct of Greek democracy that cou ld
d'de!4 The History of Peloponnesian \-Var, Book 111, fro 37. Ox~cy ~ -Presi . London. New York. Toronto, 1.946, p. t69ford UAn~"t"'I"'Y""' The Elellt1n Comedil'S, Horace Li"eright. Nt'w 'ork, 1932.
1
Th
rJS Opl
pp. 353-354
~"
Hi
. db"J Ihl' wralth'-'J flud WIiS tllI'rt'fon'

nhjt'f'livej"'
bl'US{'
I
d{'l~imt'nlal to the politiral sY.'Ih'lll thai Illu \'ngt'rull'red it.
I
OilY
What is IllOft', Iht' aristO('rats, _Iht' nWII,'yhllgs and Ihp ~Ioor

Wl'f{' all unanimous in tht'ir dlSl1kt' (If Iht' soph,lsls. thuugh
for difft'rt'nt reasons: .'lOllI(' (If tht'llI t'II\'lt'd. tllI'IT fl'P 3 (lint
infrerlllt'ntly rather fat). olhl'ts s{'ornt'fl tht'lr mod, . . ' statll1

(IIHl.~1 (If thl' sophi!'ls Wf'rt, fOrl;'lglH'fS who rUIlI!' ~(1 Alh"ns
from pro\'incial cities), still otlH'rs r('st'nlt'tl tht'lr 1lh'lIla l
suptriorily.
.
The ideology of Greek t'lilight(,ll('rs who had to adjust tlwlll_
selvE's to the existing political system and custo~s was charae_

tNist'd by inconsistency, vacillation betw('~n dlff('rent soci l
h'lIdencies and shapelessness- very much III the mann(>r of
doudfl made by Adstophanes the symbol of the sophistic
movement. It was permeated with scepticism in relation to
traditional beliefs, narrow rationalism and individualism so
typical in any enlightenment, the more so as it came into being
as a result of the crisis of ancient philosophical thought lost
in the tangle of cosmelogical speculations. The physiologers'
brilliant hypotheses might look quite convincing when COIlsidered separately. Howe'ver, contradicting one another, they
testi6ed to their fallacy and, presumably. to the inability of
human reason to penetrate the mysteries of being. The natural
consequence was all-round scepticism.
.\'ot least in importance was also the Greeks' acquaintance
with different social systems and customs in "barbarian"
lands. The new experience tended to undermine faith in the
traditional foundations of society, called in question the divine origin of law and justice and stimulated interest in
~um~n nature and society as the chief object of philosophical
mqulry. The quest for knowledge for its own sake was not the
sophists' aim, they regarded it rather as a means for 5eifassertion and for achieving practical ends. Their thepreticai
l~tere5ts centred around the process of reasoning and pE'rSUDSlon, the. logic of argume~t ~nd methods of proof.
. The hlsto~y of the SOphistiC movement is usually divided
Into ~w~,penods covering, respectively, the activity of "older
sophl~ts. - Prolagoras of Abdera (c. 48t-411), Gorgias of
~eontml (c. 483-375), Hippias of Elis, Prodicus of Ceos An .
tlphon; and "younger sophists"-Gorgias's pupils Alcid;mas,
Ly.cophron and Polus, Thrasymacus of Chalcedon Athenian
Crill as, and others The sophist,,' aHent'lon wa
. 'I r
d
O Ih
s
mam
y
ocuse
.
n e pro bl ems 0r society and cognition.
( ) '-;oc ely. r~e prnbll'm" of soeil'tyame to the foreground

III' Ie Sophl81.c agl' liS a Ilatural prodtl~t (Jf the (jrel'k world'.
historic 1 dev('lopment. The natllre of human society. its foundatiolls and de!4linils. Ihe principles of man's conduct in gen.
erllialld its moral carulIl' in particular came to he rl'garded in
term:i 0' Olll' genf'ral Rntithe!i~--nature and ronvention.
The history of this alitithf>lIi~ dates from the time of H('siod
when Greek POt't8 aud philosophNs concentrated on the rPla
lion of physis to nomos, i.e. the natural to the human.
the natural ordE'r of things to the artificial curbs impo~ed on
man and ."IOCii'ty, As time went by, this antithesis acquired
new aSpN'ts and new shades of meaning, but the basic
opposition remained unchanged -nomos was always identified
with convention that was not part of the immutable order of
thing."l and could be altered, be it law , custom, opinion or the
like. GrAdually new terms came into use and nature was
contrasted first with thesis (something that is adopted by way
of convention), and then with techne (art) which. howewr,
remained within the framework of the original distinction.
Its essence was well expounded by sophist Antiphon who,
according to Aristotle, "points out that if you .planted a bed
and the rotting wood acquired the power of send 109 up a .. h~t.
it would not be a bed that would come up. but wood-which
shows that the arrangement in accordance with the rules of
the art is merely an incidental attribute, whereas. the real nature is the other" (Arist. Phys. II, t, 193a). I.E". the real
natu~ of a bE'd is tree, which exist.,.; by physis.
The physis-~omos antithesis covers three 6el~s: langua~~.
cognition and human society . the .Iatter both 10 the pohtlcal and physical sense. I n hiS. dl.alogu.e . Protagoras Plato
ascribes the doctrine of the artl6Clai orlglll of language to
Protagoras (322a). In the Cral~lu~ it is ex.pounde~ by
Protagoras's pupil Hermogenes. ThiS \'I.ew was eVldentl.y .shared by Prodicus who paid much attention. to synonymlcs and
different shades of words' meanings. Antiphon, t.oo. reg~r~ed
names (words) as products of. h~man. c.reatlve acllvltr
According to the sophists, t~e ~rtl6clal orlglll of languag: IS
attested to by such lingUistic phenomena as. synon)!my
(words having the .. arne or llE'arly the same meanm~), hom?nymy (words having the samE' pronunciation but different In
meaning), existence of diffe~ent languages, cha~ge of n.ame~
etc ThE' sophistic conception of language \\ as subJecte
to ~riticiflm by Pinto who maintained that "things have namE'S
118
119
hatred in return. The conclusion is that obe-dience to law in~

volves wrong on both sides and pr~fer('nce therefore should be
given to the "natural" ~nit.Y of, th?\~ght base~ on a mutual
agreement of equally thmklDg individuals neither to inflict
prodalm that what is advantageous to themselveR I~ justice

for those rult~d i and him who transgresses this principle
they puni~h a~ a breaker of the law, and unjust.' "In
all states thl:'rl:' is the fiame principle of justice. which is
the interest of the established government" (Platon. Rep., I,
338e).
Here we have true dialectics of social life: starting with
the "law of nature," one ends up with the law of the tyrant. It
was precisely this dialectics that served as a basis for the
sophists' doctrine of the relativity of any knowledge. . .
The -attack on religion was anothel,' aspect of the sophistIc
enlightenment that evoked resentment of the reaction.ary upholders of tradition. The atheistic views of the sophists can
well be exemplified by Critias's tragedy Sisyphus where
he presents a vivid picture of th.e emergence of religion.
According to Sisyphus, the mam character. of the play,
there was a time when the life of man was disorderly and
beastlike. Then men laid down laws, but these could onl.y
prevent open deeds of violence and men continued to commit
them in secret. A . way out was found by a shre~d. and
subtle legislator who "introduc~d .the I?ivi~e (reltglo~),
saying that there is a God flourlshmg .wl~h Imm~rtal I~fe,
hearing and seeing with his mind, and thl~kmg ?f.everythlD~
and caring about these things, and havmg diVine natu~e.
who will hear everything said among' mortals, and ~lll
be able to see all that is done. And even if y~u pl~n..anythmg
evil in secret, you will not escap.e t?e go~s In thiS (?K 88
B 25, 16-24). Hence, religious behef IS depicted as a dehberate
imposture intended to ensure the good behaviour of Citizens by
fear of punishment. The clever legislator gave the gods the
heaven for a dwelling-the place whence, as he knew, mortals
expect retribution and help.
The theory o( the "artificial" origin of gods w~s also professed by Prodicus who wrote that "things from which b~;efit~
to human life have been derived h~ve co~? tODb~ c~~sB e~e).
deities, such as Demeter and DIOnysus ( .
As we see the antithesis of nature and con~entlOn (custom,
law the ar~) provides a basis (or the doctrme of the mutabilit.y of social institutions, l.aws , custom;h:n:~~~n:~i~~~~li;'
for the justification of their c h auge .
. .
h
'
"es the concept of relatiVity of uman
I
d
owever,
a
so
un
er
I
I
h ,
kn(~lt!;~ition. Hegel wrote that sophistic had embarked on
nor to suffer injury.

This is, of course, a utopiaD idea reflecting the realisation
of existing social injustice and the quest for "natural," and
therefore universal, justice and morality, Here again we see an
essential difference between Protagoras and Antiphon. The
former believes that justice derives from the common opinion
of citizens: "whatever appears to each stale to be just and fair,
so long as it is regarded as such, is just and fair to it" (Piston.
Theaet. 167c). Justice is law expressing the city'sopinion -this
is the thesis of Protagoras idealising and defending Athenian
democracy of the Periclean age. By contrast, Antiphon witnessing the crisis of this democracy after the lost Peloponnesian
war identifies justice with "nature" and "natural" interests
of man, wi.th what is useful for him. Since, however, people's
needs and mterests are identical "by nature" the obvious conclusion is that "we are all by nature born 'the same in every
way, both barbarians and Hellenes" (DK 87 B 44, fro B, col.
~; ThiS t1!ought was further developed by Lycophron who
s notable fo~ hiS challenge to aristocracy and disparagemle nt of noble birth. Hippias, according to Plato declared that
a l men were "k'msmen an d f rlends
.
and fellow ci' tizens by nature
'
. hand not by law'' for na t ure I'k'
I e IS a k"In to like whereas
law
18 t e tyrant of m
th'
h' h
an k"In d ,an d f ten compels us' to do many
ITnhgs w IC are against nature" (Platon. Protag 337a).
rasymachus
d"1 ar
.
argume.nts .to prove the opposite
thesis. According ~s~l Slml
stronger His view 0 ato, h e defined Justice as the right of the
the belt~r is "by n:t:sr:~ared b~ Callicles who contended that
powerful to the les
supenor to l~e worse, and the more
democracy, Calliele: d:'7a~:fulh Levelling his shafts. against
the weaker that is th
s ~ at the laws are estabhshed by
purpose of ~ature that :h matOrity, in order to thwart the
However one chooses toe US ~ong man should prevail.
equality or otherwise_th n ~rs~and natural justice-be it
nature and convention ("a~ts~'V~cIPJe . of the opposition of
elusion: if laws are establ' h d bea s IneVitably to one conchanged. Thrasymachus l:a;S' r.~~nve~tion, they can be
government make laws dem . . e different forms of
.
n Ica,
I Wit
.h
a '
View of their ocratIcal
I: a'
nstocratIcal,
tyransevera Interests; and thereby
123
the path of free thinking which was to lead it beyond t'l

bounds of existing morals and naIve religious falth.1 It wa:
the w'!aker ugu neot the t onger" 'ind vice ve.... I was no\.
for\.uitous therefore that ProtagOlas maiD' nned the he''!!:> of
the impossibility o contradiction and contended hat there Ire
two opposite, but equally tenable arguments on. every ~b]er.
From this it followed that there was no other crlter on 01 t uth
than man himself,
.This view is apUy expressed in Protagoras's famous phrase
"Man is the measure of all things" (DK 80 B i), Historico
philosophical tradition ~raceable to P~ato's Theaet~t~s rega~ds
this thesis as an expressIOn of sensualIsm and relatiVIsm, Plato
in fact interpreted Protagoras's thesis as the contention that
knowledge is perception. The phrase "Man is the measure of
all things" means that what seems to me is for me, and what
seems to you is for you: if the wind is cold to me who feels
it cold, and is warm to you who feels it warm, we cannot
say that it is cold or warm in itself.
Such arguments, of course. sound to us 9uite ,nai:e, We can
measure the ambient temperature and get Its objective characteristic independent of subjective perceptions, Yet in time
when the warm and the cold. the dry and the moist. the bitter
and the sweet were regarded as objective qualities of thin~s or
even peculiar "things" themselves. it was no small achleve~
ment to emphasise a close relationship between sensually
perceived qualities and the perceiving individ uai. Protagoras
comes to a conclusion that being is mutable and that men
"apprehend different things at diflere.nt, times owing to
their differing dispositions; for he who 15 lD a n~tural state
apprehends those things subsisting in matter which are ~ble
to appear to those in a natural state, and those who are ~n a
non-natural state the things which can appear to those lD a
non-natu'ral state" (Sext. Pyrrh. I, 218).
.
On the evidence of Sextus Protagoras accep~ed dogm~tIc
ally the doctrine that matter is in nux and, relted upon It ~o
account for subjective appearance of thlDgs. Henc~" hiS
relativism was limited and did not amount to sceptiCIsm,
Moreover, the founder of sophistic in fact c~ntended t~at
sensation cannot be at fault. If food appears bitter to a s,lck
man and sweet to a man in good health, if a man wearmg
rags feels cold and another one in warm cl~the.s feels warm,
it does not mean at ali that one of the?,lls right, and ,the
other is wrong. It simply means that 0D:e state reqUlre,~
to be changed into the other. the worse IOto the better
(Platon. Theaet. 167&). Protagoras, as we see, abandons the
the road of criticism an~ d~ubt described by Protagors r
who "was the first to mamtam that there Bre two sides to
every question, opposed to each other" (Diog. L. IX, 51)
This thesis which amounts to saying that contradictory
statements about the same thing are simultaneously true
and that it is impossible to contradict appeared absurd
to Plato who commented upon it thus: "I have always
thought it an amazing doctrine, suicidal 8S well as destructive" (Platon. Euthyd. 286b). Aristotle unequivocally
rejected this thesis as incompatible with the law of contradiction., .Conflicting testimonies make it impossible to restore
Protagoras's authentic words, but we can recapture the
meaning of his principle from context. Our purpose can
best be served by well~known sophism Euathlus.
According to Diogenes Laertius, Protagoras made a deal
with his disciple . Eu~thlu~ whereby the latter was to pay him
t~e .fee after wlDDlng hiS first case in a law court. The
discIple. however, was in no hurry to get a case and the
teacher threatened to sue him. Puzzled Euathlus replied
~?at ~~ h~d not won a case yet and had received no fee.
Nay, said Protagoras, "if I win this case against you,
I mu~t have the fee, for winning it; if you win, I must
have ,t, because you win it" (Diog. L. IX, 56). The sophist's
worthy pupil retor~ed: "If I lose, I shall not pay because I
sbhallh be the 10,~er; ,I I win, I shall not pay either, as I shall
e t e w'nner (see Gell. V, 10).
Here
weI have a genuine parad ox: P rotagoras must receive
I
hIseeonyifhei
-Ied to It
- on the other hand
" thl
s no t en tIt
r,ua. us must" pay h-IS t eac h
l y-If'he is not due to pay ,
er
on
TI llS contradiction could
lb"
.
prohibited to
I
on y e elImmated if it were
app y the terms 01 th
Protagoras and Euathl to r
. e contract between
Yet the grounds for S~~h a ee c~s~ Involving both of them.
it takes a serious 10 ical in: re~trl~tlon are not obvious and
lion to it!i source. S~ch inve~~~lga~lOn to trace the contradicin the late nineteenth-earl tlgatI~ns were only undertaken
~ion with the logical analysi~ o~:~tltth cen.turies in connecICS, As regards the soph'sts
Ie oundatlOns of mathematwere an excellent means I to' t leI paradox,es of this kind
con use an Issue, "to make
Sea 1,I~gf'1. VorlesulIgtm iiber dte G
.
Verlag Phlhpp Heclam JUD., Leipzig. 1.978tls~h~~6~er Pllilo8ophie, Band I,
124
,..,-,
standard of truth" in favour of th(' pragmatic s"W1'l(IsrI I of

I rs
better or worse: some appearanc{'s arr bC'ttl'r th
,
though none is truer" (ibid., 167b). Betng warm is ha~t ot
being cold, health is better than ailment hen~e, \:{ t an
[reezmg man to get warm and heel the sick OD(' S h P the
prescription of the s o p h i s t . ' uc IS the
'h
I ~ould not be correct to regard Protagoras as a

.
suahst and relativist. His attempt to link the probl pu~e sen
with,man's practical activity was an important 5te e~ 0 truth
consls.ten~ materialist theory of cognition consideri~ oward~ a
the crltenon of truth . Understandably't
g pract,ce
I I
was. on I y one
of th
fi rst steps on a long and thorny path. This ath
. e
on~ to pragmatism identifying truth with Pwha~~~oarl~o,~nng
and her~t I.e" appears practically useful for a given pS now
urpose
an a given mdividual.
muchmd'lSpU t e over P rotagoras's conception
of There
man inhashisbeen
famous
dividing between man as aan~~:3~~~e s~atement, the opinions

The former view seems t b
IVI u~ and man as mankind.
qualified by most histori~nse apredommant a~d ~r?tagoras is
~ppears, however that Hma "s. a~ extreme mdlvldualist. It
lDdividual like~In th
n Ill rotagoras can be both an
Id
d
,
e case 0 f the
and a corporate bod
.
co
an the warm,
to decide on what . y,
a cIty assembly cailed upon
choice is determined ~y ~~n a~d. bad for the citizens. The
whether the issue concern~r~ circumstances, depending on
doctrine truth as it were 's .. ~ne or many. In ~rotagoras's
the sage's mo~opoly.
I
emocratised," being no longer
"J'
Prota~oras's general line of th ught
. .
are subject to constant cha
d
was this: If things
that can be apprehended thngt an f it is onl~ the transient
and all opinions varying ~it~ t~ue horm of bemg is relativity
ter and man cannot but be reI e. c ang~ of state of both matapparently extreme relat"
a~lve, fiUld and mutable This
di sf mctlOn
.
mod'fi
'
between the "b IVlsm
tt .. IS d
i ed
yb
Protagoras's
what con forms to and conflicts'
e er an the" worse, " .I,C, betw('f'o
a T~~ d~c~rine of the relativity ~ft~ thel dJcta~es of naturl'
f ~u )eclivlst manner lies at the r t n?w e ~e IDterpreted 110
a se, reasoning, In the heat of 00 0 sophistry as the art of
:~e~l.ng to ,corner their opponen~n n~~g,u~ent the disputants
P Isms, I.e. to the sub"
III requently resort to
~:xible and contradictory J:~i::~s a~~i~ation of objectively
.en well awarp of the differenc b t 0 goras seems to have
e e ween the subjective and
12(;
objective u~e of notions. 88 Plato puts into hiS mouth the

following statement: "Injustice it '5 when one does not
converse differently in disputation and in serious discussion
the disputer may trip up his opponent as often as he likp.st
and make fun; but the dialectician will be in earnest and only
correct hi~ interlocutor when necessary" (Theaet, 167e)
Proceedmg from the doctrine of relativity and subjectivism
S?IDe of the sop?ists, for instance. Xeniades and Gorgias, carfled Protagoras s argument.~ to extremes and landed up in abo
solute scepticism. As distinct from Protagoras who contended
that "it is impossible to contradict" and everything is
therefore possible, sophist Xeniades made himself famous
by his assertion that "all things are false, and every
impression and opinion is lalse ... The fact that all things
are false and therefore inapprehensible is proved by disparagement of the senses" (Sext. Adv. math. VII, 53-54). He
bolstered his thesis by this argument: "All that becomes
becomes out of the non-existent, and all that perishes
perishes into the non-existent" (ibid., 53). Hence, the Eleatic
absolute immutable being based on the denial of any change in
the world and its reduction to pure illusion is eliminated by
Xeniades in favour of absolute non-being.
Gorgias, a native of Sicily, develops his doctrine along
similar lines. His main treatise On the Non-EXistent, or on Nature has not survived, but we possess a fairly detailed paraphrase of its arguments in Sextus Empiricus and in the work
On Melissus, Xenophanes and Gorgias traditionally ascribed
to Aristotle. His other remains are two speeches Encomium on
Helen and Defence of Palamedes and about thirty fragments
of his works. Both speeches, though corrupt ..nd incomplete,
are a good illustration of sophistic argument.
.
In his treatise Gorgias sought to prove, first, that nothlOg
exists, second, that if anything exists it cannot be known or
thought of by man, and, finally, that even if it can be apprehended, it cannot be communicated to anyonp pisc. Parodying the Eleatics' reasoning, Gorgias shows \\'ith mock solemnity that the non-existent does not exist. then he takes up the
same line with regard to the existent and proceeds thus:
if the existent exists, it must be either eternal or generated
or both; it cannot be eternal since if it were it would
have to be infinite which it is not (here his argument
is based on the deliberate confusion of temporal and spatial
infinity); it cannot be generated since if it were, it would
127
have had to bt' gCIlf'ratt.'d eitilf'r froIn wLrr IS OJ
what is not, hOWeVl'f. both
Inl'
Impossible
the
fOm
(lXlstelt
already exists and cannot g('nerate (t~wlf. l.l"l, )eing. nd 1e

noo-existent (not-being) {'an not gener/ltc unyth '1g. I nce
the E'xi~t(>nt doe~ not ('xbt
Similar logic is llsed to'disprove the pturallty of being: it

cannot be either many (as was argued by Zeno), or OtiC. Gor-
gias shows that the Elealics' uncritical concrption of et{'rnal

immutable and single being is no iE'sS contradictory than it~
opposite-the conception of being which is generated, mutable and multitudinous. This conclusion was an important step
towards Plato's dialectics of being developed in the Par-
men-tdes and expressed in the following statement: "whether

one is or is not, one and t.he others in relation to themselves
and on(' anothC'f, all of them, in every way, are and
are not, and appeal' to be and appeal' not to be" (Platon,
Parm. 166c)
Ma,intai~ing his second thesis, i,e, incognizability of being,
Gorgl~S pomts,out that thought is not identical with being: we
~an thlfik,of thlfigs both real and unreal, as, for instance, charIots crossing the sea or flying men, Since what we think does
not nee~ssarily exist and we have no means of distinguishing
real thlfigs ~rom unreal ones (senses being deceitful and
reason Ilnrellable), the conclusion is that the existent is not
t~ought, i.e" is not known, Gorgias's argument is clearly
~Irect~d agamst Parmenides's identification of thought with
Its object,
The
pro~f of the thesis :rests on the contention that
I
I
I
in speech
which IS not,ldentlcal With external objects : "Speech is not the
real
, and eXistent things therefore we d 0 no II n dIcate to our
nelgh~o~rs the ~x~st~,nt things but speech, which is other than
wh t ' I
'
,
,
,onverse y,
a eX,ls s cannot become Our speech, and without becomin
speech ,It ,ca?not be communicated to another,
g
Gorgl8S s Idea of cognition is so to
k
'
of Protagoras's: every thin ' f I' f
spea, the negative
the latter, The relativismg~; Pr~~a or the former an,d ,t~ue for
Gorgias were the culmination of goras an~ the mh~lis~ ,of
approach to the nf>xibility n 'd' the one~slded, subjectiVist
tori ness of notions reflectin'g t~1 I~ an,d Internal contradicobjecti~e world, In contrast Wit~ t~ea:a~lng and, contradict?ry
the enlightened thoughl of G
. ree
128
k . ly sophists expressmg
Slave-owning democracy
('
a
(>('1
(t
!h('
k,n~wl~~gc I~ exp~essed ,in words and communicated
the eXlstmg reahlles (Sexl. Adv malh VII 84) C
III~ Illwr of H1tcr I ' mg. ot''!I('f\' It

1It'l/(,fllt'IiIS i I kg r
r H': )fI(' i! 1ft ~1ll
t
glll!'ti('s, their ~11('('f":~mrs 110' Inlf1'ljlll'n ly l~rJlI'''' ('a 1:.~ .(,.l~
pr o ldl'llIs illtu " IIW,lfl!" of tflpplUg and _d :>'lr~glJlg tlu ',I ;p(
pOlH'1I1~ ill all argulIlI'nl. I')f I~lanf'e, t: llJk I- rotagf)r,~~ ,~h.
t'THpila!'i:.wd tlH' Iliftl'rl'lIl'1' Iwtw, "'n a I ar~ Hf'!' ~t <'IlL .~ S( 1,1011,
philosophical dis('tJs~i()lI, C'."'~I<l:; 1,IIstructed ~II~ pilI" 'I.. Ollt
must dl'stroy UIIP'S adVl'rSl.lriPS !'cfI()IJSnCSS With 1;,1IIghtl'f Hnd
thC'ir luughtt'f with .'iprillusllf'ss" (UK 82 B 12)
TIll' cil'g('fI('l'ntion of tilt' sophistic rnOVellll'llt C<.Hl w,11 ttl'
i1lostratl'd hy an anonymous ('s!'ay ,Tw%ld A:J.!lImf'f~I!i
written afl(>J" th(' ('nd of thf> Peloponn('slan w<tr (e. 100 H,C,)
and designed to sltow that tiJPfl' are two cnnlral'y bllt I'fllIally
maintainable argunwnls 011 f'very subject.
aut,hor,~('ts out
two opposit(' views ahout good and evil, or JI1StIC(' i.~lId
injustice, fair and foul. truth and falseh,ood, takf>s one \,I('W
himself and argues that they are l'lthN _the samf> or
diITerE'nt as the case may be (DK 90 I II), The final
word of sophi!-itic l'nlightrnmC'nt was the doctrine of ahsoilltf'
relativism, \Vhat is good for one man is bad for another,
what appear~ beauti-(ul for one looks ugly to anotllt'r.
truth when stated by one man becomes fabehood wh(,11
stated by another, Thi~ doctrine was resolute~y opposed by S{!-.
crates who undertook to show "by deed If not by, word
the difference between justict and injustice (st'(' Xt'lloph,
Melliorab. I V, 4, 10).
. I I I,'VII1",., tit II' r

,1111
1011:i and IllIporlJot
I
I
13, Socrates
Socrates (469-399) is one of the most enigmatiC charactt'rs

in the history of philosoj)hy, He is said to ha\'t' been thl' s,on
o f Athen ian sculptor or stone-mason Sophronisclis and IIl1dwife Phae na rete, His prinwry education cons isted in the trc~di'
tio na I ll'sso ns of mus ic, philology (reading, writing, le3J'1l1ng
bv heart a nd in terpret ing cla~sical tl'xts), arithmE'tics and till'
foundations of geollll'try, Physical fitness enabled him to ti.,lkl'
part in severa l rr.ilitary campaigns and he earned a reputatlOll
for coolness, brave r y ant! r('markable powers of t'I~dUI''-lIl('l', Ill'
was active in pub lic life and not onc~~ ,rl'llI~,E'd to ,Ill'
intimidated into ading contrary to hi~ con\'lctu)J)s In till' city
Assemb ly and law-collrt in lhl' face of popular {,~'-Hnollr
Such h('ha\' iolll' tonk a gl'l'at dcal of cOllra~e. and ~()cratt':'
;)ccounl l'd for his di:,,\gret'll1t'llt with the 1ll<\Jonty hy rt':'~H'rt
for law and <inotiol) to justice. In 39!) H,C. ill' Wi\~ hrought
q 11:1'.1
.,
to tr ia l o n rhal'ges of impiety and corruption of thp ~' ollth.

Th e indictme nt read: "SOCI'a:l'l' is guilty of rt'fusing
10 recognise the gods rec.o~lI~s.l'lt hy Ihl' stalt' lIltl of
introducing
other new dl\"lIllll l'S. Ill' IS also J.tlldt~, of
co rrupting the youth. The .pe nalty, ~dt'mand('d is dplIth "
(Diog. L. 11 ,40). Out of 500 Judges 36t votNt for tho doalh
penalty and Socrates drank hi~ c up of hemlock.

The three most important hi s torica l sour('l'S of our informati on on Socrates-Aristophanes's Clouds, Xrnophon's .llemorabilia and Plato's dialogues prese nt three entirely different individuals with widel y diverg in g, even opposing views.
This may be due to the fact that th ey rellect tlll'er stages of
his philosophi cal de ve lopment, 01' th at so div(,rse writers could
not but interpret Socl'ates's teac hing differentl y (the latter is
particularly true of Xenophon and Plato). Th e historicity of
Socrates, however, can hardly be called in qu est ion if ollly
for the fact that his thought has brought to life and inspired
a number of philosophical schools t raditi o nall y known as
"Soc rati c".
Soc rates never put down hi s views in wl'iting expounding
them in talks with hi s friends and disputes with his opponents.
According to Aristophan es who ridi c uled th e intellectual
vogue of hi s co ntemporari es-so phi s ti c e nli ghtenment a nd
edu ca tion , sophistic rhetoric and art of pers uas ion , Socrates
was a sophist, an astrologer and a " ph ysic." Owning a "think~ng ,~hop," he " trav~rses the air and co nte mpl ates th e sun " lyIng s ~spe.nded .up In a basket, and "mingles t he s ubtl e essence of hIS mllld WIth this air, which is of the lik e nature, in o rd e r
to clearly penetrate the things of heaven " (Aristophanes, The Clouds, p. 311). Xenophon's account of Socrates
prese nts a very prosaic, even somewhat mediocre character
notable for his loyalty to the state, faith in the traditional
~alues of Athenian society and salutary influenc e on the
IOl(,I.loculor~. In reading his Memorabilia , one cannot escape
the I~presslon that the writer was often simply incapable of
graspIng the profound philosophical thought of his con te rnporar~ .. Plato, b~ contrast, creates the image of a brilliant
polemlcl ~t, an deal philosopher and a profound thinker
ex poun~lI1g ... Plato's own ideas. If anything, the logical
co n cl~ slO~ s from Socrates's arguments 3!? reproduced in
Plato s dialogues could hardly be known to Socrates him ~E' If.
Despite the obvious difficulties that face the historians in
I~'
rt'('Oll s trllrllllJ,t tlIP J,tl'lIl1iul' vif'WS of SOC' -atps WI' lUilY sHfeiy
en'd,t him with two important ('olltrib11tioIlS to ptlllo$ophy
Th~' lirst is th,' d,'vl'loP"lI'lIt and (iaboratioll of dl_Ied e~ ~s a
uwth()(1 of illqlliry. Though Surrah's was lIot tlIP author of this
IIwthoci and gavl' 110 Ih('orf'ticai 'xpfJsition of diaif>ctirs, hI'
followl'd a (' Ipar-cut palll'fII of diaif<:tiral r('asolling ane! lail!
ban' his logif fIJI' iatf'f philosoplH'r~ to formalist>. T~II' s('colld
is that Socratl's placpd dialf>fli(:~ at tlu' st'rvic(' of "thir~ ami
undertook to giv(' a grrH'ral d('fJllition of virtm' as a hasis [or
the rational transformation of morals.
On the formal side, Socrates's dialectics rfllisists of iro
ny and mairutics or intellectual midwifery, and on the sub
stantive side, of induction and definition. His irony which ron
sists in asking {fuC'stions in sham ignorance and refuting all
answers is in fact idC'ntical wilh the sophistic method of argu
ment intended to disclose contradictions in the opponent's
statements or views. Yet in contrast with Gorgias who seeks to
prove that knowledgr is impossible in principle. Socratrs only
comes out against false knowledge. Demon~trating confusion
in his interlocutor's mind, Socrates confesses his own inaptitude and invites him to join in a common search for truth.
The ultimate goal of Socrates's irony is to exposC' false claims
to wisdom and lay bare human ignorance so as 10 clear the way
for tr ue knowledge which is expressed in the formula: "Know
thyself." According to Socrates, there is no point in studying
the ph ysica l world as man's power of cognition is far too lim
ited to penetrate the design of the gods. The true subject of
philosop hy is the knowledge of man's own nature. Here
knowledge is not on ly possible, but necessary. His irony is therefore closely link ed with induction wh ich cons ists in the analysi s of different noti o ns of a subject with the aim of arriving
at its true definition . Help ing his pupils in th e ir intellectu a l
bil'th - pangs, Soc rates Ii.ke n.s hi~sel.f 10 a. midwi.fe .(11 transpa~
ent allusion to the maleutl c skdl whefIled b) h1ln from IlI.s
mother: as a result of their dis cussion his interlocutor mlJ~t
~ive birth to wisdom.
,
'
Xenophon and Plato g ive n1l11~erO~l s ~x~mples of ~ocrall's ~
dial ect ics. Inducing his companion Aflstlppus to bnng ou.t ,l
general definition of duty. Socrates sa~'s: " ... TI~e sal~w thl.,~g
may be both good and evi I; ror I C.Bl easily ~u ~ pO~(' , t I~'l I. ",1.11 ( h
is good in the casr or hung(>l' , may be ~vll In .1. [('\~r . !'1,I.l~~
what would prove a cure for the one. will certallll~ In crl,lS(
the malignity of th(' other: and in thr same manner wdllwaut\
I:H
in the wrestler change to deformity in him wht) runnrth. For

whatsoever is suited to the end intended, with rt:'spect to that
end it is good and fair; and contrariwise, must bl' d('(>IIlt'd pvil
and deformed, when it defeats the purpose it was (il>.sigul'd to
promote ... The same disposition of the body which is b<,autiru!
in him who runs. is not beautiful in the wrestler; and while
the beauty of the shield is to cover him well who wears it

that of the dart is to be swift and piercing" (Xenoph. Mt'mo~
rab. III, 8).
. ~his reasoni~g ,as rendered b~ Xenoph.on appears to be very
simIlar t'o SOphistiC arguments IOtended to prove the relativi_
ty of our concerts and, in this particular case, to idC'ntify
the beautiful with the useful. Actually, however, the conclusion to which Socrates leads his interlocutors is entirely dif~erent: the beautiful as such is not .fiction, it does exist, yet
It should not be sought among material things. On Aristotle's
evidence, "Socrates did not make the universals or the defmitions e~ist apart..." (Arisl. Met. XIII, 4, 1078b), therefor:e t~ere IS good reason to suppose that he did not rllld the
objective status of the beautirul as such or, for that maUer
any other definitions of ethicalnotions. Indeed, all his at~
tempts to determine. ~eauty, virtue and courage came to
nought ~nd th~ definitIOns Socrates gives do not go beyond
~uperficlal pl~tltudes. Thus justice, according to X(>nophon,
I~-de~n~d by. Socrates as what agrees with the laws, and beau~(ull,s Identified with useful and suitable for a giv(>n purpose.
r!~to s Sot:rates .state~ that ~ is difficul~ ~o. define ~he beauti. and. dls~ussmg w~~h ~rlto the pOSSibility of Violating an
IInJu8~ vprd~ct, says: It IS enough then, Crito. Ll't 115 flllfil
~~~)~J11 of God, and follow whither He leads" (Platon. Crito.
m It .1I~o~l~ be note~ that there is a pronounced strain of

g~~tlclsdm In ~crates s co~verS8tions. Frequent appeals to the
. dan a USlons to variOus occult forces come nutural in
h1M IstOllrse and represent So Ie'
f
d
..
", .
.,
..'
cra S s pro Qun relIgIOUS con\I~ ~llj:"M. 1:1(' J(ods Will ~aullol bl' unravelll'd through man's
"f',t ('('tu8 l'ud'.'8vour, It rpveals itsl'H in proplu.tic siulls
a ('r mill' h l'raVIIl<1'
d'
' ....
I.
f
. '" all approprl8tt-' s8('rirtcE'. Souah's hlkt's
II!! rll(-' mm IIH' ()('Iphil' oracle I and pr,.-,
I)10tlllh'
..
.
,,('!'oS
(-'0-
\ ...
ortliItR tn
l'IHlu',
Ap"/()l(fI til,.
tkol h.
lilt 1IIo,,,,,,~, "f ",~lIkln,l. Sill"~' 1",I,,1.'i W,

P
~ un .. n
l:t2
{",tlflllde
I'IIIUlllnr('o Sorral('s
r"",{
I
11~'
.-
"'S,,
1)(' itira1 r'lU
lightens him ill the saul(' way as lIP l'llli~htens his IistE'ners.
Yet it is l!lr Illore than mt'rt' irrationalism and tribute to the
orphic tradition, Socratt's's "dlmnll'.' or tl~(-' i.nn(-'~ voice that
speaks t~ him now I\nd thell a.ud J.!\I~dlS 111m In 1~ls COllrse of
conduct is in fact ttl(> lIIalllfcs-tatlOn of the mtensE' and
continuous labour of his thought. As regards Socrates's
referencl's Lo Eros. man's best guide in his aspiration for
beauty as such (d. Plato's ~"!Impll.'~iflm): or to th.e immortal
soul's reminis('t'llrt-'s of the Ollr(' rontt'mplated ultimate truth
of all being UYeno), thl'Y can wl'lIl)(' construt-'d as an anticipation in a religious form of till' Platonic theory of ideas.
Coming bark to tlu' diah'('li('al II1l'tho<l of S()cr~tes, we may
characterise its po."iti\"{' ('Onlf'llt on Ih(' formal Side as a cryslallis<ltioll of sophistil' argul1ll'nts, aneiPllt rhl'toric and the
orlltory of th(' lawcourts. This llH'thod \~'as .still .Iack.ing a
tiwor('tical fOl1nd,ltion alHI SO('fHll's app!Jt'd It primarily to
ethical prohlC'ms, It sl'l off, <IS it Wf'rt" a~ avalanche of episIf'mological doctrilll's and had a POW('rfuillllpact on the sub~e
ql1'lIt dewlopm('nt or (~rppk philo~(Jphy. OIl thl' substantive
"idl', Socratic dialf'rti('s Sh"Wl'd tlwt a gl'IH'rai concept (':ould
onlv hI.' arrin'd al as a r('sult of hard intl'lIl'ctual labour and
that the path of knowlf'dgp It'ililing to d(flllitiolls.was not an
paS\' one. Alongsid(> this. tilf' conviction that uIII\,('rsals arl'
nnl;' opl'n to tht' llIind CilU:-il,d Socralf''' to ('('ga~d .t1ll'm as pro~
ducts of thought and to rOllCf-'lItrah' nIl man s lnn('r world.
This wa .. thl' ('pisll.'lIlnlngiral <I!'qll't'l of hi!' f<\mol1~ dictum
"know tilysC'If."
ThC' dia'IN,tical 1lH'lhod was mainly applit'd hy SO{'fatl's to
.mora! prohl ('illS i\ n d}1l' is trail ilion i\ 11 y r('ga rd('(1 as the fOll ndrr
or;;cientiflc ('thies. Sin(,, no moral asseSSm('llt seemed ~o bl'
possibl(' w;thollt a r('liabl(' crilt'rion, Socratt'S foc~lsed hiS atIt'ntioll 011 til(' gl'lIl'ral nolioll of ... irtllt' and d~flllC'd It as .knowle>dgf'. Ht' tallght thaI it eOllsisll.'d in knowlIIg what: IS good
and acting in <\ceordallc(' with this knowlpdgl For IOstanee.
bravery prl'slippos('s tilt' knuwl('dge of how ~o faee dal~ge~.
jllstic(' th(' knowlC'dg(' of what to do ill relatlOll to the> IIIdll
lion in (in",,'I' in S')frah'lI'~ ,I<I\lI. thill rirCUnllItlllH'(' S('l'nlll 10 h(' (IoinlioR' to

his politkal synlpathi('s. ~n ll'~~ im(lortant ill til(' far I that Pythia'!' proph{'('"i('s
W('ft' pas....l:'d by Socrat('s for di"ill(' wisdom all oppost'd to the f~bl~nl:':l" of
human mind: "Butlhe truth is. 0 ml:'l1 QI Alht'ns. that God only IS WIse; I'nd
bv his answ('r hE' intE'nds to show thl't "'e wisdom of men is worth littlE' or
n~thinR'; although speaking 01 Socrales.1he is only usiDg ~y Dame by way Df
illustrations, as il.hE'. said. He, 0 men, is '~e wi~st, who. like Socra&es, knDwS
thst his wisdom III In trllth worth nothmj(... (Platon. Apol. 23ab).
{aJ
t'xpl'rit'IH'" attesling to the opposite (which- Aristotle was

qllirk 10 1I0tl'). CIS from thl' idealistic assumption that the ills
of socil'ty ("0 II it! hi' 1'lIrt'd by til(' spread of knowledge and the
dis";"lIIinalioll of thl' iill'a!' of goodness and justice. History
..;hows thai 'Iny ..;oei('ly fii\'idf'd into antagonistic classes
aboulltb illl'lhil'al pariHloxl'!,. A moral action in such a society
oftell produces an inlilloral ft'sult which explodes the very conc{'ption of morality. ~lIch paradoX('s are insolublf' within the
hOllml:-< of plitt. know!tllgt-thf'ir solution calls for restructuring till' ..;,)eiHI r(,lations that hring them into being, Socrates in file I coutl'ntl'tl him:-<l,!f with a call for the self-perfection
of an individual 1"l'<llIl'ing al thai this pt'rfection to the knowll'dgl' of what is good. I\lor('ovel", r('garding th{' knowledge of
goo<llll':-<s as til{' Ill'('p:-<s(lry lind slifficiNlt condition of being
virtuous, ~ocrah':-< 1I0t only ig'norl'd, according to Aristotle,
man's "non-thinkillJ,{" part. hi:-< w('akneiis(>s and inclinations,
rUiitolllS .lntl h'lbit..; h(' :;N'IlIS to hav(' he{'n totally unaware of
till' fact thai ht' hilll:;pJ[ did not po:-<s{'ss the knowlNlge of goodIH':-<S ht' wa~ talking ahout lllld was ('ven una hlp to give its d{'flllitiOIl.
niH' might argut' Ihat th{' notion!' of virtu(>s pr{'acllt'd by
:-;o("flllt's, :-<uch as tempt'nUll'f', courage, justice and others are
~l1flicit'lIlly lucid and ran bt' grasped intuitiv{'ly. How('ver.
Sucl"atps':; own "irony" hlls shuwn that it is far from b(>ing th(>
(';.1:-<1'; Iht':-<t' notiolls do Ilot it'IHltht'JIlst-'lves to a simple d('finitioll, So('rali's flill not Opt'lI a Ill'W ('poch eilh{'r ill logic or in
I'thi(':;. lit' w('nt down in tlH' history of philosophy as a profound Ihinkt'r who look gl'pat pain:-< to dispeithe fabe notions
of his l'ontl'mporHril'S, gaVl' a pow{'fful imp(>tus to further philo~()phiral inqllil'Y hill 0('1"('(\ no positiv(' an~w('rs Oil the pit>a
~f ignol'<lII(,I'. Though SOCrHl('s':-< philo~ophy ' ...as Illainly conlUII'd to ('I hies alld hi." COllerl'tl' :;olutions wer(-' often one-sided
anti 1'\"('11 n'Hrlionary, li(' left a d{'ep lIlark in the history of
htlmall thought. The' appea l of his personality lies in its
siriking inlt'r.{riLy, th(' ullity of teaching and behaviour, knowlt'dgl' and cOllvictiolls. words aud deeds,
vidnals and thp state, pil'ty. the knowl('dgt' of how 10 bellav"
towards the gods. etc.

~
Ht'f(, we com('
wll'"< '".~ 'I,'1:-- k"DowI. (Iu('...;tioll'
"
. to the aurial
E' dg' and ho\\ must 011(' art III orlil'r to Iw hran' ' "'
A
co I'
t X
I S ' JIIS . pic ;I
. r. rl mg ,0 . ('flOP l?ll . ocrat('s taught that gUOOIH'!'!'
JlIstlC(, ('ons:st In obedience to til(' laws' to bl' I',,,,',,
tht. , . B
..'.
. IS 00 I'
ISl'rve
8\\ .. Y contrast. Plato s Socrah'.'i IS cOllvinc{'rl 0 t h
a,;d
good dprlv('s fmm unconditionsillnincsal divin\' intl'II\U t. t e
and that human reason must be in full agreement with

.~~e
humanI'
laws are based on tht'
I"rrome
II'
. divin(' law ' but nlay d""
dlate
ir:f'~r ~,~Im~rt.e pllrpos~ ~wlfIg to .tll(' illllH'd(>clion of human be. g,." , ,I'rt 0('(' tht' d,vlIu' law IS .'ililwrior to Ill(' human I' ..
,I 1,'1.0 atum of th(' lath'r i!i uol alway." and lIot n
,"< ~.\\'
pUllIshahl(>, whPr('as anv hrf'ak of II ,'r
".. ('~(S~,ual.y
rrt.rihl"lioll. By vi;llating I lIP
,., S.. Hllrs(' Vl'S'. lip to ('vii 'lIld .III("Llr ('.O( I' s plInishnH'nt ..
th~s~.r~~oes.~.va'yd(>ntlYI did nolmuh a rlpar dislilH'"lion 1)('lWl'l'1l
,
.. s alH IH'vpr pr('s' J I .
g
('81 ronclusil)!~ on ('itlH'r of Ihl'I~IS(:;'1 :I~ ar l.JIlH'lIt to it logiron for mist ont' alld if SO('fatps h: I I:. :lr~t \\H .... \\:as rlt'ariy a
pllOlI stru .... p 10 makt, Ollt) I., .. "II. rr.1 '''' chost'll II (as X('1I0JZ;1'r{'d Ihp I'X',",'",,,, 'I' liS \11 '\s. would h .. \,!' Iwrdly PII(]all.
,",. "" SUCI', S\,st(>11 n
.
fil\'in(' inh'lIigl'lIc(> It,d t:) til~:' .1:. II: s('("ond way invoking
own stand: tralJilio '1' .' JlIslllli"iltlllll of Ill(' philosopll('r's
'I I
na tIlSllilltlllllS ('"III" I
'a' II r rt'a"lIll
..,.
IIItOr IlII1S
I)(' rOrl' Ihl' jllll"t'ItIt'",-"
...
,.,
,~t
II
I . l\' lrought
,-,n('l'lIh':-< did no' <'PI' (lSI'
' , I )j> l'XISI
.',
I JII:-< I Y t Il'lr ('xish'llct'
f
.
'
rt'('ol.("lIist'd Ihp illll,or"",'
r"
.IIIJ,{ OrIlls of so('wl lifp: hl'
' {t' \I 's()(Td
111'1'1I ror dliZt'IiS to p' ,..
, ' III :-<.,',
I II " lilliS, sll'(':-<,,('(I till'
ilr IClpa\(' III II! ' . n'
r I
IIIUIIt II'd Ihat tilt',' "I" II I I '
I ,I llirs 0
I H' statl' ii,,
II
.-'tlllfotll'lrlr
'
l(' KOcis of tradi'tion, taught tl' t I. II I~'S 10 tlH~ fallwriand <lnd
b\" '1It'law. (>te. HnWl'Vf>f ht' a la JUstlCP cOlislst<>d ill abiding
JUII!.!I' 'If \'\'I'r~'Illllll.! illlt'l Ihi~Pt:.a~t'd to rt'8~()n as Ill(' supr('nle
II"P:-<IIOII 11lIlht' t'L1~ltllll'lrv f' \\,~s la1lla.1l101IIII 10 railing in
HPII~OIl and trallition Ile'v~r I:,rrll~ of :-<01' ICl I lih' and 'woI'ship.
rlillSI' of Snrratl's's connict ~,-\tl~l~ In~l,thl'r, allil lilt' chil'f
mocr,lIl'Y ~... a~ 1101 ~o fllueh his ~.I ,I It'l.nan slavl'-owning dppoll I 11--111 IIl1plil'Hlions or I,'" ,I h"(II~oJlI!I(.al ('oll\"icliou:-; as ,I",
S
S t'(If'lIl1J,{
, ,
. urrah's's
('Ihi!"al <I 01' " fIR' OWI'!'! '1
'
I I'
f '
l
II" "ll"b.lI~ Ih(' pnWl'f of r(,MOII to th ,:-< gfl'at attraction to till'
~~. ~I Ihly and t'\'I'n Ilt'c('ssii v of \hl,lII:prIYiu~ faith in tht'
f'\.flt a~,d 1(II.llllIct. Sot'ralt's is'(,(llivin t, llirmony of knowland -Rlmd('d I( ht, knuws th(' goud. lIis ~t~: tI~al Ollt' ("anllot be
1101 so mudl from Hit, Shf'pf disre a~duslOn Siems not only
lit
of ev{'ryday human
~~~~t'
'"
t;:'ii;:~"I\:~\,I(:;~'(~~(;:~('I~~I':.le~
It,. Socratic Sehoolfl
Under this heading traditionally come four more or less

di:-<tinct philosophical schools which arose aft{'r the death of
Socrates and traced to him their origin: the Cynics. Cyrenaics.
ME'garians and Elialls-Eritreans.(the latter being very close
I Xl
!til' function of n'<lSOIl in n'gi~tf'rillg "what was or is" ('lui

l;Jchu s II. Allli:;lh, fr. ',R) . This resulted in the on('-~id('d
to tlH' :\ll'garian!'). Th<,y w('r(' innut'lltiai during tilt' wholl'

till' fourth c(,lllury B.C. figuring prominently in tl
,,'
, I ,[,
1'1
d'
.
1(' con trover
~~ ),t \\(,(,~l alo an Aristotle. conlinu('d well into the fit'll ",stu' y~>rI()d and, piayC'd an important part in th(' form . eof slolflsm and.lscepticism. The logic of thC'ir hilo~(l a~lOn
n'a'<olllllg. howC'ver, had so much in common with
on thp OIl(' hand and Sorruticism on th(' other tha["[ P Ih'::lIICS
' ,W
I
I [ I "I
' I can ard
.
litH
~'rs
()()(
WlllOlit
them.
Vi('wf'd
in
a
bro'd
1"( .
1\
plll~()"oplllcni I.H"~Sp('cliv(', Socralirisfl] was a di::l('c~li~~t~o~
gM101i of ,SOpillstlCS, supe rseding and pr('serving"( .,
('
Illt'nlof "tfOIlY" within the framework of a broa 1,1 las.~ mo:lhsf)\l1tP, ,Nh.iral truth. Striving to cI('filH' the
,uIII ~hll'; llIfhc<ltt, th(' plJrpO.>.;I' of human lif(' which tl (" ~ h
1',1' hllH,~r,lf faill'd to do, tlu' Socl'atics :;ynth('sispd ,;~ '[L ('ac .
snrratl,C'lsm, ,IIHI snphi~Li('~, Tl'rminalill'g till' 1()""i~':I' do"wel,,''
IIlI'nl \I 'In("l('nt ('
k r I' I
,.. <
~.
p~OIIl1i()I1~ to S\lcr~t~~ p;::l ;g ll~nlUrlllt, Ih('~' proposNI sophi~lic
~idt'(1 thl'orir~ ovt'rl.'mph'b ,~~:a~ ant I( l':t'lolwd ~vhirnsical Oil'l\!'d~ IIf thl' ro('('~s cf 'l~I~II~g allf ,(,~~.IJ;,U!'I'rt1tlllg variou~ asI) 7"/ (~ - - T) cognItIOn, 1lI,1Il ~ rwtllr' and moralitv
(
If'
.. , ' oun( II'd by Antistht'ne~
"'
(r. H~ '~m~
I! Y"'cs.
[') ,I h' >.;cho)1
'
(,\\,I~
.,
, ' , \\ 1O wa~ '\ pHI'l f ('
,
'
au <It'1I.,,,t ,l(llllin'r of so.'.'t . I~ ,',I ,org'la~ <lIIdlalt'r h('cam('
1'11111 a ThracI'al1 '!'I""" lira ('s,
t trig thl' son of an Atil('nian
"
H'wasnt't'ld
1.1'1I~hip Af\('r dl'ath
S) .." ,0 (II It (-' to Ath(-'nian cill
RYlllllasiulll (If ("
,
(CI.ll('S ht found!'d a school in the
,\ nn~arg,,>.; \\llIch ' .
tilt' patnl!la~p of i~t'racl(' .... \ r 'I \\a~, suppos('d to h(' 111)(1('['
<Iud followt'r was Dio'g
'" ,n ~I~ hl'III'S s most pl'Ominl'nt pupil
_,
('n('s () :::iIllOPl' '\ w"nd '
I'YIIII"";11I, laiN a slo\'(' ('(to
, ; ' " ,rlng preach(-'f or
knO\\'rl, hul II(' dil'd .P ,gogut:", 1 h(' dat(' of his birth is not
roll"w~'rs Wt'rt> Cri\tl'~';:f ~i'(:lr(:;;(~~1 11\ ap~I'(),~ iIlH\t('ly 323. lIis
1I1I'IIlIrd ('Crllury B (' ,I, (" .' and h~s \\If(' Iltppa rchil.l. In
.
..,
It
.\ IIIC 1t,\t'l11
'
II n1It'I1I'" 011 :\IPIlt'dt'III1lS If'
r
,ng l'x(,I'('lsed a strong
Ih" l"I'('olHI ,lilt! tlr~I('('lIt;,'ri('~c~;, (~ ,()~l,st,h('n('s ancl T('I('s_ In
IUln ~tol('ISIH with ', . . ,., _' " ,q IlUISIl1 g l'uduallv lIl(-'r tT e(\
,.r~,, lllrd
I' t'l'uturi('>.;
- IS
\\1\ !'111l1hl' 'tl'
I"
" in "thl'
\
J)
,,',
,
l
11('
<
1
ylt'W:-i,
hut
I
'l' r' '"\IV" I
'
- , , , I \\I'lIllhrollgh <'\ P(,I
. I hi' innUl'IIC1' of Ih' (', ',,',
rlOI of I('mpora'
If ph.I"""phi(';d It'arhil1"'" _11'I,~,~_nlt s lS,lraf't'ahl(' in a l1ullLhel'
,
f / .
.,' I 'Pll'h'III~' 'I ,.
,
rlf~ I It' ( !I,,;csaml nlht'r ,\UCi1'1I1 Ii ,',s ~ OIClslII, 11\ thl' /,p(
{ h \ 0 IIJIIIU~. de
II r,lry .soureps, in Dion of
1
'
I: ht' ('lIlr;)1 idt'iI fl' [II,' [",
.\ lllt"
('Oil - ' I I !JII.y I, "or tlly wi~dolll whieh'has'llo ,,~I; 1'1 ' " IlwI philo..;IItllfeorlllg 'he I)rima(', ,_ .111 IIl'ah s tral'llhollght
MO" itllfl 1(-' 11I1IC'ptulll(,""
< ,
{)
:<('IIS" IlPl'I'l' I'
,
of fill
_,
II lOllS 111 kllowl
!'\.I~lilll! Ihin!.!>. th,'" "ilW
~('n~u~lislll and ('mpiricism of tilt' Cynics r('ducing knowltidgt

to de~('I'iption of thing~. '\ristotl(' wrote that according to thl'
foll()w('fS of Anlisthpill's it was impossible to determine th('

e5:;(-'II(.'(-' of a thingonp could only say what it looked like. For
instanct', it is actually impossible to explain what. silver is, but
il is p05sibl(-' to say that it is ilkI' tin (sl'e Arist. M('t. VIII, 3.
1043b). H('ne(-' tilt' r('j(-'ction of logic as "use\ess". On thl's('
grounds the' Cynies ~harply criticised Plato's theory of idea:;;
contending that Ih('y could :;;N' a man or a horse, but not
manness or hors('n('~s (Mullachus, II , fr, It ,4) , They taught
that a g(,Ill'l'al notion has no objC'ctive content and that each
thillg ml1~t ha\"(' its own lwlll(' d('noting this thing alon(',
This shows. rlrst, that tlw Cynic~ regarded experience
and 5('11S(' p('f('(-'plions as the only ~ource of knowiedg'. It i~
hard to ~ay if thl'ir vil'ws W('ft' akill 10 materialism which also
r('g'ilI'tis S(,J\Sl' P(-,IT('plio11S and ("q)('ri('nce as the starting point
of cognilion, bUl til(' anliidNlist. tr('nd of the Cynic school is
obvio\1s 'nough. St'conti, th(' Cynics :;;howed a strong tenti('ncy
to r('laUvism, Following Protagoras, the adherents of
:\nti~th(,IH'~ ('ontl'ntiNI that "there cou ld be no contradiction,
and almosl th('r(' could bt' no (-'rror" (Arist. ~Iet. 1\', 29.
102-'1 b) , Tlli.d, tht,y W('l'e OPI)os('d to applying a g(,ll('rai
notion 10 any illdi\'idual thing a:;; it all(-'g(-'dly led to a logical
contradiction, In thl'il' opiniol1, it wag wrong to say "tilt' man
is kind," sinc(> kindn('ss i~ kin(h)(-'ss and man ig man ... Thig
c1t'uriy d(,lll()n~tratrs t.1I(' narrowne!'os of Cynic sensationalism
which drnit's til(' nwaningfulness of gelleral concepts and is
incapable of grasping t.ht, unity of t.he gcneral, the particutar,
and the indiv idu al.
It. is not hard to SN' that. thl's(-' v iews underlay th(-' elhical
doclrinr of cyn ic ism whif' h was primarily a moral philosophy:
if thl' tru' (,<;srllc(' of a thing is rrpres(,llt('d by "its own
name," th(' lrtll' g:oodne.<;s is th(-, "own goodnes:;" of ('VN,\'
geparate individual. Thi.<; was the c(-,lItral idPa of till' Cynic
school which led to farrei\ehing con.<;('(1II ('I1C(-':-::.
All wrH(-'r~ on cynieism agrN' Ihal it!oO repr('gt' lilati\'('~
belonged to the lowe r strala of soci('ly by birth or by forc('
of circum~tances, AntisllH'lIt'~ was 1'111 illegitimat(', Diog(,llt'S
wa~ exil(-'d from Sinope for coining fal~(' mOl)(-'Y , Crall's
exchanged hi~ \\'('ullh for Il()\"('rty "i mpn'~nahl(' 10 fall',"
Hipparchia r('jt'ct('tI I)(-'r elandy ~uitors in favour of Crall'~ anti
s~ rhl~a~
(i~:~lo~~~I~~d~~
;)r
II
'1fl
137
left her" rich house,

Id ' Bion, 1 th(' son of II fn'pd",.,111 anl\
a prost] ute, was 50 Into S 3\"('I'Y togt'tlwr with h',
'
d om by S1leer Ilick: h,s
' ownp .. nndt' IS
all(1 got ,r('('
I' allBh
I:
before death.
All. of them
saw th(>ir task in (..,t~ti".\,',',Ill,
ll'lf
"
'".
.... '
g\h'l'
an
let III a sociC'ly Wlll'I'(> ')iO'" a 1 (aSSt',;
'I
I d preac h IIlg
. .Virtue,
.
Hive antagolllsllC Interests the concepts of virtuE' and \' i : '

,.llways
,"Morality has always bc('n
It has eIther lustdied the domination and tl
.).
of the r
1
1C IIlt('rests
al~bi\'al~nt.
cla,:;~ mO~~li:r.:
ru 109 c ass, or, ever since the oppressed class b

'
pO,werful. en~lIgh, it has represented its indignali~n a e~~II;~e
thiS dOllllnatlO1l and the future interests of th(> OP) g I '}
The C
'
. f
'\'CSsec '
ynlcs, III act. exp['cssed the indi gnation of tl
oPI~re:;sed
?own~rodden,
l~
and
but could not propose an wa
to Impro\:e their pOSition as there was no future for l~
~s
slave society.
elll In
In, i~s ethical teaching the Cvnic school conl"nded that
man s 'own
od" h' I
.
possible ind go d'
IS, lappllless consist~ in the maximum
('pen el~ce ~om the chances of the oute l' world
ft~~~~a~\~IY ~hreatenlllg hiS pr.op~rty, health, freedom and life
cienc~' 'W~~C~l ~~~leo~rodness I~ 1I11ler freedom and self-sufflbecoming indifferent ~obse ~lta.lIled ~ suppressing desin's and
the Cynics contrasted }~a~~I~e~~' of ether with the sophists
taught that all social institut"
to aw ?n(~ custom. Th<,y
tiona I, opinions are false and lions ar.e artifiCial and cOl.lvenvirtue and vice in the
. ead a\\ay from true hapPllless,
:\ahlr<' ha~ defined m~~~v~ntlOnal sense are but empty words.
rue
virtuous i'f he satisfies \ h
nee1s an.d his life can only be
qualities. The Cynics reso~m ane stripS off al1 his social
luxllfv and ex',
utely came out against wealth
pr(>ach'
.
I
'
.
. I' vagance
lIlg s ~mp e
li ving
an d moderate toil co nduciv ' h
stre ngth of body and so I e ~ t e peace of mmd and to the
rejected the traditional ur~ l ~~ honest poverty. They equally
cxisten('c of onlv one
d Ig\OUS teachings and asserted the
otll(>r gods as th'e prodgOt' t,\~ world's mind, regal'ding all
II
lIC 0
custom"
owever, the Cy ni cs press d tI . .
far. Together with extrav
e
le( appea l to " natul'e " loo
tal to ooth body and so~f~;~~e an( artificial wants detrim enrI'alll(>(>d:; distinguishing him a~ :Is.o .t l.lrew ove l'l)o81'd man's
and alt(>~lillg' to historical
c lvlltsed m('mb('I' of society
tr,rl(
. J IIPlIIselves
1
of all progr('ss
so . I b of mank'III d ,an(1 ('ven tried
. cIa
onds whatsoev(,J", common
Frf'tjprirk Fn"pl,
OL
.
"
. 1-/
,,1u"rtn~.
p. 117.
Mc('ncy inrlu, ve l>i"gf'IIP~ ("tht' Dog") wa!'o not shy of relicving nature in sight of a ('fowLi and, according to Diogenes
Laertills, had a "haoit to do ('vprything in public, thl' works uf
Oemctl'rand of Aphroditf' alih" (Ding, L. VI, 69). Crate:' and
HiPP<.lrchi<.l scandalis('(\ thf'ir fpllow-citiZE.'lls by op('niy
making love in til(' city sqlHlre. Th(' Cynics took pride in thpir
freedom from society and ('on tempt of all conventions, held
a sharp tongu<, in high esteem and wen' not slow to r('sort to
foullanguag<, and cast abuse at anybody-the reason why the
word "cynic" has acquired a defl1litely negative meaning in all
European languages. Yet the same Oiogenes bitterly resented
the existing social order IInder which people competed in
pushing one another into a ditch instead of comp<'ting in
goodness and kindness. lie ridiculed noble descent and glory
calling them a cover of vicco He sacrificed to the gods a louse-the only benefit he received from them ... He was a tender,
considerate and tactful tutor of the children in his charge
who returned him great love and affection. Crates was said
to be a "kind sOlil" and an "opener of all doors," enjoyed the
reputation of a "philanthropist," a lover of people.
To account for these sl'etllingly incompatible qualities, we
must take into consideration the social standing of the Cynic!'
and bear in OIind that cynicism was essentially the philosophy
of the lower strata of society. The CyniC was in fact an outcast
who had no place in society and, for his part, turned his
back on it. The fruits of civilisation and enlightenment were
not for him. He made a virtue of necessitv and returned to
a state of nature, living like a savage or an a'nimal. The Cynics
had no future and the sum total of their life was universal
nihilism. In this co nn ection one cannot but draw a paral\l'l
between cynicism rind cer tain ideological trends of the twentieth centur y bl'ollght to the su rface by the crisis of modern
capitn lism. Indeed, the past few decades provided a numbcr
of strik ing illustrations to the stock phrase "extrClllPS meet":
righteous indignation against bourgeois civilisation has not
infrequently assumed outrageous forms, such as vag ranc y,
parasitism, dcbauchery. addiction to drugs, t('J"I'OriS]ll, and
become no Icss destructive and (lilli-humanistic, than the evi ls
of capitalism it is dil'ected against. There may well be new
Diogenes es , Cralcses and I-lipparchias among the modern
extremists ... Their fCI'YOlII'S I(';ld 1I0whel'c and are as steril(' as
the ostentat ion s bravado of the unci('nt Cynics.
The Cynic school came into being in th(' epoch when it wa::;
still, impos:o;ibJe
to'OH'fstcll
lh(' bo,,,,.I,.,,[."I'
,
'
..
.'
~.l\P-OWl\ln
('t~.:\ sin\{' "regamlng Id
IllS freedolll, h(' it !'\'I'li II
I g so(,]
Iroll/{lU'
C('SS [III upflslIlg.
cou
only
'II
. bl'COIll"~ "' S,I",1\ I'-OWIU" sucI
a,Sl,ro k-(' 0 [ I lu.ck a f,feE' Illan could always hecoIIH' a sl- f: 'y
\\as
the casf' with
DlOgenes
captur('d h". II1(' plratl'"
. ,'\1.',
, ,
[
..
'
Th.as
\\as
'", II, pr"'tm
I"' r lr('
.. no vway out
d 0 1Il1s \'ICIOIiS circlc ('\""Ill
,~,
h
SPIrit, rl un er thE' contemporarY s()ci-II cond'r '. I) t e
Ilia I ~reedom could not but turn' i;lto <clOWlli:lIOl~S Illlel,I(>('.
In POIIII of fact, the universal nihilbm of the C~ ! a.lIp('rIS~.

\"Ny ('a.sy for ~Il sorts of \"ulgariscrs to pass frOI;lni~ft I;l~d(' It
to ~ord,d pronlgacy, from inner fr('('dom to the freed) I(:eals
<;oclal duties and human bonds in general from tI
om rom
customs
unrestricted animal
of
~a~.s ~n<11
inJfvf~~!fmpt
lasti~~e:~~ee~~Stot~I~/~~I;;:os~~J ~[a?:eI~j~itl~1!1~le~1 stl:ong I:~~
and of the Roman Empire.

Cille states
(2) The Cyrenaics The C
.
I I
Cyt;.f'lIe in ;'\Jorth Afri~a the yr('ta~c sc 100 ~ot its name from
tiPPII,<: (born c. 435
C )n~ lv e t~WJl of Its fOllnd(>1' ArisCynies, thl.' C
.
'.' an( l IllS followers. Like the
edg-e. but in (~:i~a~~::t~~~fd ~~t need for theoretical knowlthe p~illciplt' of pleasure ~r I ~<;dhy' they proceC'ded from
hedolllsm), The C ren '
e one (whence the term
e
Ari\;tippus by h,/pu a'i Asch?OI was represented, besides
,pI
ntlpater A"
,
'
rete
and
her
son
Aristipp
,
,
'
I'IstlPPllS
s daughter
A
pupils 1I(,(1(><:ias a"d A' ,lIs,Junlor, a~ w{'ll as by Antipat('r's
"1
1'>"
Illl1c{'rlS an I A"
,
'.
(
rlstlPllU!i Junior's pupil
1 l(>odorus the Athei!it.
Till' Cyrenaics were aeti
'
centu,rics, B.C. It is practicalr i 111 th,l.' fourth and, third
ronlrillUtlon of individual phil y, n:posslble to deternllne the
of lhe schoo\, yet there . O!il) WI'S to thf' genf'ral doctrine
ryn'naicism owes to A " ,IS good rl.'aS(Hl to bf'lieve thaI
,rlstlppliS
' I{'a t Ilat men, Jikp the
CI','tzeus of a besieged
't
. th'"'- I(
e
"('lIsations of affections , Y', 'I r{' constantly harassed by their
IHI , not pxl('rnal ollJ'pc\.! W h
AIC 1 only
' rene c I man "~ Inner slates
CVr(' "
"
. s. cconllll" to S , , L '
"
,
1I,\lCS i'lsserted that the ff
,'"
' {'x tiS l~mplrlCIJS the
amI wI'rp infallihll.' butof tl~(' ~tl011S ilIonI.' wl.'r(' app rch~;\ded
tlOn~ 1wn(' was ~Pllr('lH'tlsibllll\gs ~hat had cHus{'d the affec"~dll'r{'r froll1 v('rti"o of " ' I' (> Ot' Infalliblc_ "just as 'ho
!lIOI r
,'"
J' UIH tCI.' rl.'C{'i
.'
.
v{'s a ye l lowish impr('s' I rom ('V(>rylhlll<Y and 'hn "', IT
1111,1{" I
d
1'>'
,- .... I ('n'r fr
I
.
II
H d( ',~('( " an
hl' who P"SIH'S his ('v~, .' I ,om op llhalmia se(>s
III I IU) f' IInpr('ssioJ1 ... And in tili'" !-OI( t Wayi'. gNs IlS it w('rc
I 'rrlng about Our own A.ff(' ,.
,WHy, wlu.'rt'as w{' H're 'Ill
c lOllS, as r~'gards. tl11.' {'''t('rnal r('al
<
'"
objl'd WP 01111'1'1'; ,\Jill wll!'rl'a~ tit.' fortnpr ar{' appreh('lIsihh',

till' latter is IlIlIhlPPI'I'IH'IISlhlt, th(' soul bf'lng far too wf't'k to
disrt'rn if' (Allv, :>'l<1lh. VII, 1~JO1!1;).
LHh.'r,ltoW('\'('r, IIII' Cyrt'IHlinlllIOdiiil'd litis vif'w and linkprl
ensatioJls witlt titt' inllrr motioll of thr OUf' who expprif'nces
them: ('WII and cairn motion givt's plt>asure. jerky and
rough Illotion C<lUSt'S suffl'riltg. w\tt'rpas thp ahsence of any motion or very slow motiol1 giws Iwither pll'astlre. nor pain. ~ft'n
sl.'ck plell~lIr(' and strivf' to avoid suffering-- this is thl;' critf'ri
on of their hl'haviour, Jlow(>vE'r, lh(' Cyrenaics did not con
sider the pursuit of pleasure to \1(' thp goal of man's life, as
this would turn man into a slav{' of his own desires. The stale
of true happiness can only be attained by a wise man who does
not let himself be swept away by the rush of his passion and
knows how to control it. Wisdom thus consists in winning
pleasures while standing above {'njoyment as its master. According to Diogenes Laf'rtius, Aristipplls "('njoyed the favours
of Lais ... To those who censured him his defence was, I have
Lais, not she me; and it is not abstinence from pleasures that
is best, but mastery over them without ever being worsted.,."
(Diog, L. 11,75). A wi~e man should thus take the world as he
nnds it, taking up such pleasures as come across and enjoying
good things in life, bul never being at their mercy. Diogenes
Laertius wrote that Aristipplls "bore with Dionysus when he
spat on him, and to Olle who took him to task he replied. If the
ftshermen let thcms{'lves to be drenched with sea-water in order to catch a gudgt:'on, ought I not to endure to be wetted with
negus in ordl.'r to take a blenny?" (Diog. L. II, 67).
As WI.' st:'e. Cyrcllaic liberty, "t:'qually remote from sovereignty and sel'\'itude" and e"alted as "the surest road to happiness" (Xt:'lloph. l\1t:'mor, II. 1. 11) turns out to be a road of
opportunist wisdom leading to open conformism and acceptance of any pOWl' I'S that be nnd any conditions of life. Tht:' later
Cyrcnaics plahorating the doctl'inr of plt:'asltre arrived at very
diffN{'nt conclusions, T IlC'odorus the Ath('ist, for instance,
taught that the bas is of mo ral behaviour is not the enjoyment of individulIl pleas u res, bllt a stablE' feeling of g ladness:, the good (l nd the evil ,are not p\{,llsure and suffNing.
but JOY and sor row, Joy 1<; brought about by wisdom,
and sorrow by Illc~ o.r )tll~g{,ll1('nt., Pleasures and sufferings
as such art:' .SO,ntt:'lilltlg'. IlldlfT('rcnt. fhe joyful unscrupulollSo~ss of Arlsll~pUs_ glvt'S way h('J'(> to calculating sob('J'IIltndcdn('ss With Its rathN dubious implications. Thus
I,
Theodorus
.. t PH'S(,rll"
.
.
. d was quoted as. savinO"
. ' 1">.that ''111 "',
(1,1
aft' b ase on common oplIlIon whJ('h is nothing {'I:-it'
. s
lhe cons('nt of fools. Thert" is
11lIuhhl,
~,
,.,rrracehd a.s 'SUI.' I"
1. a wise man, ac{'ordin,r
., ' rlt orI dis.
m . I
d'
,.. {
H'llt OI"IIS
a~ sea an . commit . ad~'It('ry cHId sa('rill'.~t'. if s :'
aets are. condUCive
to Ills JOY
. ('th
. III- h.
I
. . Hefe thl' C.~ rl'I\<lIC
COIll:!'! ,cry C ose to the moral tlwory of the CYnic..; "I(,S
atheism of Theodorus was ('videnth' of tI, :
,. 1 hI'
and b '1 d d
.
l(
S<BIl(' anill
.. ?I e own to rejecting traditional
Ilolyth '. ,..:
rldlclllmg the believers.
('Ism .\11(1
. The dialectics of hedonism brought the C
..
nothin(~
d)lrec~
th~ln
th~r~n<~'~~ ~o the
I ' . I P 11 oso~hy.
negation of the initial postulate of
I r('ssmg the doctrine of pleasure to its

Hegesias
denied
life any value "'1(1' endg,elu
..
.
e( upcOI~cluslOn,
III op
is unattainable as
lire appears a goO~ ~~\I:l~ at~ a tI}~o~Ollllc~nnhot bl~t share it,
on y, t e wIse man is
indiffe'rent to it H '
.
.
egeSlas concentrated 0 t l '
.
of pamless death and earned him If tI n 1(> a,tlractlOllS
advocate of suicide
se
le reputation of an
b~~~~~s;~~e~'~~\P~rf~ct, ha~pines!'
t~~
(3) The Megari~ns The M

.
by Euclides of Megar~ a f' e:arla~1 school was founded
During the war betwe~n ;~~n an fol!ower of Socrates.
Megarians were prohibited t: v~n.~ ~n~ hIS nati~e city the
and Euclides, disguised as 0 151
t lens on pam of death,
into the city to listen to Sa hetaera, would steal at night
teacher many 01 h,'s Alh ?cradt~s., After the death of the
eman Isc lples
d
e
most
prominent
or
Eucl'd
'
move
to Megara,
Th
Diodorus Cronus and
I es s followers were Eubulides
l
till the mid'dle of the
d The Megarian school
dissolved in scepticism.
Ir century B.C. and gradually
a~tive
sn
&~'
wa~
The philosophical views of the M

.
not o nly by Socrates b t l
egal'lans were innuenced
y
Gorgias. The Megari~nsuwea sOl.b th~ Eleatics and sophist
', I ..
re s Igmatlsed
because of lh 1 d
as squabblel's and
d111<1 tl('ctlclaIlS
.
e on ness fo
..
I
H'lr teaching they combined
~ ~rlstlC
arguments.
knowledge of the general with t~~eESocl~tlC demand for the
til(' ~ens u ous and the rational tI
1... lea~,c contrast b(>twecn
t~(' unity and indivisibilit of Bl~ p ur~hty of "opinion" and
hllclidl's hpld that being \~aR
ClOg. l'Ollowing Parmenidcs
<11111 moliolll(,:-;.s. However, be~;e, ~ln~~I~C'r01I('d, ~1I1P('l'i:-:;hahl~
roclIslIIg his alll'nlion on the g
dlS('ljlle of Sorral('s and
ifl"nlifl!'(1 th(' good with b('ing :atl;r~ Oft th(' good, l~u~".lps
n( (ec O1I'('d "that til(, gOll.J
I ,
nllP Iholluh ( tllpl! by lI1all)' II<IIIIPS, ~fIIlll'ljllll'" WiSflolli.

';ollwtilllt'S (;~HI, alld again Illilll! (1I01l~) and:,;o fill" (Ding. I ..
'II. 100). Carryilll; nil Iht' spirit or Sonttlps'!< Ip;!ching'.
EIIf.lidl,g !II<lilllaillld Ih'lI Jltllhill1,{ f'xblpil b,,~jdp~ tIll' (hl'~
(;0011 Hnd Ihal p\-'il oPl'uSl'l1 tn il was nOIlI'xistl'nt.
As !'t'g-ants Ihl' pillralily of IJUIIII'S dplloling till' g'flOrl, EII!'lides was oPPosf'd to 1I11' IIS(> of paralh'\ concepts on the
grounds that if til('), W('I'I' similar il was bl'ttf'r to deal with
thc original sllbjp('t" 1111' g'oUlilwss, r<ltlwr than with what
resembled it, and if tlll'Y wprJ' dissimilar, tlH' ('omparisoll
was altogetlwl' irr('l!'vant and mislpading. This particular
instancc exeJllplili!'d til(' g('nNal !lPg'ali\!' altitude of Euc'
lides to comparison <\s til(' arglllll(,lIt from !'.imilarity (~ee
"liS
Diog. L. II, 107).

The Megarian!'. were famous in antiquity as tht' authors
of numerous paradox('g, Some of them were essentially
id cntica l with Zeno'~ puzzlps- -such art' the aporias again~t
motion, the paradox('s of "The Heap" (ant' grain does not
make a heap; adding one grain doe!'. not make it either-hence.
a grain heap is impossible) and "The Bald Head" (pulling
out a man's hair does not make him bald. so baldness hi
impossible). Others WNe rather cheap logical quibbles
intcnded to deceive and confus(' th(>ir opponents in a dispute.
such as, for" iilstance, the sophism "The Horned One":
having accepted the premis(' that one possesses what one has
not lost and having denied any loss of horns, a disputant
is baff1ed by his opponent's cOllclu~ion that he is a horned
one. The argument here is baser! on a deliberate di~tortion
of the premise relating only to something already possessed.
A number of anci('nl paradoxe~ are in fact examples of false
I'easoning violating the laws of logic.
Of far greater significance. however. are true logical
puzzles, stich as "The Liar" 01' " The Veiled Figurc" credited
to Eubulides: til(' rll'sl one I'N1Uil'es a dcrlllite answer to thl'
ques tion whethC'l' the man who ~ays "I am lying" is spNtking
the truth or not. A positiw> answer would contradict the
meaning of the man's stlltemcnt who confesses thaI he is
lying. The negative answer would again be wrong since Ihe
man admitting that he is t('lling a lic is in fact speaking the
truth. Hence, thc puzzle appears to be insoluble. A similar
difftculty arises in the second paradox. Electrp. knows her
brother Orestes, but does not know that the veiled man in
front of her iR Or('sles -so, she does not know what ~h('
knows. Such logical or semantic puzzles reOecting hiddea

conlradiclioDS in the very pattern of human thought exerciaed
&be minds of many philosophers ever since the ancient timsL
The true ;ovsstigation into their Dature did Dot start till the
end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twenti.ucenturies when the set theory revealed antinomies which
tended to undermine the very roundation of mathematics' and
were similar to tbe .. Megatian" paradoxes.
Speakiog of tbe "sophisms" of ancient thinkers, we in fact
me'D three different kinds of statements:
(t) Dialectical contradictioDs in the concepts of motion,
unity and multiplicity. indivisibility and divisibility expressed
in the aporias of the Elestic school and used by the sophist.'!
and the Megarians in argument.
(2) Logical and semantic paradoxes containing latent CODuadictioos which are to be resolved. These paradoxes (antiJtOIDi.) He inevitable in the development of any tbeory and
&heir emergence calls for a serious revision of its principles
ad even rejection of lOme premises thaI. seemed at first
jpOOIlteetable.
(3) Sophisms proper, i.e. subtle fallacies intended &0
deceive. In hiB treatise 0,. SophUucal Refutattoll8 Aristotle
.bowed tbat 8O.phisms are bared either on a wrong use of
verbe._ e~prJJ! . IOns (~omonym8. amphibologies, inco" eet
ao:"blDation or l8~ratlon of words. ambiguities in pronuncia'toIl and grammatical forms). or on the violation of the rules
.. lotie. (.... Arial. De ooph. eleneh. l80ab).
~hiatry 10 the broad 180 therefore. can be described as
a ~Iberate
Dl8nip.ulat.ion of 100ically fallacious argumen.,
al
la&!c and aemantic paradoxea and dialectical contradiction!
derllD~ to foree. the o~P:Dnent into adopting an obvious
abeu.nbty. Theoretically, It IS bared on a subjective. ooe-sided
.ppb...ion of tho dialecUcal IIexibilily of concepts. [0 the
..rrow reD". ~b~try conailt.e in the Ole of logically
tlal'I6U.... reUODme IDtended to coDfuse the opponent. iD
a 4"pute aDd pin the upper hand over him by any meaDS
...., 111m nit,ble. Such dispu&ea ia .neient Greece weN
:l7~dWI~.~at al~~mic ~d ..the r IEOtl. &0 ridicule aDd crude
"AWe alt." ..ten for from
.......... . . _ n . . - . TrodiIIon hoi.... (or
- -0......
.., ft la ,
hat Diodorus Cronus died of

in,tsnco. I
d b SUlpo and derided hy
be~!~U~~g~:iste~ol~ical Viewpoii:.r
ften perform the function of a peeu
o . ed to test current concepts for
:~~~:esses and stimulate their c!~~lio!
Referring to the concept o~ po8!lbll~tUhl,,!,
tant role in his system. Aristotle polD
ou
ans rejected this concept on the ~ounde that
only when it is Bcting. and wben It
Mel. IX. 3, I046b). This quo~tion
paraphrase of tlie famous sopbls~ of.
was intended to prove tbat nothing IS
what actually happens.' By. contrast,
identified possibility with the lOner
completely disregarded the external
any development possible if it was in accord
potentialities.
. of the
Stilpo. the last prominent repre88~tative.
school .howed close affinity wih Antiphon 10
thought and also held that. i' wu eUODBDiUB 10
thing of aoother. Hence. be oonslde
n Ind
" man is kind" or "the man Is a geD
'era1n
man" " kind is kind" and "geDerai is gen
Col"l. 23. 1119) . However. con~ry. ~ the
rejected the general i~ favour of the I~dl,:~ualt the
asserted the general and denied the IndiVidual .
As regards the Elian-Eritreian school (Phaedon
Menedemus of Eritrea) and orthodox S.ocra~cs
Aeschines (the former known as the hlstonan
of such Socratic treatises a8 MemorabUi4
Socrates) they were no~ di~tinguished for
made no significant contribution to the
':!.\,
of tl](' phy~iololot('r~'
"principll'~" of .
till' unin'l'~t'
.
"'\'1 II (1,\. IIlall_.
\"{' Ir .d.C'termmalr. .:;ubstanc('s.
Thl' 1ll,,,lru.-;t of ~tI('h III"
. I
I
.
.
'
lnnp ""
gre\\ 11\ proportion to I H'II' Illcrea..;lIl<'r
,I,\!'I'sll\"
..
1"1 Illllllhl'r 'l!lfl
<
,.0 t Ilat b011
and
.. '
I Ih(> phliosoplH'rs .
. tht' - plIhlic lill'dl'
' ~ ('arnt'
to r(>J;!an
I f 3" prQ(I IICts of rI('h lIlHt"ltwtioll
, . ,\"',.,.,
. nIl(' I
1 III
. I tWill
I hl.',m;Hln~r, n my~h-" rather than,~" ,-;olln<l ,,('i('lltiru' nolio""
Till pr('\-~lilll~ allltllcl~ to I,h(' P()~ltl\"{' philo",ophif,ll do('t['ill{,~
of the tl,l1H:' was epltom,,,e<1 III Ari..;lophan('s'" immo 1,1
('omrdy (loud,';,
r ,\
I~O\\,(,VN, tilp scepticism that follow('d
r.rth c('ntul"
('nlt~ht('I.ln1('nl \\'a~ not a hlind alII'Y. but a sl('pping stOIl(' t~
it r.H'\~
of philosophiral thought. The' problrtlls faring
rI":
philosoph)
could b(' tacklE:'d along two liIH'S. On('tlw

ma/prlfl/!sl il/H' - Was r~pr('~('rrt('(1
IIY ])(,l1lo('l'itus who
('onstrllPd tI~E:' \\:orld as an In fllllt(' IHu lt itlld(' of <ltoms stripP{l1
I all.
character istics
('t{'rnally Itloyirrg i:1
Tl. P}~ . P<l~(,. T~e oth.l'r ... th{lldpalu;llc lillI' was l'{'pt"('s('llt{'d
I" Ilato. \\ h() dlal.ccilcalh tralls('('IHi('{i thl' cOlllradidions of
~,I~(' p~~'~l~JIlS phYSical doc.lril~l'.'j by introriuring till' (,OIlC('pt of
.Icil'a as th~ e~s('[\ce, prrnclplE:' and law of a class of simihr
"'l'n~1l01l'" objl'rb. \\'ith DelOocritus and Plato W(' l'nlpr
pNlOri nf rla""'lcal Grl'f'k philosophy.
~f
21~alttatl\(,
al~d
tIll'
PART TWO
r.LASSICAL GREEK f'IIILOSOPIlY
In Lieu of inlrodu("!ioll
ThE:' heyday of (~r{'ek 1houghl. its das!-'ica! pl'riod jll!-'tly

re~<\rd('d as 0Ill' of lIll' 1I10si gloriou;; ppochs in the (,lItir('
history of philosophy falb 011 Ill(' fourth century B.C. which
is nrarkl'd by a profolllHi crisis of til' pql~s ~pl('nl.al1~ ~QII~l)"('
_of \,-I"l'.h..lliMti('al and sociailih', Thl' cn(i of the Pe!opOl1m::... ian
\\:ar did not hrilll! IWilec 10 lil'lIas, Th(' counlry wa:< drained
of hlond by t'lIdlt'ss llIililaly l'"\p('ditions sent to subdue
di~~t'nli"nl or :--imply disgruntil'll 'alli(':<' and d('\'astated by
the Corinlhian. Eiran. ~ocial and Sacred wars, The relalion~
betwe(,n IIcllas Hnd foreign ;;tate;; wert' l'"\trell1('ly unslabll'
dul' 10 II\(' pHIlicipalion of h'n Ihou~and Greek nIl'rcenari('s in
Cynl;;'s ('ampaign ;Ind lhrir ~Uh~('qul'nl 1"t'lrl'at aCl"M:< A~ia
l\lInor. till' r'\pt'(lilion of Agol'silatls. tilt' P('I":<ian intl'rfC'rPtH'('
in (;n'l'k affairs rpsuiting ill till' impo:--itinn of till' Kings Pl"acl"
and a 1It'\\ subjuga ti on of (;["('('k ,oloni('s in ,\sia \1inor, TIl<'
forlllalioll (llId rapid di~so!\1lion of l'\('r nl'w leagut';;
(Chnlcidia ll , HOl'olian,. Tht'ssalian, lilt' Se('ond ,\tlll'nian
Co nfl'd(,l'i\ ('~r) alt('slNIIO 1111 ill('n'ilsing Il'nd(,llc~' toward:< unili('alion whieh h()\\'{'\'el" pIo\,('d UIHlhll' 10 \Hl,yail on'l" the
sepa ralism of in(livilillal polisl''', This ill\('l"o(,('inl' tIlilitat'~.
polilte;!1 and diplolllilti(" 'wilr nf all againsl all' ('ould not
hut I'IHI in a (li:<1Ish'r for illdl'IH'IHil'nl (~r('t'k sla\t>~: in
Iht' ~la('(.d()lLian king Philip ps\ahli:;lll'ci his heg"t'[Uony OWl"
Iht' 1I1'11l'lIi(' alliann',
:\() h's~ si\.!nifrl'illli was IIH' illll'rnal slrih' in t~I"('l'k eil\'
sl,lh':<. F"I'IIIH'1I1 ,hang!'s of (Il-mocl"ali\" and oligarchic
go\('rllllll'lIl;; l'l'slIltiug" lan!l'ly 1"1"(1111 tIll' illh'.nilling pn'dn
a;n
II 7
II
\
of dl'IllOl'ratit'\tht'u,,;- 01. 0 IIl.!'an'llI S

.mirHlllt
I I innlll'IU'l'
I'
,Ill{ (('Pt'IH IIIg 011 lhl' gl'ographie pw\imit\ of I',' . part.
~tat('
to 111(':0;(, ('('nln'~ of atlradioll iI, ,I,' ('
kIlls III' that
' .,.
I
t
.1'1'," WII['II k
. . lilt' "on. I
t
,(",t
,IHI '('I 1(''-;, lim ('r ron~lant "II"""
. . '1'1,'t ,I(
tlH' "Iaughll'" til' '" U. 1'1111 Iris

unfoldl'tl Hgain ...;' tilt' bark ';IIlIShuh'lIl of
('II IIllllntlllg'. <1::- a rutl',
l)olltl(,l.1~ op~on(,lIts
in
phO'ht of tlH' m',..;,,"

"" I ,. r
grnulHI of th.,
. . ,!'-,(1I011lI'I'IIIIt'II'11
) ( l'stl.lbltshnH'nt of a tvnnll\" th., I
11 ~ l't to tht
<
,I
l{'C<lIIH' II !"pi!"ll r
g-on'rntlle n l in thl' fourth ('('!lIllI'" S' ,"I,
.
'
onH IIf
..;uccumb to the rule of hrH't' ".1," .' It I ~ wa." tht' 1i!'!'1 to
I
I' .
. < 0 soon lWg'1I1 t
I .
t It' po ltl('al S{'('Il(' in till.' wholr of C "
1'1'
() (Om lll ale
fourth cl'lltury knowll in hislor\' as ' ~,~~~,l'A 7 :l' :yran!~y of the
W,I~ hrollghl aboul by the di.;; i!; , .. ' g( 0 till' ,I yrallt~"
and till' contradictiOilS of tll,'", I,lg l 'll tHHl of I,ht' 1)OIIs s\'s lf'1ll
,
. d
- , Ie ~ a\'t'-0\\1I111<7 ' " '
plopt!'rlll' , cJa::-ses ..::Iro\'''
to " S,=" "I 'III 0['( I PI' to ~ SN
II\{'
~..
,I lt'ly:
1I
and retam their wealth and
r i\'il' I . c~Jt) Ie yoor
wh{'rea~ the poor looked fol'\\" ~
(g{'(
SOC ial POSltlOlI,
would h('lp them in the
a i d t~ a st rong lIlall \\ ho
('con.olllic and social ri h~~ll~ l e a~~ m ::-l tilt' ric h fo r .lht'ir
soldlNs, banked 0 'hg
e l~ I. ants, often pI'ofesslOn al
n
e
'n
I I
I
co .... tradictions between the Ie
,(
a\,('( on the
with one 01 [hem, now with-' agues oJ .~I l ~s la t('s 5 1, ing now
patronage of Persia 0 '1 'dnother or even r('sortl ng to the
"
~ .\ ace on,
Th
e t) ranllles of DlOn\'<;iu<; I
d D'
,
,
Jason of Pherae' Th
'I' .
an
lonyslUS II III Sicilv,
_
111
essa y the
. P
Euboea, Corinth and S

'
I coups In hocis a nd Loc r is,
Clearchus in lIe raciea p~Y~,n , t Ie. ty ranny of P la to's pupil
tle,,",cendants till 289 B.C n rl~:i wh ich ~v~s I~l ai nta i n('d by his
'orruption of traditional . ~'t" ~erd a VIVid Illu s tra ti on to the
...;o-called barbar,'an ,noPo ' IIC,a or lll S in Gn:'ece, whel'eas t he
na rc He- . C
,
SOllth-West As,'a ",
r
lS In
yprlJS and Car ia in
11 ellellislic
.
" Vll
no r oresha
I
I 'III a wa y the latel'
states
in th
," (OWN
'
e a nCient !\ea r I~as t
Th e PI
..
e Opo nn eslan war a nd tI
"
po
lilical
unrestsharpe
ned
t
l
'
.
w
ensu
in g social a nd
(
)
slaw-ow ning society alld \~~~dIJlle ~II ~ 1 con t rad icti ons of G['t'ek
and the poo r. Attica w I' 'dellN I w ga p bNw('(, 1I t h(' ri c h
war
as C3 1 was
~ , Pe1oponn('<;u<; b,' tI,e
I " te hY II1(' I' (' IOpOll nesiall
f pan,lII{J n(I as and ' P I ' Iorlill lI all W'lf"
, 11 ...; of
,11l( ('.\ 1)('( " 1110
III
. '
e 0P I ( as, Bo('o l"
'
Imerom; IIlcursions of tl S
.
la was ravagNI hv
rUlllerl and the fie lds layl~ , pal rbatts. Nc, The p('asa nt:-l wl' l:e
.
f eso at( Tlu' s' t
,'I~"ra
,.,' va Ie d by Ihe rf!turn
of f '
." 1 lI a t 'Io n was furl hl'r
('olollisls banished fron'
lrlll ('r ('x il(,s a nd 111(1 now (I f
('II' anci::; I
I'
ponPllts and left without an I" j" . )Y"t U' II" pol il i<-a l op'
y Ive Ihood. I h(' positio ll of f l" ('('
1'('0110111 1('
.!"<
,I, .
".
arli",III', Ino, WI' "I(',.tlilv .\dl'flll' Itllll{,

lhrv \u'n' 1113hll'
10 ~1,lIId rUlllp"'lli,," "itt. I.lrR" la\I' OWIII II{ elllprpll~'~ ~hill
III'!!"" 10 1III1'rj.!1' al II", 111m Ilr Ihl' fl)llrlll 1'('111111'\ 11.(',

TIH' illllll)\'l'ri ... IIIIII'11I or Ih., I'" 1",'III~ ,Hid IHlII,lin,lft'lml'lI
<lllIllhl' 11,"'I"I'a"-" of IiiI' p"l'dlil'lilll{ powI'r of Ihp IIIB"';"jI''' ..... "111
sidl' h~' sid .. wilh thl' 1I111'r+,,,dt'II\t'" at'('ullIul;lliuli of '"lIl'ital
in tht' h;lllll...; of IIII' w('althy all "illd~ ,1 "'"ppli('r~ all,1
contractor...;, ;trlll"'; IllillIllr .. dllrf'r~, .!Ih;IH),"'I" '. "Iatl' unil'i .. I."
and thl' lik('. Thi~ J1rOf'I'~" of wl'alth l'nll"f'III!"ati,," W<lS pilrll~'
allri\Jlllabll' to tIl!' illflllx of 1)I"Pf"iolis 1II1'11IIs Ihilt litl'rall\"
nooilNI th(' (;n'pk Inurk"l: UIP I't'r~ian "';lIh~i(lif's WI'rl' sili;1
to haH' 1I010unll'(1 to un I'lIf1rmOIlS SlIiU of ;-)O(j() tal{>lIt~ (ahollt
180 tons of gold), tI\(' Attll'nian OWII r(>"Ollr"t''''; wpn' <lhnllt IiOOf)
talents And 1IH' allips paid <lllIIlIillly WOO talrnh ill taxI'S.
On top of that in :~51i 1IH' Fo('ian~ "I'iz(>fl the COllnt!t'ss
treasures of th(' tt'llIp!t, of Apollo at Dl'lphi and welted down
many of it~ \'aluablt's . .\('('(Ill's"'; to say, all tht',,(, fllnll"
concentrated in Iht, hand" of a few and ~an' a powprful
impel liS to slave, land and grain trade, banking and insuran('j'
bU$iness, mortgaging, pt(',
The conti nuolls growth of productive forc('" which wa" onl\"
retarded but not stopPNI by tIll' raging war" railed f(l'r
expansio n of commt'rcial and political lies betWt'('1I sUtlt's
which felt mo re than pver before conslrifted by Ihe narrow
confincs of their territories. The (",reek world ~\a ... entNing
Ihe s tage of developed slavery and showt:'(1 a clear Irelui
towards larger a nd mort' powerful economic and political
all iances. Slave labou r hecame the drcisi\"(> factor in Crrrl'"
economy and sla\"etrad(' acquired (,1l0rmOIiS proportion...;.
Thousands upon t ho u salld~ of skilled labourt'rs from \"ariou!"i
Grcek cities were taken prisoner and sold in to slawry during
interna l stl'i fc. T ogethe r with till' "ba r barian" ~h\\'es (Carians,
Th r3cia ns, Scy thia ns), they W('rt' used in handicra rt~ and
" cons tr uction, wOl'ked in min l's, ('lc. T he '" free", but poor
sections of the popul ati on had pl'ac lica ll y no choice in life:
the young able bod ied nu'n jOilH'd the mC'fc(' [l ary force a nd
lef t the ir homes in search of fMIIIIH', the aged olles and till'
wome n hi rl'Clth e mse lws out in on"'r not to starve. Appraising
the soci al con ditio ns ;1I e n'I' k stail's of his epoch, Plato wrote:
'{ "Eac h wi ll cont ain not It'ss tha n twO di\'i" ions, onl' Iht' ci ty
1\ of lh e poo r, tIll' olh e r of thl' rich, l'i\ch ,It war with OIH' a noth('r:
and wi th in ('I.l(' h t1lt're art' Ul illl \ ,,",ma il er divi...;ions ....
( Hes p. ~2::l!l).
tilt' constant lIars ulIll /{('HI'l"al \'('OIiOIUil' ;tllli poll

tinli ill."'tahilily lilt' cllIlt't'nlrnli"ll of illllUt'IlSI' \\I'allh ill t!I!'
hatHI" of i\ hw <lnd tht' stalt' pr'o\icll'd iI 111;111'1'1111 h;I!'I' fllr 1111'
11I'(1g-r('s..; of (;r,'I,k ('1111111'1' ilnd ." laJ'/.{Ily ;l\'("ounlahlp fur Ihp
nowt'l'inJ,"! llf till' art ... Hnd philosophy. Tht' I"ollrth ('t'ntllrv
hnowli 1l." till' Ilt'yday of ilr('hilpt'tllrt' was nolahlt. for til;'
huildill/.! of Ill'\\, and rt'sloralion of dpslrnyt'd ("iti!'''', P.J! .
.\I('galopolis with it::; f,HIlUllS TIU'I'siJioll (u"sl'lllhly hall) for
lIl,nOIl Ih'oph' . .\1t'S""IW. \lanliJH'i\, till' ,'llIl."tnl('lioll of slolll'
tlll'<ltn's itJciuding tlw lal'g'p!;1 {)lIt' in EpidulJrlls, till'
_\lau~oJ('um at 1II"Iiranws,-;u$. tilt' (,!Hpll' of A"trllli" (I)ianaj
at Epht'sus, etc. Th(' rist' of ~rlJlptUl'{' Wil!'; !'Orlll(>rtl'd with
tlw nam(',.; of Prtl\it('Il'~. Scop"!'. Ll'ucipplJs. painling gailwd
,lllt'W dinH'n";ioll in the activity of till' A tlWIliiltl and Sic\'orrian
"
"
~chof)I,... , l;n'(>k drama at till' Iwginrring
of tlw fourlh ('l'tltury
was rl'pr(',.;(>nted by great anci('nt playwrighl AristoplHlIH's,
who~(' com(>r1i(>~ The cclesia~lIsae (Wollien in ParlianH'llt)
and The Pilltus (Wealth) vividly n'nl'ctC'd thl' corltrndictioll~
of Ih", ('poch. The progre~~ in litl'rary pro~(' WilS ult('stl'd
to by Xl'llophon's Anabasis nwntiOllt'd ('<ll'Ii('I' and historical
nO\'1'1 Cyropaedia d(>~cribing th(' ('011'1'('1' of Cyrus til(' Gr('at of
Pt'r";ia, a~ well as by IlIl' oratory and politica l pamphlC'ls
of Ly"'b. I~ocrates and D(,lI1o~plH'rl('s. YN 111(' gr('at('st
contribution of Gr(>(>k genius to world rllitun' in thl' fourth
cl'llhlr~' was pl'rhaps in till' fi('hl of thought. ind('I'd, Gr('('k
cla,,~ical philo"ophy rf'l)rC'st'lltf'f1 by i)pmorritlls, Plalo ,-In<l
,-\ri"toll", not only tel-ilifil'li to th(' illl('ll('rlllal aritie\'{'IIll'lIls of
Ihat small hut hig-hly giftpd 111'(1)1(' "wirose IIlli\'('rsal tul(,lIts
and activity a~~lIr(>f1 it a plac" in Ih(, hi~tf)ry of IlIIman
dpv(>loplII(>nt that no oth('r ppopll' ('all ('wr rlaill),"1 hul also
ffJr til(' first tilllt' cl('al'ly dt'fln('d til\' two main l"(' IHi s ill
phiJfJ~ophy. id('illi~m and IIlUll'riali~lrr, rt'fC'l'r'('(110 hv Ll'llirl as
th(, "h'IHi('!\('i('s or lilH's of Plato and j)PHIO('l'ilu'i'ili pllilos1 ,"21'1,"
I
op ,I~.
,j f) S {' ('<lr-('ut stutl'III('llt of tire hmii(' qU('slioli f)f
phrt()Sflplry as tbut ('olle('rning' til(' rI'l.rliOI I of tllf' IIlatl'l'iaJ iHld
tll(' spiritual. tlip primacy of lwtlll'P to sp iril 01' Vi l'I' V('t'S;!
ilttl ... tf'd to thl' maturity f)r philosophy, whl'rl'Hs tilE' ('
111'1'
0111
111'1,1"'1\'1' "ystl'lli of philfJ~f)plril:iLI kllowl"dj.('(' dl'v('lopPli hy
An ... totl,' oPI'III'(1 IJrlJali r)I'f!~I)('cts ff!1' all I'olllld dl'\,t'loplII('rlt
of hlllllilll thollght.
Dl'_"pitt>
>
~ Froele'rid., EUl(fI~. 1.J",l"clus II' V,,'urI', fl, f(j,

\ J 1,1'11'", ""~I"ri~II~'" ;'lIel 1';II'IIlr", (;rili(.j~II"',
I~, p. I:jO,
('h,,1"'" J
\nci('ut
t.
"'f) .:-.i<lu .... ipham"
"
\tomism: from I~('U('lppU"
tti~loricllI
TrlldHioli lind Sourc~
r", mn~t l'ongruent. l'uh .. i,.tt'nl

I~ 0111' of till \\01,' " ')ctrillt''' Po",illoniu,.; the
sp l('a~. ph do,,~,p lI~t d~t:~ rt'f t'r 'to t'a ;ly Phot'll i('~:
..
' '1
AtonHSIIl
and wid,'ly
Stoic and the IH'()-I'atnrll~ elm"l "hl'fon' tltt, Tn)Jan \\'ar.
d
illl philo~opher '\lodw .. \\ ho Il rl" .,1" ,I.,. philr. .. qph\", Tht'
' .,
',.1 'I'" tht> f nun I
.
,
i,t'. III tU1H' IIItUll'lllOrr. ,"
'1
" I l l ! a COIllP')IIi.'llt parI
I'" "no\\ n 1I
alol1ll~lI(' t Ilt'OI".~ I'f untlt'l'
.'.
:, I t ,.\ hin" in .-\nt'it'IlI I n,j.la,
or th(' \<li"('''lk<l phllo~()phl("1
t. C,.
-,f ,I, ar"lImt'nt~ ad.
" I", til(' 'lIh"'t'llIllil l'lIIt
_
For all it~ OI'Ig'I!1<I I y.
.: ",'.' I Ihi .. ('irnllll,"'tann'. ILIgt'tlwr
\'<~nc('d hy th(' (.n:l'k all~Il~L'-'\'''''I:::~a h~ill'hing i,.; hardly (Ildl'~
WIth Ih(' filct IIt"t I l l l :
,.1,1'
~\)nw ~dltll.Ir"
. I
' . Bel'" i\l'('nUlI.l l
.
than Ill(' IllIr( ('(,1I1111~ "1''-'"
,
II",,'\'H'I' tlw illH'h'lIl
"
f I '.
\11'\ IIIIIUl'lIC(,
'
, ,
COIl('I'pllon 0 111'11 11111,
,I' I" hI IWI'Illit .1 ,l\'lllllll'
,
.
l ' 't'''''
"" 1(111 .. till I I
' . ,
(,\'I{lt-ntl' \\(' p( ~~"~,
. I '" "~'I Wit(111l .\IonH~m ;1 .. ,\
"
"
cOile I II~HIII
, I ~" ' II \\ho h,ll'!'O\\t'l
I IIIII 'I rt'''' ' Iw ~OHIL' ,\"1;\ I I
,
.,' I,d in I II' 111111 t' , 1 . : ' ,
.,' .
doctnnl' WiI"; ,1( 1 II I
I
,"
. " IWI"lfllL' i\ ";l'll'nllllt
"
" I ""I
I' I I III()' 1'1'11 1111\'...
I
l )hllo~OI)lll(,lI
.'it IOII~, I
I"
('t'lIllIl'\
.1111
I.
I, , 111 \11' IIllh tI
,
I\rPOl'Y Ihal Ino" ~ I,IPI
I"
Il IIl lti 'lh'd fl)l'llI, illl
..
"I I
'Ih\,,,,
Ih,IUI!I 111 ,I
,
II
1'1'1I1i\11I!'i II
111\\\, ( ' , ,.
' , . , " " '"
lIt till' \\'111'"
f ,hI' "'{''''ll I H I ,
I
I
ililPOI'I,UlI (' \tIlI'1I
II
1" I I '
it'hl'" ,thOIlI Ihl' flll't'H!1I
\\'halt'\'I'l' , till' I'\'~ult~ II
.,1',,: ill;'(lIlII'(I\\'rlibl~' thill till'
.
'Ill
1\l1L'
('illl
..
, I
.,
I
f
f."
",,,1,
"'"I'l'
OIUI~,
,
...
'lIll\ ,III ,)fIl!l 11,1
'"
,','II I {<I"'I,k .. \\,.., 1111
,
"
11101111,,111 IIf IILI ,11111

I111 1 .1" I lit" \'ulmina\llH\ Ilf i\ II\I\~'
II!'Otltlc! tlf {:I't'I'k t1HIIIg-hl 1 , ,\ ',1 I., '\nlht',.;i~ of ,\ lIuHllll'r
1
I' ,," Int IIhln ,1111 ".
I
"Iatlding' II 1II 11~np Ill. 'I . I' 111'1'1111" 'IUt! inh'II"l'IlIiI I'll";'
"r Iypil'all~' {:I'I'I'k phI '1,";~IPIIl\~'il\' WI: 'tillli IIII' <In'''\n'r~ hI
Illlatl'~, In lIn' aIOml",ll! I ,II
\
... nUI'('I'''; II
-.
iI
,1OS(,(\ at {"\fljl-'
,numNOUs
I I questions
.
t : - ;,t,<Igl's"
ts roo! .
Into "t H' oman
and Pvth'I"Il'I"
' . 'as wl'lI
s {{n -dpep
, .phYsics
'
. <... ClllIsm.
t h(' spec I! allOn!". of till.' Ell'atie school u I I
a,s ntt)
the lif,th century, Atomism was ('ontPrll{'d 1~:'it~ll~h ph~'SI(,s 0'
o~ bemg and \"old. (':.. i~tl'nc(' alHI I'
{' P,roblems
dl~('rslty. divisibility and qualitv .1IH'r~~t{'f' tlllIt.,. and
raIsed by th(> pn'\"iolls schools. Th~:('~.,.~tI t~ll' prohlt'ltl:<

D:lllocrilus':<. atomism. not infrequC'ntl\"' it'ft letl; rl3turE' of
wlthollt any good reason, impNaliveh- d~m

,(~U [0, <le,COullt
' (.[ pi "
I
.
alH sot 1(> h,'<to,'
a,, ,~ . 11_ osop Iv
'r.
. to t('assr'i'
.. ,. t',p"slgIl1I1('al1('('
of til(' at . ' .[.
I , l)rtfllH' III the (lC'vplopmpnt of Cr(,pk tholl I
< Oll1lsll('
as til(' first systl'lll of das~ir"' ('rf-f-k '"' g ft ,and rC'gard It
T ,.'
,
.. ,
pliOSOP1\,
I
0,
rat IlH)II e!'l'dlls Ihp Cr{'('k tlil'orv f

.' .
L{'u('ippus and D(,tlIocrit'f' "
.. '
,1101111(: l'lel1wl1ts to
.~.
ov.I'\('r 'II'I"HI'
('('ntury B.C. the works of lIlI's{' lwo ""j .'
In 1(> nurlh
rpgardl'd as a siJlgl(' hOlly i111~1 tllI'ir" II 1~s{:P l_~r.~ C3m(' to h('
III)W prarlieaJly ilisUpNabl('
pr('st'nls
fragnH'ut of Ll'llrippus's hOI k () 11
1 pos.s('S.S only Olll'
to hiTII wilh ('(.rlail.t u
\'"
"I' ,,,( v.hlch {'an h(' ascrilwd
J"
otH'rs 'IrI' r
Iloth
P II" .I)so,)hl'r". '1IIf'
tl'f'
[
.
,
rp(
I
('(
to
rI' I'rI'/H'I'S to tllP

.
, lI'gln wilh thl' wOrll" "'\ "1
I"
TIl
HI
sourf('s
In\"arlahly
'
IIJ~ ... ," "1)1'1I1f'('rilll'~ ',(("rl in g 10 LI'IU'IPPIiS anrll)l'lIIo('rIi ,1' lieI I'P"s with tlll'ir pupils
tilllj,thL. .. " alill thl' lik/II(
t' [
diffH'ulli('~I~\~: nlh~~IO.1l
i' . .
"t'
LI'llciPPIIS, a ('011 It'm p;,r'lr ' f F

:-"as a Iwpil I)f ZI'no of
.\.n l,rnpI'dudp..; and Amn.lgori.ls.
I'll\' rIClII''' of his ,'.[
,1,1 ,lIli III(' ll'adll'r of f)1'1ll0(TitU";
,
, I ' rannul hi' II t'I,'
,
"
PilI at ,')()t1-Htl B (' II' _
_ x I (\<H"t y illlli 'Ifl' roughh'
'\' ,
".
,s natl\"1' ("It\'
,. I
" '
,
)f t'ra Ilr \1ilt,tlls
\\' _ k
." 1ll.1.\
Ja\"(' 1)1'1'11 ".II'a,
I[
\
'.
t
now pr'WIII"11i '
, '
, . \ not ling Clllo"t his

I p, " s fl'gards J)('1ll0 't , [
I of ('prl'lin ~1' en. liS 0 .\llIit'r-! Ic_ -"'t""17
I"
pUP!
<
:t ,ll-\'l<In" 'lnt! ('I I,
", 0) "IIf' was'
,\ I'r\I'S was t'nh'rlaill(' 1 I : ;1
,\,1 (Puns, 1'01" wlH'1l KillJ;t'
n1l'n ill ('hilrgr ....lilll Ifr/~
fHthpl of i)l'lllof"fitus Ill' Il'ft
1t'IIr,wII Ihl'olog\" 1\ , )lll,t IISI' Illt'n, whilt' "till a bo\", hI'
I,'
".'
III
IlstrnllOIl\\'
I[t
'
,I 1I:IPPII~ (I)ioj:(. L. IX, :H) () .. ' " .t'rwartls IH' Illl't
II) I,gyp!. PI'rsia and ('\"1'11 I . Fl~ ~(JIl~1 1'\'Itil'I1('(' hi' Iran'lIpd
rdllrll Ill' It'd a moth'st 'If I , "1't,1 1I0pla and India. Afipr his
~tlll' , .. ,
'
. , I so, arv I'f"
'.
'
_.III! S .HII \"alulllj:( Ihl'lll "0 h' II,
(n~nglng III scipnUfic
':'11 "111'1', Ill' "would ralll\:r di~~ I.~ I lilt. A('('ortiil1g' 10 1'\lant
kllll(llOIII or !,prsia" (I.. l,\i,;l\tr
~HII~I' than gain the
\llnll'rl)lI~ it'slimnnip" '1'111 )- II, flll'll al an old age.
It! 1\
la1ll.t h ing" rhilo"npiH'r \\lrj.!I'nds "('serioI' D(,lIIof"filu:<
what W'I"CI1I1lIllI)III~' hl'Iil'\'t'll I 1111. rdusI'" In lak l sl'ric)usl"
SHurc/,,,. '" Ir t r,l~
,
I'11111 II" iI f" " II' ""I"IOU"
"
[ I{rl"ll. I " ,\"
,- ) AII("1'1I1
1 ,1/1 n
, pra('ll(,lIl wisdom.
FI ,.
r,
',I
0:11'
rllill~ anll pO\\-!'r of nhst'rvation, Hf'fPrring to hibliograph('r

ThrL~ylllls, I)ingl'nl':< I.<lt'rlius gh'p:< thl' nam('s of mort' than
Ie
60 wo~ks by Dt'IHonitlls. ,,"lOng thl'm sllch import<wttrf'atis('s

h
Great !rorfd-Ordt'r (~()llll'tinJ('s crt'dited to Leucippus).
....:maff U'orld-(}rdn, .lIld 0" I.()/!ic or The Canon. Of thes(' only
a few fragTllt'nt:< sllr\-in'd. TlIixt'd at that, as was IllrntioTlrd
ahon', with tht' fr'lI,plH'nl:< CI[1I1 paraphrHse!' of L('lIcipP"s. On
thl' I'Vi<lt'llCt' of Dinj.:Ct'Tl(,:-; La('rtills, .. Ari~toxenll~ in his Hislorical \oit'!' affmns that Plato wishrd to burn all till:' wrilings
of J)(,IlHlt'rilus Ihul Il(' ('ollid collt'cl. btll that Amyclas and
Clinias lht' Pythagot"t'<ltls prC'wlltt'd him, :-;aying that tl1t'r('
\\",IS no uti\'alltaj,tt' in doing SO, for '11t"('ad~ th(, boob \\'('rC'
widl'ly eir('ulatt'd" (Diog. L. IX, '10) .
On till' fan' of il. lhl' docl['inl' of alomic el(,Tllent~ i~ \"NY
silllp!t': llH' ('1('llIl'nts of all thilt p\i:-;t.s arC' inrli\'isihl(' material
p8l'licil'sor alnm:-; mo\"in~ in t'IllIny spilce.l'\othing e\"N ('nllws
inlo Iwing 0111 of or pt'rislws inlo Ilw non-l'xi~tpnt. Comhina
lion uf I.ItOln~ prndll{'t'S things, whilr their di~!i()luli()n briTlg~
about lht' I'Tld of things. All things arise of Tlrcessity which
ill f<lcl i~ ;\ vnrlt'\ brillgillg tht' atoms together. Tlw \"orll'\
rt'sults frolll Ihl' random l'lO\'('IIH'nts of th(' iltoms oscillating
III all dirt'ctiOlls_ I': \ It'rtl<1 I objl'{'\~ t'mil thin slH'lls ('opies
or imagt'~) of lht'lIIst'I\'I's which n'Clrt on till' :-;('ns('~. Till' ~nlll
i~ only a romhinillion of particular atoms which art' till' linit'st
and smootht'sl flf all. \1an's fllwi goal is il wl'!far(' of :<ouL i.l'.
its jll'act' owd halann' 1I[lIlislurbl't\ by [ear, prt'jutiiCl' or
IliLssioli.
What Iii'S lH'hind this !il't'tlling simplicity? Why wa!' tht'
II'aching of DI'III01'filus so vigorously oppos(>d by Plato ;,11111
hi..; follO\\'I'l"s, IInl to spI'ak of till' latt'r Clu'i~tian tlwologicians?
2 .. \tomisti{'~ pnd tht' "World-Ordl'r"
'1'111' hnsic p()~tulah' of tht' lltO[lli~ts wa~ that rl'ality onl.\'
consist~
of atolll~ and til(' void. An infinite llIultitud(' of indi

\'i~iol(' pa"lidl's of llIall('f JI1()VI' rt('l"llally in inflllilt' I'mJlI~
sP<I('(', illlpill~i[\g on 0111' anolher and coming 10gt>tht'l" 10 form
physical Ohjl'l'tS. Tltl' atom!' (lillN from (lIll' another only ill tilt,
shapt', arnlll~(>nll'lll and position. Thf'sl' thrt'(' mod,'.s of dill,'r
pute wl'rt' illtlslnlll'd hy Arislotit' with thl' ","Hupll's o[ (\
'Lnll:\ . .-\\ and :\,\. Z and:\ rl'sllt'diq'ly- Till' tjlll':-;Iinn 1I.llu
rally .Irisl':-;: why did tht' alomists 11<1\"1' to poslulah' imll
,'isihl(' jlMlidt's alld ('fluld 1I0t aSSlllllt' lhl' inflllilt' lli\isiililil"
o( 11IC111t'r?
Ih'ing a pupil or. ZI'IIU. L!' .. ('i"IHI~ 1111'". ,I,I\~'

..
, WI'
,mart' .
\I f ,,
lilt ,1 I ,H' .o;trong <lIld \\ 1"11;.
I'' I l "III -w~'lI
,II!1Ltlll"
'
,lOi' .
n'asnnlllgarH
pond('r('d.likl' Ilt'mot'rHus. Sf' I ' IH' " 11Ilt' .hlpr.S l'rs
.,
I' apOrl,lS
,lg'illllSI rnultilutiP'. if ., I, ( "~I,
.,I, ,.
.
,
. .L" ( ".
1\ lilt 'I . ,on'r
~. hng('
tht,\, will 'II

, ( 11110 all
".
I I It'r l'I\"\'
,.,' a 'I ant ""
0 Sill'
,.,lIla)OI \' will rl,
. Il'lr ilg'gr('gatl' i . (' till' ori,"
,
III , f) lIot IIngrlt':-<s. or, if till'\" 11"1\1' '11\\' .",.
\\IIH It,
_
f ' , ,
. '
' . S Zl'. 'I''
H' lOtiV w"l] ,
II~ I.rlly~ y arg('. III'rH'(" in hoth ('ast'S thl' lOst I,' " I, W
dl\'lslhdrty It'iHls 10 absurdil\". IIowl'\'('r Ill' I,' ,llIo,n of Illitnitp
III Huh'
HUlllhrr of part'"
,I,
' I' .
thaI till' ('Olllradirtioll ('cHlld'llI' "\\'oill" I' ,,1,(' .'ll,',lllllstS 1'{'alisl'd

' ,'," .1' . .
1
, ' ( ~ )oil' Ill" a
,I, \ISI II It\., II'
),.,",'
,'."""""
,.
I' .
,., ' 1 ()
..
IgIllIIlU('IIHIVI<;'11
atoms (Cr. "indivisibh''')
-, ,ISSlIlIlpliOIl
, .,
. 'h'l(\
I) {''HIparlJcks
or
"" .,.
' . TI liS
,
,I( \'<lnta,l{l' in that it
. , \' Wit , 1 l'v('ry<h,
<"
(I . JOllai
<
( .1 OSI'
11111('1'11, l'V('n simpl(' oh"l'I"\'alion )'I"O\idt,<; I' , .. ' : . I XIW~'lt'IlC'l'.
that mal\t'r run hl' elivid('11 inlo'II'II'IS '., CIII\.II',11 Illg ('\Hit'lIn'
0111' .,
('"
'
,SI Sln,1 11" to {'''(''II'
-' < ('
S(I1S('S. 'Inng all ,1I'('OtHll of Ihl' U' .' I"
Dl'lIlOerilus, Arislollp IluOlp" I' _,
1 111.1 Ip PS of alOllllSIll ill
l"pl'C"k:-. of ell"'l d'\[]du<r i 1 . ,liS ,10lllPansoll of Ill(' atollls 10
','1 ' '
,'.'
.... I a :->UIl wam.
I( .1\0Il1IS\I( Ihl'o!'\' I rid.
1 II '
p
Iwl\\'l'('11 Ihl' 011(' im,
,"
1\10\";1hll' and illdi'isil',,"' ,1 gN
1'lIlg 0
'Irll]('lIi(I'
'"
'
'
,
plyslralworldof"I'IIS'"
I"
'
l'S
alii
H' n'lIl
I
II oITI'rt'd al OI1('I"llu: I,~ \,",I,llh ,lHl1tahll' <.111(1 di\'isihll' ohj('I't.~
,
SI1l10l10IWOlll'ohl'tl'l
I IIt' ,.,It'atil's: thost' of 011"
,
"
I 11IS, 1<1 l<lI',lssl'(1
"
I .HI( m,IIl~. ,11111 111011011.
1 I" I.
III I III~ ohJ{'("( I'()uld now I ' ' 1-'
. of P<II"lidt's and 1"I'"lor<'d I I "
. ),1. ~P II 11110,\ fll11' Ilumlwr
of \'oill aiollgsilit' aloms 'II~ I S III~II.I shapp, and Ihl' l',islt'ncl'
11'1'11 of Ihl' FII"lli(' B . . ('Il(lnllti for Ih('II' motioll. Thl' pal
.
'
,.
\,1Il~ rt'IlI,IIIIt'd ill\'Ie!"
',"
I onfl''''I'11 ,Is ill"", .. ,' . ,
.'
S!lll( H' alolll<; \\,('1'('
<;1 I I' .1111 un,ll'rl 'I ' I,
.
was sllhstitult'4! fOI' 0,
','1
:-> 1,\ I 4' I'II\ I\ II'S, hul mau\'
11'.
It' PO<;llIhliol ,
. I
.
lIll
I
plll!",.!isli!'
'II
,
'
I
"
I
I)
VOl
I
IliacI<'
I"('alil\'
I I
"
II IIIO\'01 I I' ,IIOIU'1
'illil 1""
'1'
.
wII II till' "I'IISI''''
('( I''']I'<ltil' logic-
Ii",, ,
b",,'"
,;a
. ,\n"tolll' IS k, 10\\ II ,!II 1,\\1' 1111('1"111'('\' I ,I

01" ,III oIUS\\"I'I" 10 II ' 1"1"
'
(I
II' al\lllll.~ ll(' lill'o!"\'
',.1
II . 1,1111' dl'III'd of '11
,
.
II' <llomists .1('('('1 1\1'11 I'
I','
(all,l.!4';IlI( 111()\I'l1ll'nl.
H' ',I'all(' 111'0,10 ,it
,I
\011 I 1110\1011 IS 1IIIIIOS 'ill, \.
S IIlIl
III I wllllOu\
I.
1'1
1'\llIlr"Ir\,
I
"
1'1
S
I
, ,
1I11'111t'I'\i"It'IIC"1'oftl
I I
' , n H' ',l'alie<;who dl'
II' \011 I II' '1IOIlLi t
'
011.\
11'11If,!
01"
1111'
,ltOIl
I',
I'
",>.;
HlilllIl<lilH'll
Ih,t! 1101
I
..,11I
IS,III;I~OIlOlh'
I
I'III~ \11'111' \oit! 011'1'
'il _ III1'rpl"l'\ill" Ihl' ."", .. , _.'
,
'
'""
I
"
"
"
''''''11'
'III Ll\olJr of Ihl'
t \1"'11'lin' of Ihl' \oil' \,.,., 'I"
,
,.,
111\
Ills
_
,"() I' Wl"oll'-" - "
,
111011011 \\"IIUIII SI'I'1I1 1101 tl ' ." ., . ---II I" 11Ialll\;lllIl'd Ih"l
\\II'd
1 I \IS . I 111I'n' WI" II' rIO nlltl.
- ~i ll('i'
, I~ 'II
II 1',1111101 ("OIlI;lilllll\'ll
II", ,
,I );1 , :-<III1H' Ihilq.,:-"'\
' , illig
I 111411't' "-- ['It I'~ 1"1',1"011 fl"lull
1""IIIII"I.~:-,',1
. , n' 0 IIial
1~1'l'\I'lt
. \\ 1IIl"h illlp!iI'S
t l 10
' . l'olllr-'1
,II ;1111 I ' 1\'
II 101lIPI'I'<;SI'(\ lrOlt\
rw'
,,
('Olltra('\~
~I;-I ,iiI)
\nlo thl' voilh pI" !O<>111 ill il

(Arist. Phys, 1\'. Ii,
TItI' v(JIII bah, '1IUI,'Iy hOlllogl'I1l'fHlS <inti rilll exist
irrt'!'pt'dl\"l' of wlwllu'r it I OI"l'lll'il'll lIy ph~'siral ohj4'("\S. II
sl'r,Irat es whole hodil''\ \lL11 p;lrtides
I'omp/)sitp hoelil's .
AtollI a101l 1' ('orllain no \loit! allcl an' IhPfpfon' ahsolutl'ly
S
til'IISt' IPil\iug 110 rOOIlL for a 111;1111' Ihal mi~ht ("ul or splil
or
thl'lll aparl,
Tht' <Iclmi~silJll of \'oit! alsol'lilllinillt'clIIH' IIiffl(:u1til's fa('illg'
th(' Pylhagol'l'<iIlS and "-s;!\"I'II" Ilwir dorlritlP of numh!'r as thl'
prineipl(' of Ihl' ulli\"l'I'~!', III poilll of fad, Ihl' Pytliag'ort'ulls

:llso :-<pokl' of void, hut ulldprslood il in a ('1'11/11' way, i41('nli
fyillg il wilh ail'. Aristotll' was kl'l'n 10 nole' a (,prlaill afflllily
betWI't'1l thl' two Il'achillgs, silll'\' ally lllall'l"i,lI ohjl'd is {'Oll('('i\'('(1 h~' an atomisl as
rillitt' pillrality of ,1\mllS and,
Ilwrl'fo]'(', as a liI'fmik ll11l11hl'r. Yl't LI'wipplls <11111 ])PJlloeri
tllS p\'iell'nlly show!,d no tl'ndt'IH'Y to sHhseri\)!' 10 ~o"calll'd
rnillhe>malir<ll atomism ill Illl' Il\alllll'r of Pylhagort'an Eurytus
a!H1 lI\adt' no ath'lllpl to <I('('OUllt for proppr!il's of Ihings hy
Ihe> ilumlwrs of tlw;r aIOlIlS. tht' llIort' so as Ol'lllo('rittls al!o\\'('d
diITert'IH'('S in tilt' <;i/.I' of lltl' atom<; and ('\'ell slIggl'slNI thl'
possibility of ,11\ alOIn as largl' as thl' rOSI\lOS (I... 207),
j)PlHo('ritl1s pustillait'd all intinih' lIlultilude of atoms and,
;lr('{)l"{lingiy. an inflllill' \,,\t'IIUlII. sinn' ,I I1nitl' \tlCl/urn (",lIll1ot
'1('('Ot1l1ll0d'lh' an intillih' 1I111111wrof ,lloms and an inrlni\(' nlllllb('r of worlds l'0Il1POSI'11 of atOIllS, It is hard 10 say whi('h of Ihl'
IwO assumptions was primary. S;II('1' buth sll'lll frolll Olll' and
till' samp ('onn'plion of illiinily whidl .Ibo ulHl('rlil's Dt'tno("l'i
tus's postulalioll of till' intinitl' \'ari('ly of alom shapl'!"'.
TIH' infinity or tlH' wnrlll in spac .. P"I'SUPPOSI'S its infinity ill
lim(', as wI,1I as Ilw 1'I('I'IIily (infinity) of lIlotion, Ael'onlillg 10
Ari:-;\olil', "Dl'ltlo('l"illls of Alull'l'a <;<lYS Ihal Ihl'I'l' is no IIl'~ill'
Hillg' of till' ild'l[lill', lhal H ("HISI' is an origin <Ind what i,~ ('\'l'I'lasting is ildinitl'; Ihl'rl'fon' 10 ask 'wh.v' ill a C<lS\' likl' Ihis is
10 look for an orif,!ill for 1111' illl"lIlill'" (Arisl. Ik gl'lt. <llIi11l.
7/,2h). This is ,I VI' I'Y illlporl,l[il s\,I\('III1'1l1 and WI' shall lall'r
dis{'lIss it ill Ilion' dt'tail. hili al Ihis P01111 it will IlI'sliffit-it'nt
for 0111' Illlrposl' 10 nott' Ihal Ihl' IIl1ivl'l'''I', a("('()rdi\l~ 10 1111' .Ito
mists, is 1'II'I'IIai <llId illl"lilitl' ill spart', alld Ih,,1 1111' 1I1IIIilwr of
\hl' "IOIIIS <tlld of Ihl' wor"].. l'OUIPOSI'I] of 111\'111 is il1f;1I111'. This
flilldatlll'IlI'IIIII"It'r i<tli ~1 propositiotl \\as at '111('(' l'Otllllt,,'('d h~
till' <ltomi<;I,,' OPPOIII'lits wilh ;111 ;lr~III1H'lIt Ihal it pnsllilalt'll
-.;ollwth i II g 1111":1' i "I; II i1\' I Ii" II I linn i I Y (L. 111 ), ] "cll'I'd ,alTord
il1g 10 Ihl' atollli"lil' dodrillt', 1111' 1I111111wr of Ihl' WIlrllls i!"' In
,I
linit(' and. a ... ('a,h of tht' world.

... mainl",'"""
. .. \1'1'\' Iar
oI atoms. tIl'
atoms
i ... .
hl'''''''
II,hill 'I
~(lIurlllll'r
I ' numb('r of
,.
...
.
I H' nUl
I
($, I.e. than inlmit\'
whiel, ,'s <"I""
,I \' 011(' r IItI )pr of
In (' wor II
,
S II
tanl ('vldenct' throw'i light on how nt'llIo"r'l'
:
n . 1(' 1'\I liS 111('1 tills I'll'
ell II y. TI1(' on Iy way out open to him ,)1 II)' I I'
. (I ]' l-'
,\
lilli' '11)IW'\ ..
IlaH' ",(>('11 pro\"ulC'd by ,\ua\agoras's tIH'IlI'\' tl. '". (,IS to
th(>r(' IS alwa\'s a Greater And it is "'1",,1'
],\1 I In (,r('<l1
, II I
. I
.'
. III IHlm I('!, II In
"nu\
, lUt
('ac 1 thing is
to.
its('11 I)() II I grp;H 'Inti . ' 11""
UK ~g
D 3
,
(
,J, I)
)', H?w('v.er, Drlllo('ritlis could not I't'~()r silla"
arglllllrnl
il!' It IInpll(>d the i,)",,)',ln ,I' " '1'1'
t to. Itills
'I I
II
~
]"ISI H Il~' of
s in
,n ,I"IScal{
'I (>( I 'I'
ill<l ler.
.j~ O( ('rll
I
.mathematics has- long .
<t liS 1)I'obl
uY s lO\\.lIlg that the infinitt' set of \\'( rld~.
. .em
of a nnltp set of atoms, contains a)
:' :<\ch COIlSIstll~g
pow('r to a numerical s('ri('s) onlol I COl !lAtable (equul 1ll
. .
",
a oms, S I'egal'ds In
paraeIoxes arlslIlg in til(' cosmoloO"v of '
0 el'
(!'Ilch as h t
.
:."'"
Inllurne>rable worlds
wer(' "tillPfao OI~C'lr~c, g~avI.t<ltlonill, th('rmodynamic), they
\'Oill likl' to likl' ,\~ il I'l'slIlI thl'y form I s('parat(' 'world'

t'lId;) . . ('11 within its !'t'paratp "!:iky," \VOrlf'" alld all ohjl'rts <Iff'
fOrlnt'11 from atOiIl" aud di!'sIJIH' into them. According to
Ilir~lIllytlls, Dl'1II0('l'itlls I<tUKht that "t"Pre are innunH'rahlt,
world" of dirtl'rl'llt "izl'''' III SOUlI' tht'rl' i" Il'itlwr Still 1101"
moon, ill olht'!'s IIIPY "1'1' l'lrg('r thall in flllr" and othpr:; hun'
Illort' tll<lll OIH'. TIIPs!' worlds art' at irrpgular distun('l's, mort'
in Ollt' dirt'rtioll ilud II'S" ill ill\otlll'l", an(1 somp arp nourishing,
others dpciinillg', 1I!'1'f' tht'y COIlH' into b('ing, th('r' they dip
<lnd th('v an' destroYt'd
by ('olli"ion with on(' another. SO/ll('
. '
of th(' wodds haw no animal or vpg'table life nor any
water" (L. 3/19). Whilt' reading th('se lines a modern reader
may easily mistake Ul('1H for an cxlract from some nineteenth
('t'ntury popular hook 011 astronon1y ...
,TIl(:
paradoxl:'s against mowment" TI1 r '.
e( by Zl:'no s
lit'vt, that LeucipPlls and Democ'rilIl : (', IS good reason to beby rl:' . . orling to the notions of' _-.' ~,\Olded th:se paradoxes
tinw and mOWIll('nt. The;
".HII\IS~ble fructlons ,of space,
the \'i(>wpoint of anc' t' e 1.lOtlOll!;, Ilicompreh(>nsible from
modern concepts of q:I~I~ti;c\e~cl;', cOi~l(' v('ry close to the
Democritlls was bound . e( space, tllne and motion,
for the differences'of fi
.t? I~lah . . Ollll;' attempt to account
ulomic composition r~: all, \\~ter and eart.h in terms of their
"e]('ml.'nls" was dl.'e' I ,l'tl:l ce t le conceptt~n of the four
lion, DI'"rribing theP ;to!~~~~;! I~~ G.~l:'ek phllo!".ophical tradilIwy have Il('ver explailwd in'd \ 1~t'S, A,rll'ttotle \\Tote: "But
(>ll'mE'nts, ex('ept so far al'; to 11 eta; th(' shapes of the \"arious
and the r('st they disC'
. \ ot t H' sphere to fire, Air, water
g
atom" (I)e ,-aelo III' ;,n "OI3S ed by the relativl' size of the
..;
,
. I, 3 a) Acco l'
J) I'mocntus explained the mob'I"t
f I"( IIlg to other ('vide-nce,
smulln(>s:-; and roundne<:!; TI I I yo the atoms of fi l'e by thl:'ir
"
I"
'".
lC atoms of fl',
.1'1' ('II 11(' In shape
ll)n',
I'ff
.
.' II, water and earth
-.
, " r ( I ('rrnl
41l!'tlllctlOns bNween II
I
Sizes accollnting fol'
,
le e enH'llts Th' I
HILI) 011(' another
but e' I, I"'
a OIllS do not turn
n.....
'
\'o\'el'omal'I'>1
, .I~S as separat' elements C-' g
I a g( . If't('rogC-'lleou!'.
,!,pvlIlg the illusion of JIlulI;all' l'~lrt I ;)1l~1 all' from water.
As WE' S,(, i
.
.
r.1I1S ormatIOn.".
. ,n cOllstructlllg thl' lIllin'r,,(' I)
"'PPIll lo Il('ed anyll,',no I) I I
.
('mornlus doe!' not
I
,., 1I a oms and II r
\
I raw togNhN, set lip an ('dd" u'll b' '. 0 lon, ,,10\'ing atoms
.
I (
(gin to Iw "orl('d out in
n('mocrilll" was th(' flr"t in anci'lIt Greek philosophy to in

_ll'Odll(,1:' tht, (,OllcPpt of ('eluse and to de\'elop a system of d('l'rmini:-im, For OIW thing, no 011(' he forI' him had used the wor(1
aitia with its pUI'ely anthropomorphic meaning "originator" or
"instigator" in th(' hroad s(,llse of "caus!"".
The gell'ral !;latemellt of th(' principle of causality is cr'dited to Lellcippu:-i who was quoted as :-iaying: ".\'othing occur:;
at random, hut ('\"1'rythillg for a reason and by necessity" (L.
22). Thi:-; utterance alont' dearl\"
, shows the advance made h\'
.
t he atom ists on tht' pre\' iOIl" 1111 d('r"ta n ding of the rei a tion"h i p
between the pr('cNling .lnd "lIbseqllPnt !'tatl:'S of things. Prior
to Democrilus Creek philosophers in fact deeml:'d it sufficient
to indical(' thl:' primary substan('(' from which all things rallle.
Tlds led to the 1~leati(' drnlal of I{enpsis and change in g'llt'rai:
if "nothing can {'nnw from nothing." genNation of things hecomes ilH'xplicabll' and h('IH'(', in the t'y('S of the EINltics. im
possibl('. The way out propo"ed by Anaxagoras ('onsisted ill
postulating qualitatively dl'trl'luinate and imnHltabll' s''ds
constituting 1111' subslance of all things and not differing quali
tatively from tll('ir COmp()I1' ll tS. L{'lIrippu!'. and Oemocritlls
approarhed th(' probl(,1ll of genl'sis from a different dirl'('tion:
by assprting that Ilothing Clll! g't'nt'rate without ramie, "at ran
dom." In other wordR, th'y pn'serwd the conception of primary substall('(' from which all thing~ ('Olll<' into being, but di"tinguished fl'om it tIll' ('(lUSt' of th'ir gt'lieration and chang'.
~ince Ih(' work!' of Ilt'lllu('I'itu!' and Lt'licippu~ ha\"(' conw
down to u" in fnlg'IIll'llts only. til(' reconstruction of tlwir
ato~~i:ti; C~allce~l: o/I~~lotlil~)I~ \~~~~I~~~II:t~~iett ssiellc~.
3. Det('rmini~'ll: \('('('ssit) and (:holl('(' in Delllocritu,,'s Philosophy
d{,t{'rmini~rn
pl't':-ient
.... cOIl
1'[1'H'II I'
.
.'
".... ilit,I'I,I,I (I
liPS I I
wa.'" IIll'rr rOllC('ptlon of tilt' mpch'\/tis", [
"I' 1111'1'11. whal
>rI'II-'
.
1l{'aIlSall\")TI
' .'
II' rno~t
1) () M ) t. V('r.'iJOIi (,OIlW'" fro/ll tht' I'"I I 41 [ I !'lllt~-1
I 1'1ll0('rllus as rpfC'rring' 10 till' "I'I' Wr" -.,' ~ \\ In qUolI's
hlow of _Illilth>r" (I ~. -.
'),)) .
t I (IlSSlfIIl. llIotilll l '\[,.1
..
IS 1/1 prl1n'ls J! . '. .
I,'"',,
nt'('I'SSI!Y" ,"pI"
.'.
. ,. '.
C;lUs{'
,.-;
Dl'lllorritus c1earl\- idt'litifiPs

" 1_
.'
I H'
_. ,Is ,\ slatl'llIt'1l1
[
.
0
"II' (OIlIlO,laIIOIi to il:
OhVlOUs
("111'
<
st;' \\ I 1 rIP('t''';''II' ,
I
Ittl(.'i to .....'\"('nll IlllllOrt"", "')" . '
.. ~. ,\Ilr this
TI'
.
,
. . {qllt'nct's.
.
H, fi~ . . t and th(' mo:-;t .'iignilk<lllt of I,
'.
.
materialist dl'h'rminio;ll' ,,[ '" ' ' til' t It III IS thl' dptllal hr
'II
. . 1)JIlPIgt'IH'('l/-,
'
\\or (. Accordtng' to Apli . . 11
1'1
1<1 mO\'I'~ tilt.'
world to h(' al1imat(' and ~~''''';~'Il(,II) \1 os~~pIH'.I"~ Iwlip\"('(1 tht,
Lpucippu ...;, i)('mocritu'l I;' " . ,.t ).\

l'o\"1dpl1cl', Wht'I'CH!-;
'.
"
~IH{ III 11.'1 "'HI 01 hel' " II
,
1.\ oml...;ll{' tlit'on' hpJ,1 ,I",', . . . . .
,( H'1'('nl!-; of thl'
,
,I 1 \\clS IllWIIlIlt.'
I
sump
blind
foret'
(I
?")
I)
.
.'
'
'
.
anc
.
.... ~ ..), ('spltp (/i(' oh\"
," govl'I'IIPd by.
"
lOllS 11l1lC('lII'I.lCV of
A{'tIllS <'I hOll I tI", (1]).\111111011..;
rN'OI1\'t'
f
'
pO\\"('rs hy all Dl'lllorr',t" . '" " I
,.,1 I 101,1 n
pn'tt'l'll<ltural
" " 1)/ ('( ('('(''';!-iO!"''
I, , '
\"iI I(lilh/!': f)Pllloc!"i' ' . . . II
' . . . . IS ('.'111111011\' is H'I'V
.
liS. ,ls \\ (' as othE'1' ',t
"
h'!"llllllistil 10 till' 1'l'ligiou!-; I I':
-' ,{"HISb, ('oilirasts dl'tlip world, In (lth"r ' I' ({I)C I Ill(' of d.\"1111' l't'aSOil gov('rninfr
\\orIS 11(' 11('11'1'11"

[I
'
IIlSPpilrahl)'
lillk"d
,,',I
',I
1llliSIll
()
I
It' ;Homists j"
,
<
I], a ll'ISIlI,
,
rh(: s('('olld ('OIlS('(jlll'IlCP was II ' I, '.
r('sll/llll/.! fatalistic 1,','",1 ,[
'_
III( (111,11
('h<\/I('(' and llip
.'
( allf"II'nll 1'11'1" l' "
A
'
II IE' atollllsts Ill(> pIl"pO. [ , '
II JllIs!!!. I'c'ol'dlllg In
. '
.'I, n seu'net' " ..,.,
' . I I
,In 1'\'1'111. 1.1'
,I"
""
.
'
s "I{'\l'a Ill' C<IUSi' or
' . )\\ IS Ill'Cl'SSII\ S'
.
.
'. " '- 1111'(' (".-'f'I'\,lhlllg O('('lIr..;
IIV nl'I'ps..;it\" thl"
.""
11'1.'1 no such 1hi 11.1 ' , ,I
.'
,
'
.
s~'ns", I.P. as sOllll'lhing tl ' t I"
.1." ( lal~('I' III an obj('('tiH'
.
1,1
1,1.'1
flO
{"'liSP
(I
'
, 1\,1' nollOfl IIs('d IIll'r ,I 'I I
.
< , . , lan('1' IS a suhj{'('"
[
,
(
)I) (1'1I0\(' '\II ('\""
t ' I
(,IU~('O,I.I',nothinfl 1- tl
'
I \\('(Ollol kllow (he
'" p,';('
lan an P\I""'~"""
'
" II( ' p.
.~S
II () [I lilmall Igno-
or
t.,
"
Most f'OIIHIl('lItalors on Ill(' ) ' ,

1]'('11 upon Ih(> first "0"
I hdl,)sophy of J)1'Jllol'ritus ('('11
'
I Sf'IIIII'II('(' whld I '
jf'l'( or Ihl'i]' '111""1-,,
.
I )('anlf' Ihl' 1)/,illl'II'\' ob .s dgillilSt
Ill, ' I
"
' ,
;I]'g"UIlIPIlI or ilsl)l'llOll""I" .. ,1 .1 {HIlI,sll{' dO("ll"iIH'. TIH' maiJl
1
,
I
I 't"IIIH' ('Olild Jlol ('\II
1,1111 Ol"ll'l'Iill('S" i
II s\\,lsllat Ihl"' IO(
('I ,', '
"II
II' wol'ld I}Pllo"
"
,111...;1101]1 tlll'oloui-lil'
I
,',
(1I1c Ill/.! dl'll'l'llllIli"lII
,
t""
.... < .1]1( 11I.\'.-;IIC phdosl ],' '"-, .
" '
\1'.0 I, ()III' lIlav I'oll('pil(' t I)
.. )11 11 1",11111 A 1I,1.{IJsctllH'
1'\lsl
'
,
, , 1'11('1' 0 r
aloills
P""" tl 0 . ('1Il0I'I'JlII'sc aliI I I'"PU'III'lIS
tilt'
'I'
"
1l'll'ralld'II"
'
i'fsu Illig" 1110\'1'1111'111 Il,,'
,
11
filII (f) ISIOlls ;Iud the
,
I
' 1I!lIIM1.
III hn ' ..
\1( \\ I lallhl' alollls c]'owfli" 'I
I
\\ (.111 ont' ac'('('pl tht,
1"1)',1 II.1.:'P ,Its SIlatll' 'lJId ",.,1'[,!!: 11"1'1
H'I' ("III (.. I
"I'
' I P aI"I' .'101111' oh)'('('1 '
,
11\I'OIlIg-IlI"II'
prOporllfltlatp al)d ado],lIill;' "II 'I' 10~1: 11\;(1\1111-{ II slIlooth,
"111'1
-'.
.... \\1 1 (00111')' '1'1
,
I nllll'l.'-'lIl f';I/l Ill' IIlllltiplit'd. hilI all r' I ' II' 1'\;II.lIpll's of
o I II III IOII.";I'IOIISI,\' 01'
U[J('flllSI'inusly illlllrl' Ihl' t,le l thaI IJPlIlO('ritlls did lUll r('l'fll{niSI' a("('idL'III;11 1111)\'1'1111'111 of ,IJI' ,II'IIIIS and Iheir "randlllll"
f'()lIIhinalinll illio ordl,rly 'lhjPI'ls. hul held IhM tIH>Y WPr{, suhjt'('\ to Ihl' law, or allradioll of lik(' 10 lik,,_ _
'
This 1'011('1'1'11011 was wpll kflown 10 IllI' plillosoplw'al pr,,('ursors of 1)l'llIm'ritus, bill hI' 1(1\'1' it a III'W inll'rprf'lali fll1. ()Il
lilt' {'vicll'lj('" of S('xlus i':lJlpiri('IIS, j)PlIIonitlls taught that
"Iivillg {,[,p;lIII]'''S l'flll~f)]'1 wilh tlll'ir kinfl, as dOH'S with lion's,
and ('I'<\IIf'S wilh Cralll'S, allil silllililrly with Ihp rpst of till' alii
mal wMld, So il is wilh inanimal{' tilings, as Ofll' ('all SI'!' wilh
lh<' sif' .... ing of s('Ptis and wilh Ihl' pphhlps 011 bpad]('s. III Ihl'
fOl'lll('l', throllgh Ill(' I'irl'lI]alion or Iht' sip\,(" bpalls arE' sPpilral
('Ii alld ['allgl'd with I)('an.", harll'y-grains with barl(,y, HllIl
wheat with whf'at; ill tlJ(' laU('r, with thp TIlotion of the waw,
oval pf'bbles art' IlrivPII 10 lilt' salll(, pla('(' as oval, and 1'011 luI 10
round, as jf lilt' similarilY ill IIH'St' things had iI sort of PUWI'],
OV('I' thI'IH which had hrollghlllH'llllogl'llH'r" (OK fi8 B Hi'!).
Simi],l!' ('vidt'llc(' for J)(,lIIo('fitlls'S vi{'w~, if only not so colourfill, WI' ha\"(' from Tlu'opilrasills, ])io/.!f'IH's La('I'tills, lIippol~'
tus and AI('xalld('1'. As rpgards Ilw formatioll of (lnit'rly
inorganic bodi('s. J)l'IlIO('l'illiS was far ahpad of his til11(, and his
doClrinp might \H'II ha\'1' rankpd wilh ~omt' nll'chanisti(' ('011ct'pts of till' nillt'il't'nlh (,l'lItllr~', as, for install!'t', til(' "law of
agrl'gation" ill Spl'IH't'r's Iht'MY of l'volulion of whiC'h it is
highly rl'minisf('lll.l
TIl(' pidul'(' of thl' IInivprsl' jlail1tl'd hy Dt'lIlo('filus t',t'lIIpli
rips a simpl(' jU.'I:taposition or nl'('t'ssit~' alld dIilIU't': ortit'rly
hodi{'s (,0111(' about hy 1It'('pssity as a rI'suit of h,lphalil['tI collisiol1!-; and rpcoils or Ihe atoms, If his vision of lht' world WPfI'
to h(' r\l's('ril)('d ill Il'l'ms of IllOdl']'n ~('il'lIn', tht' law of slali~li
('al rl'gulilrily wOllld prohahly Iw lilt' f'lo!-;('st nppro\imatioll.
lIow('vl'r, 1)['O('I'('ding frolll his IlH'challislk tlH'ory of callsality
wilh it!-; rigid alIPrJlativl' of dIiIllC(' or lH'n's~ily, 1ll'lllOl'I'illls
I'Pjl'ctpd Lill' fOl'1lll'r in favour of Iht' latiN, Contrary 10 tlia]('('ti('al 1]l'll'l'Iliinislli will. its ('ollccplioll of fhaIH't' as ;I form of
lII<tllir('slalifl(l flf IH'('I'ssily ;\1]([ as ils complt'lIIt'JlI. III(' Ollt'
sidt'd ilnd "Will)([('II" dl'tpl"lIlillism of Ih'lIIol'rillls ahsollllisl'd
1I('ct's"ity, 111('l'l'ily IlIrllinj.! it inlo ils opposi\l' and rt'dIH'in.l{ In
til(' Slilll~s of dlill;f'I', 111111'1'11. tilt' 1II1ivt'rs(' Ht larg" is conel'ivl'd
by 1111' alomists ilS Ililvillg 111'1'11 prodll('pel by ('ham'('. wli"r"iI'"
"0111' world" has 110 olhl'r I'\plallalioll hili lilt' law or calls;liil)".
.,
",'
The rejection of chance and the identification of cali'S""

with
mnecessity that created for DemOCritus serious Prob,.....
OOI ology and cosmogony also led him to deny aoy freed. fa
human activity. The problem of freedom underlying any 8Ihical theory lay at the root of disagreement betweeo DemOCritaa
and his follower Epicurus who was to develop further the doctrine of atomistic determinism.
4. . . . . . Ibe ....ecwy of' KaowJedge
The atomists gave a purely materialist account of soul 8Dd

the process of cognition. Following the deeply rooted tradition of Greek philosophy, Democritus together with the loniau
philosophers attributed the mental activity of human beings 10
a speci&c life force present in the body aod called soul or
psycbe and regarded it both as the source of motion aod the
seat of IensatioDs aod thought. As regards its first fUDctioa,
his reuoning was simple: what is motionless cannot jmpar&
movement to another body, therefore, in order to move the
body, Lb.e soul must be corporeal and movable. Demoeritua
maintained that the soul consists of spherical atoms and is like
because, according to Aristotle, "shapes of this kind He
bed able to .lip Lb.rough anything and to move oLb.er thintp b1'
their OWn movement" (Arist. De anima I, 3, ",Oab). The Ind
vidual soul is mortal since its atoms are dispersed after death
of the body. Yet all things. according to Democritus! "share!n
""De IOn of 8Oul, even dead bodies,because they plalDly retalD
-lie portion of warmthandsensitivity when mostofithas been
brBathed out" (L. 448). Hence, Democritus's concept of soul
ia Ita primary function of imparting motive power is a c?m.
biutiou. of mechanistic atomism and the hylozoistic doctrlDe.
Tb.818CODd function of the soul, that of providing sensation
ad IhOUlht, was more difficult to account for on the principi.. or the atomistic theory. Sestus Empiricus quotes DeIaOCrituB 88 saying: "By convention is sweet, by convention
blUer, by convention hot, by convention cold, by convention
colour; but by rity aloms BDd void" (S t. Adv. math. VII.
135). This new espreS'ed in .modern tel'lDS amounts to au ...
Inl108 of &he objective character of such 8888lble qualities u
- -.....t aad cold beCln'e
of them. come only from. Lb.e
...,., Ui-P.amen, and poeItlon oJ the aktmt:. Hence the , .
&be I..... ; ...y of leD81bl. bowl.....
......... of II....... the truth fOr th. Simple "'SOD &bet di
..... lie ,.wd &be .....,.uUee of the HPIIS: "We in
me
an
.... - ..... """"t
h d nothiDg invarlahle. but

reality.com~r~h:ndisposition of tbe bod,
accordlDg
't" (ibid. t38).
--'_
whicb OPposeb I h the I'me object un.p.~
However, t ~ug on the state of mill
.
satioDS depe::~ugn:ering from
bitter to a mre secondary in
one). they a e of the atom. Aecordlafl
Iy. to the sbap
both are the elects
is akin to ~~ ~~<;rbi:ck reeult
atom~, a~oms sound comes from. a
roug
' . the tonH belDg
(tbe difference ID
rod cing
~~~sa:=:~tr~~t:i:: i~g:'ariUdi
les and bends; sweetn888, roUD

gods on the position of the aWIIlI
the sun-beam
very different eBects 10 a th neck
observer's eye: some 188
~hUs.;
fa~liD~~:ce
black. :\h\.~ s.D..dOll law1_

Democntwl
contact bellweeu an e
terection between the t.tw..
of auditory, taedle and
quired a more
ties. Democr!tus
ences accordlDg to
as it were, films of atoms
These "images" as tbey were
eye and produce the,
According to ancient
that there are two
or "bastard", and
still
othe~
.ts.)
to.., -.. =Ud.
o_
. "
108
what
ceive
finer
As
"lOry experience. 00 the evidence of

after denouncing the sen'Sa as giving but a
of reality makes them say to tbe miod;
you tAke your evidence from us and then throw us dowol
throw is your overthrow" (L. 79-80).
Sipi&c.an\ as it is, the idea of Democritus about the
o! Haaory and rational knowledge was destined. to rellO,I.
but. conjecture. sioce we do not possess any of his 100ical
WIllin" devoted to theoretical investigation ibto the proc.
olllC8llt from one level of cognition to the other (his trea\ile
0" Lo,1c or The Canon is known to have been lost). Oem.
critua widely used abstraction as a means of reBectina
objective reality and, according to the tesllmony of Ariltotl., was the &rat to tackle the problem of delinition. There
ia aood r8'SOD to believe that he gave a powerful impet.UI to
::"~icunsD. in their further epistemological studies. Nnep, the foundation of formallogie as a science of ewnet Wilkin&' is justly credited by tradition to Aristode.
For all iy weak poin\8. the theory of knowledge espoun...
ad by Democritus was an important advance on his predanl
&OiL It. contained a number of fruitful ideas anticipating
in way the future development. of philosophical thought.
Among the mOlt important. of them was the doctrine of the
oIJjecUve or "primary" (extension, size, shape, etc.) and the
lubjedive or "secondary" (colour, t.aste, smell) qualitill
whleb occupied the minds of philO8Ophen from Galileo's time
un the nineteenth century and is still alive today, the teachiDI
of efluenee which WM in fact a prototype of the corpuscular
"'eorr of liaht. and the idea of logical transition from pheaomeoa to JlUDee (from baatard to genuine knowledge) which
JtIO"ided. thefowuiation forthe development of inductive logic.
g_
. . . ' ",dzl't BrYu" Ad",
Like all Greek philosophers, Democritu8 devoted much

aueauon to the problems of origin of living beings. He taught
tat. th.,. came out of earth and moteture and did not owe
*slr orIaiD to any creator or int.eIli,lDt purpose (L. St4).
Aooondlnl to De"'",,}ri'_ the 6m men may allO have arisen
from ..nIt,,h, it is allO pouible that 'hey came from other
. . . . . . . 1'eIuit of Damral chang" and survived in the
. . - etf II-a..hlt" Jib "utua1 "1IeUon." Tb888 viewl
. . 1M ..... of nw,. boI ....... IDaDkind are Dot orIIiDoI
. . - be ...... to eZIUer pbUOlopb.lcal dOCtrlD8I abd etl
. . "'11 .JIII aloin tU....,..
Far more _realistic wu the

societ.y credited to ~e~ocrit.UI.
to
I s Democritus malntamed that. &he
I; iUe like animala feedinl aD P'~ aad
being in constant jeopardy from wlid
to herd t.ogether in order to lumve.
d could not. use tire or build bonnl.
r:ying in food for the 'Winter, they ofte~
cold_ As time went by.. the~ learn
caves and lay aside frUlY '~It;able for
learned to produce fire by fnct.1on and
arts came into bei~g: ~alen
"experience and V1ClS8ltU~88
from their wealth of esxenence
form the t h "lOgs
ldIey 0 ."I
Other sources ascribe to Democrit.us
arts were a result of simulat~oD: ."We
mals in the most important. t.h~D~, t.he
mending the swallow for buildml,
and nigh'Ungale. for smginl, ~Y way of
Elaboratinl on the evoluUollUJ
Democritus proeeeded frow die 80phlatic
tithesis, i.e. the dist.iaction between what.
tilicially or came iDto being by human
natural (arose by nec88lit.y). He
is an anllcial product. of
uuered but. confused. sounds, then
aniculate words and agreed
for every object thereby
Each group of
languages arose in
who was believed to
gin of words,
ing by
arbitrary
word coinage
Similar views were
and the laws.
Uoertod
tha~
11). wher us "ill

1
(IX, 45). This is a verr important stah'm('nt le.ading directly

to a conclusion that gmce the laws arE" egtabh!lhNl by mea
men are entitled to change them: "The law wishes to benelit men's life: and it is able to do so, whE'n they them~
selves wish to recE'iv(' benefit; for it shows to those who
obey it in their own particular virtue" (I... 608). Hence, julio
tice is what conforms to naturE' and injustic.e is what eOn~
tradicts it. Contrary to Antiphon, Democritus does not regard
the laws as necessarily contradicting nature: "The laWi
would not prevent each man from Iivif,lg according to his
inclination, unless individuals harmed each other" (L. 570).
As might be expected, the solution to the problem of
freedom offered by Democritus is also closely linked with
his understanding of the relationship between what exisls
"by nature" and what came about "by convention." The rigorous necessity of all natural phenomena advocated by De~
mocritus was apparently incompatible with the conception
of freedom of mao's behaviour and ruled out any responsibility for his actions. The opponents of the atomistic theory
sensed its fatalistic strain and came out in defence
of chance as tbe foundation of the doctrine of freedom
and free will advanced in the Hellenistic period and particularly in Christian literature. Taking exception to the
Democritean view of absolute necessity, Aristotle wrote:
"If ... all that is or takes place is the outcome of necessity, there would be no need to deliberate or to take trouble"
(De interpr. IX, 1Sb). It should be noted, however. that the
criticism of atomistic determinism was usually blatantly
hia-sed and not infrequently wide of tbe mark.
Indeed, Democritus held that a conscious act was possible
even if no such thing as chance existed. This. in fact,
is the jist of his famous statement: "Men have fash ioned an
image of Chance as an excuse for their own stu pidity. For
~ha~ce rarely con~icts with Intelligence, and most th ings
In hfe can be set ID order by an intelligent sharp-sightednw" (L. 32). In other words. men speak of chance when
tbey do not know tbe concatenation of events and thus
deprive themselves of the possibility of acting reasonably.
Reasonable conduct must be always baeed on knowledge.
In the light of this statement the notion of chance
(t.,cke) acquires a new meaning. Tbe ancient Greeks spoke of
t.,cke mainly in connection with human ac... using the word
in the seose of fortune or misfnrtune as distinct from fate.
,..
riw vl'''''
AccordiDl to Democ',
dependence GO chao" (is &hi'
d of one'. OWD conulou.
ste~ made pouible DO\ 0Dl,. ."
ty .. but also b,. the .fmDIl
ture,
Ioml,
i.e. the
cus
the modern
not reducible to.
erposes Intelligence ~
\he
lor
mao's stupidit.y he op8BI
wa,.
cept of necessit.y.
f do'IIl I I .......
DialecUc delin. rea
ujecL
sions ,,:ith knowl~3:mc:.;::.tD fM\
sharp-slghtedness
how
derstands necessity and knOWI
is well aware of the fact chat. it. ..
thing, as even a good
~
valorous maD may suler a
case knowledge ud .W will
water is useful for maD,.
ful, for there is danpr of
therefore been tnvent.ed,.
To be sure, Dewucn&el
freedom as recognind D~".
towards the dialectical Mlutloa of
on ~he role of "nOD
~.::
conjectures.
&1M
consideratioRs.
freedom paved
the nature of .buma
make another atep in \be
antithesis.
-=
':0
10
acee
loa
gods were
beheld Ibe
lightDiDp,
ecUplel of
.h.
groundll':<:-< bt'ilL,R" calls!'d by lIIah'ri'}1 illl'l .' ..

On tht' (,\"idt'IH'l' (If :-;('\\;1:< El11pi'ril'lIo.;<J.t,t.~) ( {rnUIlIns").
tin'
'"~-r ,illll
. .IIlHl.,R'{'." .
.
..
1'!IIn('nlu"
I III JllllJ.l'l on 111\'n "",1 "r ,I

. g,IY!
h'"
I
.
,
U''',' "or
\, nl' 'I
I('t'llt. nlll'f:- IHHll'lin'nt (whl'l"" "I, I
' , III' ar
I
.
.'
t
-'0 It' lira\, \1
I ..
"") .'' .. ul ,I",'
. I t t 1,1\
IIt /lllg 11 lan' prOptllOtlS jm ....
,.,.
t "" Im~\,I{t'" s
-r
,
,I. Il' rII un' to nll'l1 IH'fon,h\",1
'
. ''" ,. ,1"'\',,
I I' \ "'II
lSI I !" . '." I I/r{lll .V
sound"_ 1\('[1('(' till' allt'it'll\S on rl'('('i\'i
.
,lil! ultl'r
of tllt's(' imagl's $UPIIOSl'd Ih~' ('",1 " ' ,IIH ("I PII'I'St'lIlatio n
TI
."'"
'ISS
1)1{
IX 19)
. H.' {'Ol\('t'pllon of image!' rt'VNlling till' future ~;ll' " . .
rISeb toI the belief in gods ' ra,I\",'"
( glVlIl1{
'- .ague III D{'mocrill
to
e ate~ cla~oraled. by Epicurus and Lucretius.
IS,
was
~t~:~lO~lr~~I:s l~a~;~d~~e~h:':~~;~;:rtel~I~~\~I,e~n et~~I%l:I~\~~lr o~

o~e hiS~ ~mrus,
a~
accoun~~
of certain myths
traditional
or lca events and human experience F
.
int~rpreting the myth about Athena "Trit~ge~;i~..~stabni::e,
tlm:l').
maintained that the goddes!i
~:~~ond,catlon of Wisdom with it!i thrN' abili ties, to t l;ink
e . to speak well and to act well (see L 822) A . ' I
e'(plan 1 " '
.
.
sImI ar
cilance\:'o~ was gl\'e~ by De~ocritus to tlip con ception of
;Ich, accordmg to Aristotle, was viewed by him as
De~lOcritus.
\\~8Sor~
:~;\~~r~c~~~~: ttp~u,~atl u~de~6tandi~g ~nd therefore di"in~
t)
pantheon is known \ . h' ,~

Significantly, the Greek
the goddess of {ortun: T~:~:.nc uded, among other deities.
Proceeding from his

I h'
.
Democritus denied d' . genera. p dosophlcal convictions,
the dead pos:.th
IV me ~rov.ldence, the resuscitation of
ghosts, etc I't iumous retrl.b~tlon and requital, prophecy.
on r('ligio~ anJ no~ su rprls:.mg, there.fore, that his views
terpreted. Amon go s were often dls.torted and misin '
"images" with ~ht~\~xamples are the Id en tification of his
"God" alleged I
rlS ~?n angels alld the fire at.vms with
The
hi y wors Ipped by DemocritllS
pro ems of ethics:. are treat d b 0'
similar atheistic vein C' t i e .
y
emocritlls in a
that came down to us 'is t~n ~~ to hi S moral preS<'riptions
lions among: peoplp 'N~ dl (' I ea of humanenes!:l ill the rei aany direct link bet~~ene h~~<;Sp~o s.a Yj one would vainly s('('k
theory which obviously rei I y~lca sY!:lte~ and the moral
S
f 0 what PXlst" " by COIIV(,I1tioll" and cannot be ded a
However. the ethical thO~~~lt ~?"b the a~omistic doctrine.
from no other source but his bas' en:,ocrlt\l~ could spring
They are expounded fi 't' d' I~ pllliosophlcal principll's.
, r~ 811
or{'lllost, in his teaching
of crill.rill H rl'lldu"d hy Sf>xtn, Ernpincu~: "According

tn Ikr!lO("fitll. II.NI' are 1111' (. Criteria muneh thl' criI('rioll of the .ji'llr. 11l'1i~illn of Ihm~'"3 non evidenl. whir.h is
till' t!till\l"s npJ!flrellt, for, fI~ "ll.,xagfJl . ~ !lays (and [)"morritl1s
Cf)llIl1H'lId~ him fllr it). IIIf' Illing!'l appa.rl'tJ.t a.re the vision
of tlH' thing~ [lolI-l'\"i.II'l1t: dnd Ihl' critrorlon of iII'.estigaliol\, which is thl' ('/JIII'I'ptioli ... (Iud tl1P critl'rion of ('hlliel"
and aversioll. whil:h i'"l till' aRI'ction!: for that which we
feel is congl'lIial to us j~ cllOiclworthy. but that which w(feel is alien 1)01 to 1)(' t('~ar(h'll with (ivpr5il)fl" (Sext. Adv. math.
\'11, \.1,0). TIll' \attl'r rritl'fion dl'tprmill(,:; the mllral Cllrllillct
of man. silj('{' plt'<ll-lurl' in rongf'lIia! tf, him, wher{'al-l "nnNing is ali('lI. lIow('\"N. till' hl'donil-lffi of UenHJcritu~ dOl'" 111,1
oal
boil down to the prf'fl'fl'lIr{' IJf plt'a~url''''' ~in('e the 't
of living is cont('lllrurnl (l'ythymia). "a "tate in which tlH'
"oul conlinll('s calm and "tro1l2, undi"turt:.ed by any fear
or sllper:;tition or <lny oth('r emotion" (Dioe;. L. IX. 45).
Contentment can only h(' achir\'ed by moderation in enjoyment and ob:-;('rvance of meal-lure. Pleal-lure~ .. hoilid bp npithpr
lacking nor excel-l"i\"{': "'If oue o\"{'r"lep-. the due mea"ure. the
mo~t pieasilrablt, thing:-; beco1l11' 1I10... t unpleasant"' I L. 739.
753). Ob!<enanee of 1I1ea~llre. accordine; to Democritus. calls
for balance bttwt'en one's abilitit" and conduct and b impossible without knowll'tige allll intelligencp. The ethical thl'ory of
Demorritus link~ hedonism with rationalism accounting for
wrong-dOing by lack of knowled2e.
Democritu:-;'" chid contribution to ethics was the development of ~uch moral categorie" a .. consciencp understood
as I\\Nsioll to doing wrong. duty and ju"tice. He is credited
with well-known maxim "r('frain from crimp" not through fpar
but through duty" (I.. G05, 789) ,
The ('thica! principles of Dl'll1ocritus do not make an
elaborate reason('d :-;\"~tem a.s they came down to us mainl\"
in the form of sep.lra't(' maxims. T'hNe are grounds to believe
that they a re but corrupted fragments of lost writings where
Democritus may han.' R:iH'1l il continuous exposition of
his ethienl throry. lIow('wr that may be. these fragments
throw atlditiollal light 011 hi:-; political leaching outlining
till' structure of an idl'a! dl'mO{"fatic state: "The well-run
State is tltt' grt'1.I\t',,1 prot('{lion. and contains all in itself:
whell thi,:. il-l ,,11ft', all i~ ",1ft'. when this is destroyed. all is
d(':-;troy('d"' (L. 595). lIowl'H'r. ill public affairs, like in
pri\'atl' lifl', Dl'\1lurritus remains true to his principle of
167
""
contenUnent or well-beiDI and recommends avoidiol "extremes-submission of individual to the need. of &be
state on the one hand and neglect of public aO.ira. on &be
other: "To good men, it is not advantageous that they sbould
neglect their own affairs for other things; ror their private
affairs suRer. But if a man neglects public aRairs. be Ie
ill spoken of. even if he steals nothing and does no wrona"
(L. 737). Consequently, the right way to achieve contentmea.t
is not to avoid participation in public or private affairs, but
rather to observe measure and keep well within one's powera.
Living in turbulent times, Democritus regarded participation in public affairs. punishments. contradictioDs between
the rich and the poor, the masters and the slaves as unavoidable evils and recommended dealing with them on the priDei
pie nf the golden mean which he also considered applicable to
such moral categories as friendship. mutual assistance. devotion. and the like. The Democritean ethical theory safely
eVldes both the sophistic immorality and the Socratie alJso.
lutisation of moral prescriptions clearly demonstratiDR
the most characteristic feature of all ancient philosophy.
its contemplativeness. Exalting well-being and cheerfulness
IS the goal of ljving and seeking to keep emotional disturbance to a mhtimum. Democritus did not see in philosophy
a meaDS of changing tbe existiog society-his aim was only
to explain it.
6. ...... D
lLilt!,M
.,
ing, nor do
ing" (Sext.
starting point
garding the
Besides
expounded
wrote Th,
The HlItorll
Anaxarchua
sopher and
Owing to
the trulh
Tradldoa
short at the mockery of Alexander the Great hold

ing up to ridicule the attempts to deify him. When the ki..
happened to fan ill and his physician prescribed some beyez:..
.,e with Dour for his malady. Anaxarchus burst out laughing
and said that his god's hope was in the cup with stopa..
Anaxarchu8 evidently carried his scepticism to an extreme
IS, on the evidence of Sextus Empiricu!, he "likened existmi
things to IlCeDe~painting and supposed them to resemble the
impreuioDs experienced in sleep or madness" (ibid. ). Hia
etbical views were essentially eudaemonistic as he recognised
happiness or well-being to be the goal of living. However.
biB eooaemonism was closely linked with scepticism:
happineu. according to Anaxarebus. could only be attained
lIuoalb complete indifference to life (apathy).
HeeataeD of Abder. is known for his commentaries on
H.., aDd Heaiod, works on the Hyperboreans, a legendary
people in the far north, and on the mythology of the Magi
ad ElYPtian .. His book 0 .. II.. Philo.ophy 0/ the Egypt_
ca", down to us in the rendition of Diogenes Laertius
(I, 9-11) and Diodoru. Siculus. Hecataeus held that Ibe
eu.p..-e goal iD life is autarky. i.e. internal freedom aDd
. .pl.ceney of the individual. I n this he differed from anoth.
foJlowttr of Democritus, ausiphanes, who saw it in fearlsr
_ . Hie Tripod devoted to the three facultie. of wisdom
thinking, pod speaking, and pod acting) is baoed o.
belief in the priority of "pbyeis" over "rhetoric". Accor4iq to the testimony of Philodemus, a diSCiple of Epicurul,
NtI_ipb,nes . U seriously engaced. in the studies of logioll
pn. . . . .Dd m.aintained that consistency aud coherence in
........ _lei O8ly be achioved if the speaker proceeded IIiIIIi
\lao knowled .. of lb. whol. and combined tbe "phyeicat..
d, of objecta inaeeelSible to sensee (i.e. of their atomic
.......... ) wit~ th. rational intarpretation of obtained reelll...
i.e. .........._ oIlbe luture lrom the known lacts" (DK 75
B 2) Tlaia oleuly points to th. 18ne..1 trend of a ..ipban
....... .....,. ....rda a Ipihuis of the inductive aa4
....... --.
mons philosophical
and eno H 'ever no less obvious .AI
b " us " " .
ytb 1....._ 1
h \IOtraditiulial religiOu8-m ~I~--'
Ie
.
. dealism The launu.,"
dE" 'eloPIR~e~ of obj~tive Idealism.
~'ho~e ~~:I reaction to t.he atomistic
~~:uOggh Plato never mentioned the
was clear already t.p the ancie!lta
. sion was not on'y the hostihty
fm: but also the nderst.andiol
I~:t~h himself agai at t.he prince
L. IX. 40). Moder .
dialogues reflected ~18
and at the same time
opponent's
.
which surraced m
of open
materialism
and religion.
provided the
its banner in
f
Page 172 J'

.
Ibt
lin ...... I rolll
ERH.\TL,\l
bot tOm
mllin"
SIIOVL
DREAD
"t)'
il I nOa,1 . I II ,iliaciI.'''
3S"
. ('I'eral
. air.)
I.Ialy UIlU . ,,,-387 PI
j1
/'sh('d f,." SIcily wh('r alho
Plato
\'I.!,
ed
wndly relat'IOns
e c est'J.
- -
7. Ufl" and Work
Platn W,IS h()1"1l about '127 B e ,

.
,\1111'111,111 famil\" lh." "'It' ,._ . '\11 'lyrtJlIIIIlI'III hut Hot rich
.
[
.'
.'
\\.1'1 II Iloh]" hirth In'.
,l'l.. III
, ..
,\. flh [allll'r .\ristun
(' ,
IIII! 11'" ps(",'n\ rro I \tl

,
,(){ rw', alill llit, Luni!,. [ , : , '
II . .' ' H'a s last king
".'IL'
. k'
. 0
liS llIo\hpr PI"
,t
.1 IIl'imilll alltl rrit'lId, [s "
Ilf 10111' earnp from
~I a t 0 .S rl'al II'l1llt'
I .0011 I l(' hlllOIl' \t'
.
_,. \ . '
S..
11'1110111 law"i\,l'r
"
I,
)~
,\\,IS
fls\ork,,'
whll'l! Itt' WI'III dowII in hi"lor .'
I I
.111.( _ II'
o~n'd
..
.
.'11{' lIi1Jllt'
Ill!'an", hl"o<\(isholl\,It'fld
~ 10 hiS ,Ilhl!'llc hU111 (pllllyf
'\111I'1I;.\IIs In'rt' lab' '" or ~tOIlI), lIi~ falllily and 1IIIII"r
. ,
r (r1\I'U nlll of \",'
,
"
,tilt I rd~lrll('fl 10 .\11l{'I1~,
' l ... lIliI J)" I H' Spartan~
I lato ~ \'IIII("al;oll. likl' , '

~IOlh
phy~i('al and mental :IIIlJ othl'l" nobl!' .\tll\'niall~, \i,iI:and mU~I(", III' b known tal' lHc\udt'd gymlla~li('. grammar
of IIl'radit('an ph;lo~o 11:1",a\'(> :~lad(' au !'tlrly aC'III<lintantl'
IIlnll!'IICI' of ~1)llhi"l (,.,,' ,"
prlslIllIahly
oW;II" it
t'le
,
1 If to..; who
I I
'"
I!lIIlH' "f hi~ Ilialol{lll"
II'
1111 l\' alpr IIl1ul\, H ("h,U',WIt'!"
dm'\rilH':'\of "arllll'llill::" ;' 11111,'" I<I\!' Ihol'oll/o('III\' ~llldil'd 1111'
'0
~Iot>d
i~
1'1'<1:-011 In 1U'\il'\'I,'ill:I;U10 a;ld Ihl' Pylhaj,Col'\:'U\", Thl'l"l'

t II' a'omi~'il' Ihl'OI'\" p,.,lt 1,1' Hid a 'hol'oll~h knllwil'dgl' of
111111'11 ,-\HH' 10 pOI'II"\,
' ' 'Illd
,I 0i' I~ al"o
.
j' k 110\\1\ to h;\\"I' 111'\'oll'd
','[1111 ,lyriral wIlI'k~, ;\~
~ :'I'I'~ 1,II'd \\'ilh Illllll!'r()ll~ I'piral
'
,\, \\ II "
I 1.....
1' Il'~ and (,olll!'lli{'~,
' r 1:-\
'
, 111'1"1\'
_ ' ~' 1.l'nla~I'
thaI"
I
_,11111(\1'11111"1
(,11111' I U\\'11 II
..
,,'
'Pllt'lll" \\'l'illl'lI ill
I
a , so illr\lI(it'-"
,J(
_
L' I'on Ill"
... I(, ~"IIlI'
alll"",,t ' II' orlll o[
IgJ'am ... ,llo\\,I'\'{"
.... ol'r"ll ",IIl.1I1'
'
,I ~tI{"h " profound
:-0111'('1'" I ' , '
111"1\"
illl -: 1,1'" 1\I'llu<lmlarH'p wilh'
" t
\1"
.,II' " lllrlll'd ,rar.wd\'
Ill' "., lH!'~s"(1l
.,'
It' \ullng 11Ot'!
\\"1'11
t' [
"~I ~I'
"
'Yo It>
;\' I n II ,.,
II
')~oph\",'
,II
"I'
U~
I'
\ \ n l h'Il alii , 10(11\'1'
him~I'lf
alo F,,','
hr~1 IIW\ ''" "rral!'~
'
hi!llirl'
ahtllli ~n7 'It I ,.
,[ S' '
I' IIKhl ),I'ars I\{' Wj',
[' 1I Ill~ nll'\'Iilllol' lurnf'd
I orrah-.. 81) 1 I r
' UII{' 0 tli'
ahllull'l
)":1'11'
t ,A.tIIl'IIS lIfh'r hi~ m':stIllO~1 dl'\"(lI .... {1 pupils
.
1\'1'1 1 1 1 M '
., I'r S {'xI'r"t
"
IUlla.I'ril\' , . ,
('gara and ,It
'
HIli, 1'01'
_, I lilt" S{'\'I'ral 11'-IpS abro<lll
,j
1'1' a shurt q
. ' ,"
',
I
.}O\
a~ III liS
, II o)O,13S7 Plalo \'it,
Ii:' ,I'
with Dioll, a hrotherin-law of Diunysus I. the famous tyrant

of Syracus~, Howev~r, for an unknown ~ea~on the tyrant got
!(o angry With the phIlosopher that sold him mto slavery. Plato
was brought to Aegina and bought by a Cyrenean Anniceris,
Wben Plato'!( friends collcded the necessary sum and offered
it to Anniceris, the hitter refused to take the ransom and let
Plato free. Tradition holds that Plato used the money collected by his friends to buy a sit . . with a grove of trees outside the
walls of Athens and fOllnded there his school, the famous
Academy, called after Athenian hero Academus. Later, the
name came to denote scientifrc institutions of high repute.
In 367, after the death of Dionysus I. Plato made another
trip to Sicily on the invitation of the former ruler's son Dionysus 1I. Like on his first visit, the philosopher hoped to realise
his ideal of enlightened ruler, but his hopes were again rudely
~hattered, In 361-360 Plato made his third trip to Italy and
It also proved futile, According to ancient evidence. Dionysus
showered him with gifts, but Plato rejected them. The relations between the tyrant and the philosopher became very
strained and Plato had to leave the inhospitable island. His
mishaps were partly attributable to friendship with Dian who
strove to o\'erthrow Dionysus II and establish an oligarchiC
government in Syra('usl.',
The philosopher died in 347 B,C,
Plato's ht>ritage includes the Apology oj Socrates, 23 genuine and 11 disputahle dialogues. as well as 13 letters, some of
them incontestably authentic. The dates of Plaw's works caoIlot be fixed exactly. By and large, his creative activity caD be
roughly divided into four periods. The first or early period
started after Plato had made the acquaintance of Socrates and
ended with his trip to Sicily. It includes the Apology oj Socra-
tes, Crito, Euthyphro, Laches, Lysis, Charrnides, protagoras

and the first book of his RepubliC. These dialogues are notable
for a broad u!le of the Socratic method of analysis of concepts,
The second or transitional period (the eighties of the fourth
century) is keynoted by the emergence of the theory of ideas.
w
It inr-iudl's dialogues Meno, Gorgias, Euthydemw. Crall/l ,
Lesser Hippias, Greater Hippws,ion, and Menexenw (the genuineness of the latter three is disputable). The third period
of maturity (the seventies and the sixties) is represented by
dialogues Phaedo, Symposium. Phaedrus and books II-X of
the Republic where Plato develops the classical form of his
\1,1
theory of idE-oS as the ~lIbstnllrt' of rt'nlit .

trend as such. as wl'lIlls bv dilling",," Th
,y, I.t', tht> idl'aiisl
hiS
, , ' Fa{' etll!t P me
.
Sop ~s , . talesman, Timaell$, Hud erit . _/. " flr nide8.
growmg Interest in til(' tll('ory of klJ()~~I('~ ~Ch rt'v('al PlatQ'"
~~ the
hand, and ore indicntiVl' of his ~tt~nd ~Osmology,
e eaf y form of the theory of ideas on tI
mp to revi~.
toe
or late period includ('s Laws a v('r~ I l(> d~t~('r. The fourlh

g
already free from any innue;.ce of S on
I~ ague which is
r
Besides the works listed abov 8 Deff/le Ideas.
collections traditionally include
we ~s letters. Plato's
t~n by his pupil .Philippus of Opus, d~~nbOt~~t ~robably writblades, (first), Hlpparchus, Clitopilon M"
. dialogues Alci~
ous .dlalogues Demodocus, Sic h,'
mos, patently spuriU
',,!,sttce, On Virtue; a minor wo:: H; ; ~lcyon, .E~yxio.s, On
gives 185 defmitions of ancient
. Ot (~he Limits) which
~he treatise On the SOIlI of the U!l~I;~:oPhlcal concepts, and
In fact an exposition of PI t ' T'
e and Nature which is
of Italian Locri. but actuaa~ s tmaeu.s ascribed to Timaeus
t1;e E
unknown writer. All these worts ~~Ion~mg to the pen of an

a long-st.anding tradT
asslfied as PlatoneanlllHI{'r
the studies of Platoni~:\ a;e undoubtfdly illuminating in
book of ancient philosophy I'k
l neth~ hardly be considered in a
for the same reason into th e b'" one. Neither shall we go
doctrines."l
'
e pro em of Plato's "unwritte~
In ~ssessing Plato's philoso h
I?se sl~ht of its central ob'ecti~e':' as a w~ole. one must never
tlficatlon of the contempdra
rto prOVide a theoretical juswhich was undergoing in h'
po IS system of ancient Greece
lean age, the heyday of a~s . I~e a profound crisis. The Pericneve~ to return, and the foulrn I ependent city-st~t.e had gone
~rowlng might of coalil,o, II' I~entllry bore witness to the
'.
I ~ {'II( IIW to," . I
I
Ie IllC
empires of the ~","
'"
.alc s 1 Ie future Helwa s S ,11
.,d 1I-OI"I('nlal lv,,,, Y
I a I'Ive and fel.lgh,
l
."
et t IIe polis system
In cnse Ideolo .. I b
, Th'
glca attics for sun'i-
IS problem is CO
I
ruet from h
!LneftN With uttl'm
f
the ~onlen~ oe scaue~ed remain.~or Plat"'~ PIII)~~oIU~oml' seh?IHt"l!. 10 r~eol1st.
tiall, diff. r,P,lato s oral learlling ('luiult'd P""
d .'IOUII' 11IflL~ III Anslolir,
<ren rom hIS w 'tl
d'
' " ullr~'a'onabl'
I
come into prominen
rI en . 18IoJ(UI'~. III re~etl
y.lo It' "~~l'lI
Plo.to. Th~ Wrltt~n ce a.;'~iJve.n rIlle 10 I'XlenSive liler!lyeor(s Ih" ~uhjl'('1 ha,
197<1). Wt' Ilrt' inclfnn
I'IWfI.111'1l Dor/rllll's, Routled ure W(>J.N. Findlay.
(''IOteric doctrine
ed. to thHlk, though, thai lh~ .ge and Pllul, London,
di~ciples in the AC:~:~ h(' J,ad on(' and r('~('ated :~~o~ta"ce of Plalo's
for a Irend toward
y. nI'l' ."01 be Overe~hmat"d: be' n y to h,~ c1o~est
it could hardl . Ita s math('matl('.al pr('!'nhHion
IIIg notable mainly
f'xplicitly stat;d inv~h~('Pd",ted from the ba~i(' pri,,('rp~~:so,Plh'irJlI ('onfepL~,
la oi'U's.
. 0
'" Ilh,JII.'l<iphy
"
'"
0' .
t that I mp. cntred ,trl)lwd thl! prf)hll!m~

'itt.
I I
f tt'lij{iflll tlncl l'tIIlCS.
u TIll' ~flrialllyst"'lII of II( ler.ll G~l>etC wa .so cliJS<'ly lillk('d
with tl'ligil)" that till! Hellcn~c wrnd c~lIld"l.Ot but C'UII ('lVI'
thrill lI~ a lIilll{lt! whole. HI'lt~{lous holidays WI'ft' p"'l'rIL, of
!!tIlte illlpnrtHIII'C and thn dpities cf'gaf(lI~d as cily pmtpctonJ
(e.g. Athl'lHI in At.hpll~) v.:er.e ille~Liflf'd with thl> city iL'If'1f
religion mcrgf'd WIth patriotism. 1 he city JawS WfOre ellfMCI'i!
in lhE' namt' of till' pl\trnlli~ing dl'ily and the s('mi-divinl' law
giver was regardp<J Mllhl' mouthpiece of the god!!. ~() 1f!S! rigid
were moral prc~cripti/)n:i sanctifll'd hy statl> alld ft'Ji~ion. \Vith
the growth of class contradictions in slavl'-owning !\l)cif'ty
the rcliginu!! dogmas and moral principles, as well as the once
indisputable authority of the city law. bE'came thE' objects of
rational analysis and more and more frequently w{'rc callpcl ill
tjuestion. The ideolo~ical advocates of the pa~t (e.g. Ari~lo
phanes) openly canH' out against the att(,lIIpt:> 'If clJntempo
rary "physiologers" to account for natural phE'nomena in na
turalistic terms, even though they did not banish thE' gods
from their systcms. Far great'r was the "sin" of Ikmocritus
lind the sophists: the former in his atomistic theory dispt'nspd
with lhE' god!; aitn2E'ther, wherp3s the lattl'r reducE'd religion
to a trick specially invented in order to dupe the }wlievE'rs alld
hold them in leash ... In thE'ir eyes the law-. wen" no longN
the divine gift of ProvidE'ncE': being a human creation. th('y
were subject to changE' by human beings.
Besides the openly atht'istic doctrines, the orthudox spirit IIf
the traditional city-state religion was sE'riously undE'rmined
by the spread of various individualistic religiolls h'achings
concerned with a concretl' human soul rather than wilh IhE'
problems of the state.
The tragedy of Plato as man aud philosopher ('onsislt'll in
glaring contradiction between his philosophical and artistic
genius on the olle hand and the hopE'lessn('ss of hi!! attt'mp!s
to r('vivl' thl' dE'ad past, on the otlll'r. On the objt'ctin' ~id{',
Plato's philosophical !'y!'tt'llI, reaclionary as it was, synthe
sised the dialectical achievements of prE'Vious GrE'E'k thought
and repre~enlE'd an important stagE' in the dE'vclopmE'nt of
ancient philo:.ophy.
Speaking of the sources of Platoni:-;m, one should namt' the
Hl'raclitean doctrine of constant flux and its sophistic inlNpretatiolls, thE' EIE'atic conception of One Bl'ing. thE' t.!ialt,rtic'5
of Socrate~, and PythagorE'anism. Plato accE'pt"i the HE'rac
//1' war
fir illeas
litean view that all things are in a constant process of chan e

but regards it only applicable to the sensible world with ~ ,
constant motion and instability. Since true knowledge c~~
only be the knowledge of the stable and the universal Plat
turns his attention to the arguments of the Eleatic 'schoo~
which advanced the doctrine of being as the single , motionles
and universal object of knowledge revealing itself to though~
only and being thought itselr. Socrates who set himself
the task of evolving general concepts and was speCifically concerned with universal ethical definitions and axiological determinations of being, such as Truth, Goodness, Beauty, gives
P lato hi s "dia lectics." FinaHy. Pythagorean ism enables Plato
to bridge the gap between the general and the individual and
to eHect a passage, through the agency of numerical relationships, from universal definitions to the sensible world of Heraclitean nux.
Plato's philosophy should not be construed as a mechanical aggregate of his predecessors' doctrines. Even if we could
trace every a~pe~t of Platonism to previous and contemporary
thought (which IS far from being the case!), it would not detract from its ?rigin~lity. Platonism mainly owes its unique
charact:er and lO~egflty to the theory of Ideas l whereby it is
a classical doctnne of objective idealism.
8. From Critieism of Sensuous Knowledge to the Theory of Ideas
In his dialogue Theaetelus Plato asks through the mouth

of Socrates: What is knowledge? He points out lhat knowledge cano?t h.e ~educed to sensory experience as sensations are
unstahl~, ~ndlvldual and ~uhject to constant change thereby
contrad lctlllg the very notion of knowledge always directed to
the cons.tao~ and the universal. Sensuous knowledge has no
other cnterlon but the man himself who thus becomes "the
measure of all things" like in Protagoras. Now why should it
:~t~i~;rt~:'i!~~~.i:l~e~~~i:~nd~nn~\:~~ G\~~~:Ii.~e
~oes
Uislt
image which
not
"appearance' even "external
,..
I S primary meaning was
b
d ' . .
appearance, I,e. the visible image of an
o Jeet, an It IS 111 thl~ sense that the r('laled word 'd
d d
I
used by Plato. Yel in his philosophical dOClrine ~ tl 0$ an. I eo. were a so
dlnerent meaning.'!: the external appearance, the e~~~~('Y hrl' a~.least three
the mmd only, and it~ l.eleological principle. The'e m~en~nan 0 ject o~en. to
cld\' III a concrete notion a~ under~lood in diall'cticar I ~s cahn onl) comi! b~ thl' old term "idea". In thl' historico-philo~o h~IC w leh denot('s
F.nRh~hspeaklnR counlri('~ the tl'
"d ". I
peal ht('rature of
.
..
.
rm I I'a IS r('(lut'ntll replaced b the
lRrm form . which ha~ its ad\"antag('~ th()URh may 'IOml'tim ..... b
"I'd"
.
'"~
e mlS
ea mg:
176
I"
Ian and not il pig or a cynocephalus. a mythical creature

b~ ~ nth (' body of a mao and the head of a dog? Besides, true
~It l '\('dg(' implies understanding which cannot be provided
~;~~(' s(>nses: heari ng a foreign language without understand.
it cannot be called knowledge.
In\he only w~y Ollt appears to ~e the c~nclusion that t~ue
k wi edge can only be rational, I.e. obtalOable by the mlOd
ndo related to intelligible objects. In other words. the
an
lru(' objects of rational knowle d.ge are oot sensl"bl e t h"lOgS,
but ideas that represent true belllg..
.
The concept of ideas is expounded. With. u~most c.lurJty
in Greater Hippias. Socrate~ asks sop.hls~ ~Ipplas: Is ~t not
by justice that the just are Just? Agam, IS It not by.wlsdom
t hat the wise are wise, and by goodness th a~ all thlOgs a r~
good? Then aren't all beautiful things beautifu l by bea u t~.
The simp le-minded sophist unaware of th e. trap answ.ers I,n
th e afnrmative. Then comes the next questIOn: What IS th~s
t hin g. beauty, whereby all beautiful things beco~c beau.tlfuP Hippias answers by giving an examp le: a beaut~ful maiden is a beauty. Socrates retorts: Isn't a beautiful mare
a bea u ty? Must we 1I0t say that the mare, too, or a.l 'fast ~
beautif ul o ne is a beauty? What about the beauhfu po~.
Is n 't t h at a beauty? Bri nging thu~ in th~ ~roblem of ~o~
relativ ity of beauty, Soc rates co n tmues: Sir. you ~o .
grasp t he t ru t h of Heracl itus saying t h at the most e;1~~I;
ful of apes is ug ly compared with th e human ~alce; a.nd
'
.
I
h n grouped Wit I mal ens ...
d
11
t the resu lt
mos t bea u t if ul o f pots IS ug y ~ e
But if ma id ens a re grouped With go S, ~ I no.
;. IV" II
lped With maldells.
be t he sa me as wh en pots we re gr ol
H I I_
"
"d "
g ly? Does not
erac
not t he mos t beau ti fu l m a l en appea r u
.
I 'Th
"5'
won
s
e
wi
se ~
it us w ho m we a dd uce em pl oy t Ilese ve ry ,
.
,
'd
.1\ appea r bu t an ape 111
of me n , w he n com pa red to a ~? S'hWl\
. d mi t Hippias that
wisdo m and beauty a ll d all e lse.
a we a
,
'
" II
I pr~{"tif<llly idt'lllifl('d iI
,I
lov
AnslO
('
WIO'
. I' I~'
I
"form" wns u~1I111 I Y ('UIPOYC{.
. II "",,~in"morlihelnl1\ ."{I.'
rvd " .l,ing
~
with mor/JIII: wlll'Tt'IIS I' l IIttlllSII,111",! 'lh~Illn('(
' .
un thf.' 1)f('C(' d('II l' ,
I.
1~ld('rlltlOn ~n
. . l I'
of "id('n", Prof('f.'di ng frOI1l t liS COl.
. I " r ' 10 indi{"~t(' Ilwl II IS 0 )1
w(' ~hnll n~(' th(' t('rnl "!<Il'II' Willi {",II"t.:l
. ~ it i~ nol 1\1I(;lll1ilinr to the
ulldt'rstood in th(' P lalolll'lIl1 S\'n~(': tlH' 1l10~(, ;;okaphil~sophrrs: I'rom Tllllle.'
Engli~h re,ul('r (d. W.K.S. Glllhne. Th.C ;~e~MII or goodn('''~ or ('(p,ullt~.
/0 1>Ia/o p. 89: "We ~ily thill w(' ha,:
wl1<'11 we Inll; of Io:ood \\111(' Of
which (';mb l('!1 U~ lO mel, n th(' ~:"~II' Ithltll,~nl ehnncNI. altholljl:h 1111'''' nl8~.
, ,'od
,rickeler ('{llIlIl Irl!\fllo:l~~ .II\( e I
.,.."" lind frifl;f.'h'f~. trl~IIIt'('S
v
' .
011 b('IWl'('fl "
!le('m to be little ~ I\iln'd III COIl1I11
anti Ch llUC{'II").
Ih4' most ht'autiful n1<li/ll'n is ugly III cOllipHrisun w th th4

nH'(' of gods?"
Sflrrall'S nf'rnands an absolutp dpfinition o( be... Ily .dn
Ilippias makes anoth('r attempt: "Ui'<luty is nothing t'lse b,~
gold,., For I suppos<, w(' all kIIow that if al1ythin~ has gold
acillrd to it, it will app<'ar iWillltiflll."
To this Sotral('s rppli('s that "Phl'illias ... did not gi\"{>
his i\tilrna rye's of gold or IIsr gold for thl' rpsi of lH'r facl'
, Ill' m,Hlr till'm of ivory;" hrsicil's, if w(' arp to rhoo.sl' Iw
tWl'l'n thl' two 1;1(111'.'-1, OIH' of wond a 1111 tht' otht'r of gold, WI'
SIlOllld llndfHlbll'llIy prl'fl'r til(' forllH'r as ilion' apilropriah' In
till' soup allil tiH' pot" (IJipp. Maj. 2}!!ld) ,
lIippias is llnahlt' ti, (h'filll' Ilf'allliflli a'i slI("h anl\ ~')("ra
I,'s rOllcilldl's III(' disl"llssion in \l1I'sr' words: "All that IS
IW:illtiflll is difflrult" (ihill. :{(H (" p, ;;!);-)). 1':lsl'wht'rp ~IJ('
ral,'s !-ilatl's, ".'\iothing mak('s a thing IW<ltltiful bill th,' pre
1'11('1' or parli<"ipatillll of i)pauly ill wll<lll'\'('r way or ilia II 11('1
ohl<lilll'll. .. I slollliv ('IIIIt/'nd Ihat ltv l)patlty all hl'fHltiful
Ihillgs 1)('('OIlH' hl'au'lifui. Thi~ <q)IWar~ II) IIII' io hI' Ihl' !'af(',,1
ilIlSW('r whidl I ('all givl', I'itllt'r In lIIy!'!'lf nr to allllllu'r"
(PhiH'do, 100 d)
!'Iato's allS\Hr is ind"I,,1 ahslllutl'l.,. "sarl'"
IWI'au~I' il
hoils Ilown to a simp'" lalll()lo~y: thill~s' an' Iwauliflll 111'('0111<.;4'
IIH'Y arl' rI'lah'll to twaut\' as Sill'll. Plain ill f.wl striws
to ("plaill Iht' hrailliful with Ilw Iwlp of his tllPory I)f idt'as
\\!ru'h iryposlalis('s or IlIrns IlitO <I s"pilrall' rl'illily Ihe 1I1IIsl
~I'ru'r;ll (,(Inn'pls us('d hy Illall and tIIOS4' grallimati("al forllis
thal ilrt' IIl't'd,'d ttl qualify 1I1I'1ll. Tht' ulldt'rlyil1l{ principii' of
lhi,.nal\'1' lhl'IH'Y of illl,its clllIsisl~ ill 1111' assumptioll Ihat Iht'
1IIt1lv1(hl;ll ohj(,(,ts graspl'tI hy 11111' ~"I1SI'S Illust hilvt' their
1'lIulIll'r'parls whi<'h {'an ollly Iw ('Ollh'Ulplal('(1 by tlIP mind.
IItppra:-; (likl' llw inlt'rI,I('ulol's .. 1 ~OI'lillt's in Ill(' TJ/('(lt'
1t'llls) rashly a('I'I'pls thl' pn'mist, tlial thl' sourrl' of tht' Iwall'
liflll is tWittlly as sl1fh, wlWrt'LlpOI1 hI' ('01111101 l';;1"1IP(' till' (,011
I"IIISIOlis fo~rl'd upnn him hy Plalo. Bill is 1111' prl'mist' r('al
I.,. hilI/I? I',mpiraltl"ally not! Tlu' world arHulU1 liS (all its
OhJl'l'ts alld plll'llIIlIIl'I1<1) IS a IInily of Ihl' indiyilltlal, tht' parti
nrlar alld Iht' 1I111\"I'rs<ll, an,1 it is IIlIly Ihrough abstraction
Ihal WI' I'illl .li\"orr'l' HIt'1ll frulll /JIlt, annllll'r. Bl'allly dol'S not
1"1 I f~tlt"'"It' a Iwaullfullll'lllil'lI, a Iw<tutifulmarl', pnt. statut',
('\1"
)1'1 II IS nnl iI IIIl'rl' ~11Il1 lolal of tiwsp inliividtJ<lI
"IiJI''''~ or tllP particulars, ~tlt'h as goltl. i\'llr\", ('te 'Thew,!r\'ldlJal I'XI..;tS olily ill tilt' ('1l1111l't'lioll Ihal 'Ipads to the'
\
fl(" Jlllver
exisls. )nl~' In the indl'ildual and
rsa
Dlve' Ie Hid vldu ... : I,"
.
\
I'IS (In one w~y or
hroug
('
..
very
mdlvlI
ua
h
)
\Ill ver!!")1
EvPrv 1Iniversal i!i (a fragnlt'lIt, or an
aool"er I th~ (,s. ('nee of an individual. EVl'ry univ{'rsal
'pC(
, )
I ' d 'IVI'd na \ 0 b'Jl'rls. \''.wry
I pproxilllal
'Iy mhraccsn \1 tWin
onlY ~d .\ ellh'rs Itcomph'lply inlo the IJnivl'rsal, '11",. I'lt".
lilt \VI \I
0 r transltlOlI!'
',
individual is cOllnl'd,'( \ \ )y I IlOllsallU~
.
E,.NY
'\ Uil \5 (II'lings,' b
' proc
_ I ther kiTHJS n r'III( \'1\'11
r t'nOO!('lIa,
",It ,I )0 l't(., 1 The unlVI'rsa
.
I lorn {Jut 0 r II'
liS d'iii \pc t If a I 11111" y
('~SlS ,
h'
'
'I
I
'
b't'('OIlH'S 1111 "Idl'a" Ihal I\S II!-i pXlslplICI' III tit' l'X rat'l1Iplr,
ieal worll!'
.
.
TIll' lhl'ory of ('oglliliun shows that ,Ih(' ullI\"prsal t',,~ls
. lht' individual <lnd III(' partitular, the stahlI' In thl' \i.\.
~Iilablt' .lind lIIuti\hlt', tilt' law in thr diversity or pIH'IWIIH'lIa.
Thl' universal (unity) {'an only h(' grasped.as a result of ,abo
straction. i,l'. lIlt'nlal isolation of. propertlt.'s of tilt:' ohJt'd
or (,/HIIlt'Clioll!! hl'twl'pn it~ IlrOpp.rtll'~' th~ugh hotl~ till' unt
v('fsai illltl thl' individual (divl'rslty) arl' Iniu.'r('otlll Ihl'
jl'('t~ and I'Yj'nL-; of till' fl'al worl? r~:prt'se.nt1llg ob!rcllH' ;~s
pt'rls of fl'ality, Accnrdin~ In. \"1.'11111,. till'. ~Irhotorn)'. n.f hlJlI~'II:
kn\lwll'd~I' and Uu' po!-'!-'tl)llrty of Idealism (=r{'!lgltl,n) .H~.
giwn alft'ady in tile first, elem:;r~ru abstractwn .hnl~sl
in g('lll'ral and parti(tililr hOtIS(':;.
rt)(' format.lOll. I)f ,11\ al:.
slract Ilotion is it l'tlInph'x aet whirh lIlc!udes III It th(' pos.
sibility of till' ni~lrt of (,III las), from Iif<' an~, cOIl:wqut'ntl).
uf lht, transformation of th4' abstract concept lIlto ~ pa~t;"ul'l~
IWin,l( Thl' world of Id('<lS thus turns Into till rt,l III \I
,
I'
,I -I ',s rl'''''lrd('c\
ilS pnnlar\". 111
~upra.sl'nslloui 0 )IN:ls W \It I
fo,'
ft'lation to llw phy~klll worlt!. .
.
.
. "
\
I'I'ly of id('alislil IS also rooh'd In 1,lIIg u ,lgt,
I{, POll!'l)I I
I . tl ' 11IIV{'f'
as wonb t!H' "maltN" of langlHlge, ('xprrs:; 011) It 1
.
s'll" Prin;itiv(' lingui!-ilies proert'ils frolll the assumptlOll t~~'I~
01:
\0
t:I~lt'. ItYl~ II,~
afrtnily betwl'('1l tht'III. and twing IInable to frnu I HI,III<\ 010":.'; .
~~(;ry word rt'llrl'sl'IIL-; II (Ipfinitr ohjl'('t dta'
'II
I Ylii('al world comrs to Ill.' ('nll( 11
I
of ah~tracl wort s. III I~ PI,:, ,1'
. 1 Ihl' world of t1uiwr
sioll that tlH'Y fIIu!>!l ('X~SI t' Sl\\ I(rr, II
sal,
c(Jn\('('PII~ l;r."::~~:I,;;
'llral 1Il0dl'rn analylit'al philnsol'hy

t l$ IOU ( l l
.
. ., f Phill's IIWllry nf 1III'1is
tt'llcl!-i to r{''''ard tlw hastf prl'mls~ II
,.
'.... I. \
"
'II rIll' rnnfusloll of Ihl' grillllIll.llIt .1 .111'
IJlcrl'iy as a f('SU "
1
. '(" 11 Iffl J\ rks \ ..I.
'On 11,[, (}n,'~II"" "I U"lt, ,,,., t'("
,
\'1
:lX, t~~:'
INlin.
r'1~;;:~"'Con~I" <"In'!"( i\ri~I"tl,'
8 1\",,1;
ontological predication which ran \vt'll bl' l'\pmplith'd bv th

famou~ "ontological ar.gum~nt'.' fol'. till' ('Xist~nr(' or' Go~
(God IS perfect, perfection entails exl~t('nr(' a~ IL'i predicat
hence, God exists) .. Indeed, "Go~" and "exists" being b~t
the grammatical subject and predlc~te and pertaining only to
thoughts, it is inc~rr~ct to predicate physical, objective
existence of God. Similarly, such statements as "Unpunc_
tuality is reprehensible" and "Virtue is its Own reward"
seemingly dealing with universals ("unplInctuality" and
"virtue") do not imply their existence in the ontological
sense.'
However, Plato would hardly rank among great philosophers if his idealism were but a fallacious doctrine based on an
incorrect predication. Having abstracted the "world of
Ideas" as a special object of philosophical investigation,
Plato laid the foundation for the analysis of ideal and
idealised objects, i.e. concepts as such, irrespective of
how they were obtained and in what relation they stood to
the objects of the physical world. This preliminary investigation was a stepping stone to the Aristotelian formal logic
and Archimedean physico-mathematical description of objects
isolated, as it were, from nature and treated in their
ideal form free from any chance innuences. Yet the "rational kernel" of Plato's theory of Ideas was not only overshadowed, but also distorted by his idealism. We shall later
discuss this question in more detail and turn now to Plato's
conception of knowledge and to the functions of Ideas in the
world.
Since Ideas ~re c~nceived by Plato as specillc objects
of knowledge discerlllble only by reason and abiding in a
transce~dent w.orld, learning can be nothing but their conLer:'piatlOn. TillS presupposes the soul's immortality and its
ability, upon return to earth and incarnation as a man, to
recollect the vi~io:n of true being. Such a doctrine i Il('vitably
leads to a r~hglOus world oullook, baSically mytbolog i('.al and centrmg around the notions of deity and immortality of soul.
. Plato is awa.re of the difficulties involved in the process ?F. recollection (a~mnesi.s). The soul is liable to forget
realities and needs either to be remind('d of them by a
i-iage, or made to perform compl('x logical operations. The lat-
s..... Gill)(>rt Ihle.

S),.,ll'flHltir,II)' 'I,
I 1
'
'
~'ailll"l
....
dl
'in
Anf(lliIf(j', Fir~t S(-rij'''. Blafkl"'I'lI ()'
1 I~" ..'(pn'~Hons . In;
,
.
'( uri
,,,i,S, PI) 11 22.
)
'. 'lIustnll'C1 in Mpno by th(> example of an ignorant

tel' caSl' IS I
~ag made by Socrates to "recollect" soml'
w
i
d
'Ie d .
bov
sIavl'
riral
propositions
hl'
hac
never
stu
met
geo
t'",lt Oil the answers of the slave, Plato makes
...
f Socrates: "Th er(' are
,Com men
I
"Oil throlwh the mouth 0
I...
h 'IS an d
thiS co ncto U
bt, S
trul'
notions in him, bot h w h'l
lee
ah~aysh
" ot a man which only need to be awaken,d into
while e IS n
'.
.'
I
'
by putting qUl'stlOns to him, hiS sou must remalfl
wI d
klno e pg~ssessed of this' knowledge; for he must always
a.ways
)
h I' be or not be a man "(M eno, 86a.
,
eltT~liS statement is clearly. untenable: even a .most Ign?osses.!)es in virtue of hiS humalllty, cerlalfl
rant~ P~~~~~~IPkIlOwledge and is capable of fomuiating simpl~
~:~c'~~if"c propositions under expe.rt ~uidance. The s~ory f 0a
Socrates and an untutored slave IS s,mpl Y an ~~a~p e I~ c
good teacher and a clever pupil, but not 0 f sou s reco e r "of th(> world of eternal truth.
.
f
10~lato's investigation of "Ideas" brougbt him r~c.e to ace
h;,
with the problems of lo~ic ~nd res~.~~~ int~cn,~xtt~~~I~~e~f ~~:

methods of r~tional lhlllk~ng ~rfJ r.st laa:~he abilitv to ask and
term in two d.. fferent meat'ng;90i) \ e in the sOcratic sense
answer questIOns (Craty us,
? ' : ~r I ues. and, second,
in which it i~ widely.r~presented III hl:colrad~;g to their kinds
as the ability to dIVide ~oncep!~n ale idea. Dialectic in t~is
and el~bracc each one ut ~r af ro~edures called colle~tlOn
sense IS based on two oglc
p fc view and bring Widely
and division: (a) "To take ~ synop ~hat one Dlay make clear
scattered things under ?n.e I~e~, s~e wants to expound at the
by definition whatever It IS btl a
t ,'t up at. the natural
,
(b) "T be a e 0 cu
"
time', and
.
0
t. rke an incompetent butcher
jOints, not hacking at any par I
(Phaedr. 265c-e).
. . as the ascent of the mind
Plato thus conceives dl3~ectlc"b the light of reason only,
directly to the essence of tlungs f Y
"As a result the
. t nce 0 sense.
.
I
and withou~ any aS~ls a If t the end of the intcll.e~tu~,
dialectician "f\l1ds 11Iffise .3 It. t the end of the VISible
worlds, as in the case o! sig 1 at of dialectic extends bey(Rep. 532ab). Yet. Plato S.c.OI: ce P isteme) and reasoning
e
l
ond the process of cognlt.. ~
(dPanalogy. The two latter
(dianoia) , including also FaIt ~t~~e opinion (do.la) , the t"'~o
faculties taken together c onst , knowledge (episleme)
.
or
fI'"
former ones, SClellce
(Rep, 534.),
I :-; I
,0
1.'he ~i\'i.!'ion of .knowh'(!gl' int(~ ~Cif'II("t' alltl )plnion is of

major slglllfic3nCl' III Plalo s do('tl'llH'. sine' the fOrHwr f('Jat'
to Ideas anti is the philosnplH'r's primp (.:Olll"('fll, whereas UC!i
latter p~r~ains to tlw sens('s. ~t:it'nct' gives us the truth. wh:~
reas opllllon docs not go beyond tilt, st'llsihlt world. Even
mathematical science:; cannot grasp the whole truth as Ion
as they adhere Lo their own principles and are incapable o~
apprehending them, Le. linking th(,1H with the knowledge of
Ideas. The only SOUfel' of ce rtitude is the knowledge of Ideas
Plato's logical doctrine is v('I'Y contladiC'lory. Unlike til .
me~hod. of "division" ~f a generic concept into specifiC one:
which I.S presented With sufficient cia I'i ty, "collection" is
~'ague, ,~f not a,!together mys lic, The philosopher describes
It as a, release of the soul from something like "barbarian
~uagmlre," ~s direct insi.ght into the essence of being.
~he soul views some tllIngs by hNself" (Theaet. 185e)
wlthou,t .the use of sens~s. In the Symposium Plato explains
the ability of man to rise to the apprehension of the Idea
~y the ,po~~r of Love (Eros) which leads him from the beauty
III an tndlvldual body to the beauty of morals, institutions
and then , to beaut:y as such. " lie who has been instructed
thus far I,n th~ thlllgs of love, and who has learned to see
the beautliul In ~ue order and succession, when he comes
toward the end wll! suddenly perceive a nature of wondrous
beallt~ ... a n~lllre \\,~Iich in the first place is everlasting,
~~o~lIlg not birth or lleuth, growth or decay' second ly not
all' In one point of ,view and foul in another' ... but be'auty
::SO~lIte, separate',smlple and everlasting, which is imparted
b t ~f ~ver ,growlO~ and perishing beauties of all other
, eautl u thlllgs, Without itself suffering diminution or
mcre~se. or any change ... " (Synq)os, 2tOe-211ab)
,
ThiS ascent to knowledge as de
'b d b p.
.
a rational process' tl
'd'
scn e
y lato IS not
intuition, direct il\Si~~tn~:l~O r~~S~~t~~~ Idfe~h~y irraMtion~1
though it may seem, this c o n '
a
IIlgs,
ystlc
of human knowledg(' whiChc~~tl?~~ represents ~h~ real course
contemplation of reality IL' g I With the ilvlllg, sensory
lated sC~lse experienc(" ~onS~~i~;t:d o~~ t~le ,basis of ~ccumu
and SOCial forms of I)ractical
t'.
,~c lal conSCIOusness
ac IVlty I e in
d t
tec Ilno logy, art and lanullu"(' th t
,. .
pro llC 1011,
1ess b roa d Ilypoth('ses which
" ,." <trt, at('sted
man can adva nce more or
I'd or reje~ted thNehy coutributing to 't~~rrected and accept)('(Ige, ThiS process of cognition or a
progress of know'
SCf.'nl to ever more pro,
182
fotllltl 8Illt ('omprc\Jl'osl\'f' kuowlcdg(' was iutllitiwly gra~pl'd

bv I'la!o and repn'~"lIh'" ~y him,in a rnystifif'd, distort.l'" form,
, PI<tto waS tlw IIrst thlnhr HI the Instory of pllliosophy
who cOll!'wif)lIsly formulated the basic question of philosc)phy.
tilt' OIl(' of thl' n'iationship ~f thinking ~nd _b('ing, Sonl(, phi
losophf'fs , ht' wrntf.', "'obstillately mamtilm th~t ooly th('
things whith call hI' touch('d or handled have being, brcaus('
th('y d('fllle being (rtality) and body as onp ... Their OPP()
orot!'; contend that true reality consists of cl'rtain intrlli
giblr and incorporeal I~eas" aod a,ssert that thp bodies are
"not b('ing, but geot.>ratlOo and motion. Between the two armies, .. ' there is a!\l,-"ays an ('ndless conflict raging
concerning the1ic matters" (Soph. 246a-c), In the lAws Plato
poses thl' same question in ~ s~ightiy different, for~. con~ras
ling id('alism to the matenailsm of the anCient physlOlo
gers." The latter, according to Plato. "say that fire and watN, and earth and air, all exist by nature and chance. and
none of th('m b\' art" and that the soul derives from them,
whereas their opponents hold the opposite view: "'If the soul
turn1i out to be the primordial element, and not ,fire and
air then in the truest sense and beyond other thlllgs the
sOl;1 may be said to exist by nature" (ibid. 892c).
Plato' asserts the primacy of the soul on the ~rounds
that it was the first to come into being as self-movlll~ and
the cause of all other motion: "If, as most of these ptlilosopileI'S have the audacity to affirm. a.11 thing~ ~"ere. at resl
in on(' mass, whi(,h of the above-mcntlO~ed prlllcipies of mo;
tion must nccessarily be the first to spnng up ~mong them.
Clearly the self-moving" (ibid, 895a), Ac("OrdlOg to Plato,
the soul "directs all things in heaven, and earth, and ~ea
by her movC'ments, and these a,re de~ribed b,y ,th(' terms \~dl,
. 1 t
. ttn"t,on dehberatlOn ' oplIllOn true andd
conslc era IOn, a " ,
false, joy and sorrow, ("?nfidenc/?, ,.re~r,. hatr('~, lov:: an
other rilllHfY Illotions aklll to these (Ibid, 897a): ~\\1Il~ to
all thl~<;(, ,1]](\ olhl'r qualities. as \\'('11 a~ to t1~e chvtll(' mlll,d
.
tl,n~ c,),,1
'd,'~"'ipl"<;
all thlll"'-;
rilThtl"
to tlwlI'
S IIe l'eCCI\'CS,
'"
""'-,~'
,to>
~.
' ' ; S ' but when she is III compatliOn of folly . .-;h(' does
1HI.Pjlllll'.,.
' " (bd 897 b)
till' VNY contrary of all t1~IS .1 I"
a,
Hl're ' Plato's philosoplucal uleahsm openly ,links wi~h
. ,
d nt\'tll(llo~\' reconstructed on a ratIOnal baSIS.
'f'I'
..
'. , t ' I
rl' I IgiOll <III
From thl' \-iewpolllt of logiC.
ato s reasolllll~ IS pr,lc ,c~ .
Iv irrt'pl'oarhable. Till" hll.ld~nl('ntal fallacy ,of Platonism itt'S
in tht' pr(,lllisl's, TI1l' atomistiC theory accepting ('tt'rnal t11()n"l
ment as a given fact eliminates the probl{'m of lht' first caus,

and rejects Plato's postulate of eternal so1l1 as the principle of
movement. Determinism f'xplain!'i the world from it!'iel discarding the hypothesis of god as unnecessary and confuSing,
9.
From the Theory or Ideas to Cosmology
The eternal and immutabl e World of Id eas is no longer

the One Being of Parmenides, but an orderly hierarch ical
structure with the Idea of good I'anking the highest.
Cha ra cterising this Idea , Plato writes: "Now, that which
imparts truth to the known and the power of knowing to the
knower is, as I would have you say, the Idea of good, and this
Idea , which is the cause of sc ience and of truth , you are to
conce ive as being apprehended by kllowledge, and yet, fair as
both truth and knowledge ar(', you will be right to esteem it is
different from these and even fairer" (H('p. VI, 508e) , Like
the sun which "is not only the author of visibility in all visible
things, but of geo('ration and nourishment and growth, .. , lhe
good not only infuses the POW('f of being known into all things
known, but also bestows upon them their being and exil'ltence,
and yet the good is not exist(,llc(>, hut li('s far beyond it in
dignity and power" (ibid, 509b).
The Idl'a of good is difficult to grasp, but it r('veals itself in
[\callty and Truth: "If we are not abl(' to hunt the good with
olle id('a only, with three w(> ma y catch our prey ; beauty, symlIlt.'lry. truth are lh{' tilfe(''' (Phi leb. 61j(> -65a). According to
the original, "naive" theory of Ideas. they are ungeneraled ,
l'v(!r!asling and immutable, TIll' relation betw('en the Ideas
und things is characterist'd by thrt'e noliOIl!-l: imitation (mimesis), plIrticipaLon (metexis. kOinonia) and presence (paroy ,~UJ). In othN wOI'd~, a thing COI11(>~ into b('ing (or is created by
tlw .god~) as the closest poss ibl(' imilalion of its Idea.
1-lavlIlg em~~rg('(l, the thing is r('lated to or "participates" ill
thl' Idea. 1'11I311y, till' Idea iL"t'if resid('s in a sensible thing,
t!H' lattN r(>~embling.ll$> Idea ~nly beCatlSl' of this presence,
Ila)to dol'S. !lot C'xplal1l how it is possibl(>.
I roc~'('dlng from Plato's ('onC('ption of Idea we are bound
to ('onclude that the IHI~lbl'r or Idt'as must b(> equa l to the
11I11II1."'r of c1a~s~'s of slillilar thin~s, and that lands us on the
f()rks. I nciC't'd, how are w(' to a("""'I' r ""I"
r ,10
" par '""
'"Ion '" 0 r OJl{' <lnd th" StUll!' 'I" ' $r
In~ ance, Id
or 1"
lupa
"I".
'"
. ,~
. .'..
..
.
ling 11\ ( IIJ(>rent " eas,
g,I)I. ,-,o('r,ll('s III man and "( ~f('l'k"? A a i ' s
fI'lat! III C;'(}i)dlH'ss. B"illih' Tru h . d .. ,,~ n. Plat.o s Idea
, ,
\,.t 1111 IIlg of no IInperfec-
'\in from his viewpoint, evil, ugly

I
.'I>I
'art'
we
0
'
,
,
"
h
Ih
h
tioO, Yet ow,
.') '\('arlv, thl'Y cannot HISl Wit Ol~t
e
and fabl' lllln~d"" .C It ~hould be noted that Plato hlm.self
correspoJ\dlll,~ I ~:~i~~se diffl('ll1ti(>s and subsequently. revls.ed
was not l~naWar\'n an important !'itep towards the dlal,ectlcs
hi~ doc.trllH', m~ I ,g" proach will bE:' discussed later \0 the
of conc('pt.s. HIS new ap
chapter.
P to conceived Ideas as (1) models or pa~aAs w(' !'iee, la
.
ric or specific characteristics
?)
iversals I.C. gene
d
d
digms; ( .... un, 'I . tl~ings' (3) causes of things un erstoo
of a cl,3s s of Simi, al
It is' this latter function of l~ea~ th~t
as their nnal pIli pose.
ced teleological stratn III IllS
of the pr?noun
1,'('5 at the root
b' t'
deailsm.
.
system of 0 l('c Ive I.. 'med directlv against the determlnPlato's t('leolo~~. was 31 In contras't with the atomi,sts who
ism of the atomu.;tll theory,
0 >Iv i e eternal motion and
" d II efiicient causes I J' . .
b
recog lllse
\(>
I to conceived the relatiOn emutual colli~ion .of at()l~sit a, as thE" tendency of the former
tween sen~ibl(' things an I' e~s His teleology is ('s~('ntially
to approXllnat~ to the at~~ 'the physical world, Slllce the
transcendent. 1.('. {'xternal
h'
As has been shown eorltIdcas are separated from the t ~I~~s'hic conception of the co::;cr it ~tel1l~ from the anthropo
P I Is Ih. physical world
"
. h ". Ji" that con ro
1U0S endowed Wit
a :;0,' _ II controls the body.
io thl' manner the hu.man .:;01 nd cosmogony are tr('aled by
The prob\cms of cO~ll1ology a
dt: his physical th('ory
Plato in the Timaeus where he e.~poun -bet~eN; the sensible
e
and makes an attempt to b:idg ~a\~I;ae~ernal Ideas. Basic to
world of change and ,111', Immll . 11 notion of Reason as
Plato's physiCS in thiS dialogue ~s le'ThiS notion is a clear
the demiurge or creator of the co~mlos"l Anaxago ras r('gardl'd
except 'imary
t 1a
'
" " er.
ccho of Anaxagoras'N
s OllS,
elements
0 r rna
il olily us the moUve force of the pi r the world (nol from
",' the c reator 0
b NY
wht'reas in PI~to "I ~, IS ." 'Their relations appeal' to (> v I'
nothing!) and Its I'at ht'\., '
mind to grasp, For one, t l.~
complex 3nd hard fOl' th(' anc~ent (and in Plato denllllrge IS
I e dernllll'g('
.
r 1
conceptio n of go d as I )
. 'h'lily of cr('1.ltlOlI ron
.
I'
the POSSI I
' .
t
nothing but god) lInp ~!Ilg (~r('l'k thought and It wa~ nO
nothing was (>ntlr('ly ab('11 to Platonic doctrine, lIndl'l " ~I~~
until much later .t hal lh(> 'f'lIIitv r('ceived a mOIH1tl~lI~t.11
innuence of Judaism and Chrl.s" o(':demiurg(>," dl.'nollllg III
inll.'fpretation. Bpsidl'~' th; n<\Il~~1 in Illanual labo~lr, dll.' not
lngag....
Phlode~('nbl'd
tulll ,l~
G~r('e k a.~"kitHul ilrtl~an
.
f "hther,
~Ince
'
tally with tlH' notlo .. ()
<
_
I '"'J
til(' buildrr of thl' cosmos

manner of
l.l
Iht' hlm' p r lll is of Idc ' .

c<lrpl'ntt'r hudthnJ.! a hUll s!' or"
'" H I
()~v
ilfLl' t'
It'
a beu (II
lis ('UI'HHI:'. ,Ina IO~\ rll'ad" r l 'vl'a ls .\Iht'JIlIIl!'r
' . " I.. k'Ill"
concept of God) .
. '
JflglJ\ If th,.
As Plato prest'nts it in tht, rlll/ lll'lI.,. tlH' II
..
s
f I
co~mo::; are t I1(' I l I('as or t IH' Illmh[s of'. th ill II. \IIHah'
1.
. 0 I It'
unformed
m,lte>rial
from which tht' ,"
" ",.,,!!.""','
Itlttt.'If
1' Of
.
G
1Il,1{ ('
I tlli'
I
or .od \\l1I('h shapl's ttWIll III '\(,. I' < I( tIl'
DemlUrge
'r aI Id
0
I
1
< (on all('1' w'l l
(' l (n
eas. nIH' ('VI{ l'!l('l' of Plato 111111 ,'I[ I I
' I
.['
I'
.
S
Ie \'\d
d 1 lieu ties III explaining hi", (,OIH' I' pl of matt: I ' great
says (30a) that God found the> whol(' vi~ibl(' S r . e nd eed , he
but moving in an irreglilar and disonit' ;'ly h ' .I{>r not at rest
disorder he brought order" th('n '(500) 11 S lion an~1 "olltof
I' h
.
'
"C' compares It t
I
W11C
a gold-smith fashions into nlany diffel'f'nt slw (~gOd
further
as. belng
'
" InvI"p('s,
o:;ha I (61a) hC'
' . speaks of nl'ltter
,
Sible and
a II
. p(' e5S, receiving all things p'lrtak"
I(
bewildering way of thr intelligible<', ,.'~l,g In SOIll (' most
aId"
t I:'
' as matler " " nurse"
,I /ece p ac e of things produced in it by id('as 'S om er ::i:;esdto
as space
sums II b;;5tati
was born' (52d).eln g an( genrratlon, ('V('n before the world
,I
pt
i~e
l~~: r~c~Pla,d('1
' The
cr~a
~lIId
n~I~~~
rIon 0 [
thp cosmos a.'" pres('nt(' ri by Plato lh

,"wellS IS a complex pr
. ' of Ideas
III
T
the 0
.
'
ocpss.. 0 ut of a rnlXtur(>
ande
Malter
it throughoute~:~u~g;c ma~~s til(' world's ~o~" and distributes
mixture is di\'ide/in~Oa~sl~pH'd for tl1(' \'I!"ilhle universe. The
earth. Having set it in rot~l~r, :len~C'nts: fil'(> , a~r, waleI', and
th(> cosmos into a spher(' th) ~lO,tlon, the Demlllrge fashions
orbits to planets anti thC' \ eS.t of all ~hapes. and assig~s
ac{'ordance with h.
. e3\'el1 to statIOnary stars 11:
displaring.1
armO~1I01lS malhC'malical 1'C'lation"hips
uu(> proportIOn a I
.
pro\'idl'llce the cosmos s
n( measurC'. So by God's
. I reason. It is uni(IIJ""
- I. created
Will
. as
' a I"IVlIlg b
elng (>ndowed
.
~. sl nc(> It I'l'S(' ll1bl
.
unique modl'l, the Id(>a
, e s In every way its
.
..I n ordel' to be compl(>t('
lIw
livmg creatures and th I) ' ,
cosmos musl contain other
r.
,I'
mak('
acf' ()[gous,
the rac' of(' hi t'mllJl'g('
I I
, s IIH~m, They are the
crf'atur(>~ (40a). Platodo{'~( J:' ~ ~('~v;~teI'Y sprciC's, and the land
for thl' birth of til(' (Tod" al,,1 0 [a (! I' upon himself to account
.".,
ft' t'rs
I
. tI 1(> r(>a d t'r for their ge neal III Ih,' fl"puhlic (X -'n
)
1,II'a'
IIII'J]
,1,
..
"
B
.
.
J. I l} II;II() "'''I'rt~ II
..-ho~
I-I \I's.
",b, IIii'll ;HI' lOr t!ir
'. 1<1 IC'.ud I-.. Ilw rrl'a\l)r of tht'
;:I::~:';I:~lIt.I'n,d It
(;nd, till' rn"k'.rl:tt~I~I~I'lallllltu'rl' ar.' Ihn'f' arli~l~
rIll< 'In'I''h'II<'\- flf 1'101'"',, id" I' H 11'1 . Mulltli' I);lillll'r " Thi" i,
P"
WIll:
la "IIt' II"rlrill".
nt'l I,rf'e k III) 'hology in thl' 1II11fllll'f flf lI(>sil I

1'1;" j)" m lllrgc t 11'11 makl's a lew soul rnixtlHl' from tlil' n ~
~rI,di(,lI 13 ue fOflll'oly lIIixe~ III cr ' atlng III' worl,i'ssOIII HIIII
Ili\'ill .. :-; il illio !'l'p,OI III' Sflul :i III .HT onlalJre ""'ith Ihl' nUlillwr
of Ihl' ~tatil"lary s Ial'S. \'ow of thf> di,'inf> hI' hilll~I'lf wi.l~ lhl'
('rt'<lt
or . hul til" /'I'I';Jlioll of till' IIIortilllH' rOllllllit1l,I\ to his 011
~prillg. AlHllilf'Y imita ting him , rI'ceiwd fr{J1Il hirnthf' imlllor
tal prilH'ipll' of lilt' .solll ; aliI! arollnd tbis they pro/'I'l'Ill'd It. [;1
shiOl1 a 11I0rtai hody" (fi!k) . ThC' ~OlJiR of the morlab ,HI' illl
plalitNI in hudiC's ilnd, fif'tl t'IIIJing on tlwir IwiJaviol1r, ('ithN
return to a bh'~~l'fllift' 011 the aPPoint('d star (wtH'IH'C' til(' link
of Platonism with (lStl'O\Ogy), or bf'come incarnatrd ill anllth~'r
1l1Ortai body, first in a woman, th(,11 in a b(>ast whith i'i tlH'
llC'aresl to lilt' soul's vicious nature (42r), With an I)hvil)\I~
lOllch of humour Plato rxplains that the souls of harmll'ss
smatt('I'crs who " thought it enough to study the hea\'f'lI~ with
eyes alol1(>" transmigraH' into birds. those of men subdmd b~'
their animal desires move into quadrup('d~ and rt'plih'~,
whereas flshrs harbour the souls of the ~tupidl~t.
The idea of th(> tran~llIigration of soub and of their t'mallC!
pallo n from th(' endle~s chain of reincarnations may ha"' ... bet'll
bOl'rowC'd by Plato from Orphic religion. The fatt'O:; of soul" .In'
d(>scribed by Plato differently. In the rimae-lis (41(') he wrill"lhat "their first birth would be ODe and the ~ame for all- no
one should suffer a disadvantage at hb hands," whf'rea~ ;n
the Phaedrus the imperfect soul is said to lo~e her wing~ whill'
still in the heavens and fall onto earth where ~he cannot hI.'
incarnated in any li"'ing being during her fir~t life.
Plato's description of creation is openly teleological. Man'~
head i.s made spherical as this shape is best ~uiled for thl.' divinl.' part of his body; to save it from rolling on till' ground
with its hillocks and pits, it has been provided with a hody .\Il1l
('xtl'C'mities; til(' eves have a rlery (luminous) naturl:' thal tlll'Y
may Sl.'e, Nc, Jlo~vev{'l', Plato cannot completl'ly disrard thl:'
nOLion of necessity and flllds the way oUI.in subj('rting nt'Cl'~
s ity to til(' mind: "for the creation of thiS world IS thl.' ('0111
binC'd work of lI('cessitv and mind. :\1ind, thl' ruling l)ll\wr,
pel'suadl.'d necessity to bring the greater part of cfl"ltl'd thing:,>
to perfection" (Tim. It 8a) , This synthesi: enabll'~ I'lato til
use both causal and tdeological explanatlOlls and c!'eatt's <I
possihility for thl.' intt'gration of some naturalistic ('(llH'l'pt~
into his essentially idealist syst(,lll.
Un Ii kr Plato '" (,os!1\ologica I teach i ngs dom i n<ttl.'d hy III Ytho
10
In dl
jl
...... flnchs. his doctrine of matter and laws of its motion

i.a. "ph".," is bened on combinalion of Pythagoreania';
aM "ism. This might be expected. since the simplest 'Way
... 'uHDliq for the relationship between ideas and
,.nic"'" objects W88 to IS9ume that the latter embody the
........Ucelltructure of the former. Indeed. since the world
is tIae ere RUGa of the mind, its ultimate elements must display
........... .nd proporlion represented in n umbers. Plato
thnefore poetul.tee the geometrical structure of matter which
ia ..... d on regular bodies derived from triangles. In tbis
_ .... Ire is presented u consisting of pyramids (tetrabedIone). til. moot mobil. and sharpest of all regular solids.
air U dODlistiq of icosahedrone, water of octahedrons, and
...th.of eDt B8. The &.fth regular solid. dodecahedron. repres",III t.he model of til.....moo or. according to the Epinomi8.
edaIr. Tbe vaR'ition from. one element to another is accountIII for bJ Plato u tIle,ulisation of mathematical proportions
. . . . ._
the comparative volumes of regular solids: ODe
OJlehed'Oll is equal to two tetrabedrons, one icosahedron is
..... eo he &ebabedrou, two ieollabedrons are equal. to five
ia his attempt to reveal mathematical relationtil. otructure of oubetanc.. Plato in fact

to .,wetry. ThiB ....thod which had far........uenoBs wu to pla, an extremely important
..IISBQ1l8llt development of natural science.
modem
Beside.. il enabled Plato to
doctrine and fit the id.a of
iato his picture of the world. For
t.heeeperalion of the .lemenls
of grain (Tim. 520-530). Plato
(L 316). Howev.r. in
in the manner of
peoce. prec::sding the crea... to IPISk, to &ake over
of ilnlPSlad
the teaching of soul. \\'(, ha\,(':a: hn

~~ClS Ills moral th('Of\' "
by Plato to the world's~ an,1 ,'nd'1\1"d lIa Ishown
mh. Cls
n aU '. tilt,
.
"... ,"'V.llh
",11('<1
~os
~t arge. Now let us look at thn~ f IInc't IonsS !'ouis
10 thl' co'
liS Ilf..,.I
of rna nssoul'
'.
s
with the world of Idea::;. Plato
r"
Plato starts phiIoso hie I d"
assertion of the soul'; im~or::fj~urse
arg~ments
,.
In
the Phaedo with th
to prove h;s thes;s, y and develops a system o~

( ) !he argument from the all
~~c.ath did not pass into liCC' life -wouF;ll~~~on of Opposites If
, '(d)ot;~e case, the soul n;ust be assul:ed,~atelycease, S;'nce
lions of lJ:a argument fro",: recollection. Mf:'~~rv.tve
the body.
S
be
obta;ne/:~~;~:~I~:~:;~su~~~~f eq,"al~y, etc ~11~~~~e;atn~~;
noth~ng
ou(1)' ~e, acqu;red

IS
III
before
he argument from th
~.Iike. indi.vidual
e(4
b;rt~f what the soul
but the recollection
t e fact that learnin
knew preJ
objects. the S~~;nimutability of the soul. Unof IL" affmity with the di . s always equal to itself in
) The argument from
v.me and the eternal
therefore it
soul is. the true cause
~~ ~~~ t~ings,
iSC~~S:~~YinT~~e
w~~Yi~~::~;r, bdein g the life of ll~;b~~~ 11~~ ~r the life
tihle
70e-107b) .
an ,consequently ' IS
. .Immortal
' IS IJIcompa(Ph
Ilisnoldirflcult
aed.
Iy unt('nable I
to prove that Plato'sar ur
of logical
ar.gument (1) is ba!d nents are logicalty which
I Ity which only exists in th onhLhe confusion
opposite into
to ,the physical world. Theoug and actualisation is yet t ~ ot ler may be possible 10 . P~SS1l1g o.n of one
vide such
proved. In point of
Its rcalican b(' used a orcover, his theory of cr' . ato did not prosoul.
against the
and
IHbility of knowl
,IS a vicious circle IInmortality of the
soul (in the M edge IS derived from th ' beca.lISC the posdpriv>d from t~no), w.hereas the pre-ex~lS ~re-existence of the
BC'sides, it is r~~t:oS~d)ility of know led ('en~e of the soul is
d('monstrative val d III mythological
(In the Phaedo).
on a myth and on Ut~ whaLc;;ocv>r. Argume:~ts W~ich have no
Immutability, A . e
of soul's> (3) I.S also based
JlHliv)dllal soul
h('IJl.g
and
ha~f'd on thf' assum . l:' finite. I.e. mortal 0 creatIOn. an
throllJ;!h II
ptlOn that th(' inrJivid ',Argument (4) is
Ie agency of lh(' g('neral i
I ua can be explail1ed
, .(' . t lrou""h
I
J90
... tie i(lf'a or the
po~ .~~~ed,
rela~1
t~S
proo~ ~
Argume~t(2a)rg.ument.
fac~lcPIIY, b~lt
c~tlon bac~fires
no~
pm;~ulate
n~u~:;'b
l~e prodll~~erntl Iden~ity
e ld \II \"11'\\ whi("h IIcW.II~s .0 th:::. wl,rld of mhllig(,llcp. and

c'f\lIol pr('("('lll' JII IIlllivul ual nbjl'ct ontologiraHy. So. all
plalo'S i:lr~1I111I'nts n'81 on L.III' ~Ilaky flllJlldatioli of faith <Ifill
"ill Jgain~t t'II'IIH'ntary IOgH:.
. The do('lrint flf ~{)II\'S illllllortality i:-; u:-;ed by Plato as tilt'
(oulldatinll for Ilis I'lhieal thl'ory. His reasoning is as follow~:
"If death had ollly ht'\'11 till' (,lid of all, dying would haw be('11
<I god~end to th(' wi(:kPd ... But now, ina~murh as the soul is
manifestly imnlOrlal, tlH'rt' is for her no rl:'lea';f' or sal .... ation
[rom ('vii ('x('ppt till' athtinmf'IlLOf highest virtue and wisdl)Jll,
FOl" the soul when on IWl" progress to thl:' world below takes
nothing with hN but nurtul'f' and education; and these are said
grratly to beneiit or ,;p'eatly to injure the departed, at the very
beginning of his journey thither" (Phaedo to7rd). Aftf'f
a man's d>ath his ~olll sets ofl, under the guidance of the "ge~
Ilius" assigned to her elllring the man's lifetime. to a place of
jlldgem('nt and thE'n to her habitation. A corrupted soul wan
d('r~ alone "in extremity of distress until certain times are
fulfilled, and whell tl1('Y are fulfilled, she is borne irresistibly
to her own filling habitation; as every pure and just soul
which has passed through life in the company and under the
guidance of the gods has also her own proper home" (ibid.
108c)
,
In this way, thr('atE'ning the wrongdoers with punishment
in the next world and promising rewards for merits. Plato
intends to force men into the ways of righteousness and
sets out to d>velop the principles of moral behaviour, i.>.
the doctrine of good. This doctrine did not rf'main
ras
unaffected by Plato's philosophical genesis. In the Protago
.
one of his eariiN dialogu('s, Plato adhered to th> principles
of l'ational eudaemonisml and maintained that goodness
was the unity of virtu> and happiness, the beautiful and
th(' useful. the morally good and the pleasant. Later (e,g.
in the Gorgias) l'lato advanced the principle of absolute
morality opposing it to happiness, benefit and pl>asure,
In the Theaetetus, PILaf'do and Republic (Books VI and
VII) he ~Iready fixed <In unbridgeable gulf between th(' id>al
of abolute goodn('ss on the on(' hand and man's s>llsual
ity and striving for plcHsures and happiness. on the othN.
This ('volutioll w ..\s evid>nUy the result of PlatO'S growing di:-;
illusionml.'nt ahout thl' Athenian society and 1h(' increa::;ing
.\
laliun
~ph.lIl uf !'Ihir~ IIIi1I d.{'lilh"S ,lIul t'nfllfC{'S moral

to h"PllilH'~ " f IIt'r~'III;d wtlllll'ing. T
"blis,::<lti,," by its :-e
191
religious strain in his philoso I
alien to th!s world wallowing ~i~;' tI~ r,()udn(,!-l~ II t'iog IIlk'

the moral Ideal appeared to be tI ',' t
way of aehiE' dy
sures. Hence the asceticism of Pin r~J('{'tlOn of all bodily ~11l1{
the purificat.ioll of the so ul.
alo s t<>ucillng and
The most Important role in this
"f!
.
.
Plato to philosophy whic h is desi pUrl IcatlOn IS aSSigned
tyranny of the body, to rid it of p g n: d to
tilt' soul from
However, ultimate freedom
aSSlons, as(' desires a nd v' e
in
~nly
hi~ ca~ ~~;
~ee
t~Y
~eat~. therefore philosophy isC:~~Co;:~~d b~ ~Itained thro~~~
IO~
or death and as ability to die: " It i y alo ~s prepara_

philosopher to despise the body' h'
~ characteri stic of th
bot\an~ desires to be alone an'd b~ S~~rs~P~ (apha

~r
from
hi~
m the Laws Plato return

. . ..
aedo 65d)
~ora~lty and ~reaches a virtuous fir~o a~l~hlllltlal conception of
applest one In which the aspirat'
f e mos t pl easa nt and
!on or s uprem e goodness
can be combined with ordin
a~cording to Plato, consists :rih;lrtue. The i~dividual soul
wls~om resides) , forceful (whi c h ~e ~arts: ratIOnal (wherei~
deSirous (whose virtue is self
IS t e seat of courage) and
common virtue of the soul ha~cont~o.1 or te".1perance).' The
three. faculties is what Plator~:I~ISI?g, .as It were, all the
the.r~ght coordination of the soul's Justi ce. It consists in
decIsions and rules the will r Ifll s. powers: the mind makes
comply with the r~le of t m U I S Its orders, and the desires
This scheme provides th e p~rance and obey.
a~d doctrine of the state w~.basls for ~lato 's social philoso h
ttlogues: the Politieus.
expounded in
.~~o gives a brief outline of th/': ~~ Laws. In the Politicus,
WI
~he " age of Cronus" T
h I~tory of society" starting
mankl~d, God assigned ~ lo~eerac .tflbe.of animals, including
supervise it personally Th deity, kmd of a herdsman to
erty no
d
.
.
ere w e r e '
,
!lee to wil as earth yielded f no states, no prop~
no '
Whmartlage or begetting as 11
ood untilled. There was
ld
a were born fr
h
en the fabled
go en age ended and
am t e earth.
was annih'l
trol over t~ ated, the cosmos settled d the earth -born tribe
M k
e new generation I
own and assume d oona
Re~~hbr;,e m~nly
lre~
b~~:~e~~~e~:~;;~:/~~~ed\~~oi~~I~~~:]~~:;~ndt"i~~hb:c~h:
nance theP ey to Wild beasts and had

.. sorder set in. Men
extinctio/b~a~h fo;m~rly found free n~~kills to get the suste~
arts from Heph t: IVllle gifts: fire r~om Py were saved from
ae!'ltus. seeds and plants fr rometheus, various
1112
am other gods. How-
. kiHIi was 11'11 to lIIallas,.:1' it~ own

irs wlthoul rli
.vt'r ' .111.re1 1 .IS III' til ('ollid alit! III'\.'I II'd rll Ier:-; (st-\.(~llIcn ani I
t.
\11 1'('.1
.
. 1 ) to ,.{"llil Iiii' fllllCtlolL~
II r thc' IorlOl'r "1wr d ~mpil
kings
'.1 lin d II'
;\oW, in ('f)!ltra:-;t to ('OU
IVlllt .... Ilep h I'flIs k][Ig'!' ar~' 1.1f~ IY
hlll
<11111 tlil'rl'forc' liahlt' 10 prr: Hen- ItI's the pos~.;]blhty
an ..
nan
of !ll'rv('r:-;;on
lind ovc'r,llI IIt_gradatloll of governuwnt. In g("
ol thl'f(' an' tlirt'" tvpts of lo(uVt'l"nIHt'nt ba.;ed 011 law. Arlie",
.'
r
f(lng('1i
in cll'ffl'i\<;\ng
ordl'r of pt'rfl'fll. on , they are monarchy.
aristocracy and til'l'fIo(:raCY. To these correspond the form<;
bas('{l on lawh'~<;]\c<;s: tyralluy. oligar('hy and the lowest form
which, according to Plato, has no spf'cial name. Plato's c1as
sillcation of the forms of govl'rnmcnt provided the fOllndation
of his political theory and was lat('f developed by Aristotle in
his doctrine of the state.
In the Republic Plato makes an attempt to construct a new
model of ideal society. The state (polis) arises due to the ina
bilit.yo{ individual men to Ratisfy their requirements ..... ithout
outsidt' help. The need to procure food, build houses. make
cloth es and meet people's other vital requirements aCCQunts
for the existence or farmers, artisans, merchants, etc. They
constitute the lower class of society and shoulder the burden
of providing the material goodS. The defence of the state
against its internal and e:eternal enemies is the responsibility
of the warrior class. Finally, there are the rulers whose function is to co-o rdinate the activity of all the classes and govern
the stale. These are "philosophers" skilled in the "royal art,"
devoted to the ideals of justice and goodness, and possessed of
wisdom.
'This cc'.onomic and political substantiation of the state
structure is bolstered up by a psychological analogy between
til(' classes of th e state and the faculties of' mall'S soul which
!Oust be in harmo niou s unity. Man's position and weight
in the sodal hierarchy depend on the prevalence of one
of hi s :so ul' s virtues: wisdom, courage or temperance. The
membe rs of the lower class (which on th e whole receives lit.lIe
attention from Plato) are allowed to have private property and
individual families. These, however, te nd to foster self-interest, jealousy ancl inequality. As a result, a special external
force is requircd to hep the labourers under control. To prevent. the extremcs of wl'alth and poverty, the higher classes are
denied the right to private property and family. Thp ~tall"s
population IS reproduced under the strict supervision of spc('i
ally appointcd officials who ('IHl'fullv select thl' mating CO\l-
1:,11:1'1
pies. Children ar'. tahn away rr(J~1I their Jl<~rl'"

il bir,,,
('xamined for physIcal fitIH'SS Hnd dISIW~l.d of If found illl '
per
fect. The survivors are subJl'('tt'lltn tI rl.~,pd SY:lll'ffi "r ShUt, {'du_
cation under the supervision of ~lIardlall.i fllld SPf'cial Care
taken to ensure that thl' rhil(.ln'lI Hnd tiH'ir parenls do n~:
know each other. Boy~ and glrl~ <lrt' brought lip III1r1t'r thi'
same cond it ions and bot h ~l' x('s a r(' l'q 1I/.I1I:v l'/.I p8 h h'l of mili tar~'
and political activity.
.
. _
.
It is worth noting that III SOIn(' modt'rn wrilings Plato is
made out to be a precursor of socialism and the state system
described by him in the RepUblic is dished out as "socialist" to
scare gullible people. Actually, how~ver, his utopia is nothing
but an idealised picture of the archaIC Spartan state, an obso_
lete and reactionary caste system with certain traits of primitive communism. A precursor he certainly is, but not of SOcial_
ism: he may well be considered the ideologist of such feudal
organisations as monastic societies and knightly fraternities.
Of all the dismal features of Plato's utopia that might repel
the modern reader the most depressing is perhaps the complete subjugation of the individual by the state, the dissolution of the individual in the social whole. Proceeding from the
conviction that men cannot be trusted to know their true inter~
ests and follow the dictates of reason, Plato viewed the state as
an aggregate of impersonal beings, without individual needs,
desires and aspirations, whose only purpose was to fulfil the
social functions assigned to them. The true reason is embodied
in the slate: its claims must come first and everything must
bow to what is Supposed to be the good of the whole. Such
a state does not recognise art or science, poetry, songs, fairy
tales, games, or individual love ... To put the finishing touch to
this cheerless picture, Plato vividly describes the blood-curdling punishments awaiting disobedient subjects in the next
world. Speaking through the mouth of Er, son of Armenius,
who was killed in battle and came back to life twelve days later on the funeral pyre, the philosopher recounts the story of
his soul's adventures and dwells with obvious relish on the
tortures applied to the sinners. By contrast, his account of the
exalted happiness of the virtuous is rather insipid and lacks
inspiration ... (Rep. X, 616b-620).
Of course, Plato understood that his ideal had but little
chance of being translated into reality in the contemporary tu~
multous w?rld. In the Laws he offered a more realistic
project. ThIS work, conSisting of twelve bOOks, begins with
.,
d' can f' In legJ latian. A"c:m:l ng ) Plato,

JII Iltroductorv
;~kl' doll 10 God's hanils <lnd does nr)t know
mail 18 sCJfIIf'thmg
IIPre laylhing, or has a more imporII hI' i~ IlIh'llded to ~c II
d ~d Go::I's purpo$e is the good of
t
tllut f!lnetlll"l () pt>r ()rm~tl~n~ )~l a means fa jltimat.e good
the wil(,I/' dIll lUall 9 Q.
IH'SS.
- ndowcd with a soul which is the prinn
Howevpr. fIlan IS e l f
1:1 certain amount of freepll' of sl'lf.-motitb ~r;~ !I~~~~~~: o~:sires and inclinations,. be
dom. MotlV(ltN. ~ II~. "'s df'sires stem from hunger, lhlr~l
~trive~ for happmp.ss, I !<lOtrument of self~reproduction, and
and Rexual urge, the. \~S h n~"t. "The excessive love of ~f'1[
therefol'f'.he love!'\ hllnse t t e:~h ~I~n of all offences" (Le~es.
is in reality th~ source 0
'.
lex sychological nature
1to
731e). Takiug
a~doi~n~e~el:s~~~io iniroduce th~ strictest
of man, Plato ee~
1I
i I relations as a baSIS for new
possible regiment~l.lon o~
:s a small agricultural polis,
society. H~ cO~c~040dh~usseholds, each with its separate. ~llot~
a community 0
d
to 000-12 000 male cItizens
mf'nt of land. This ~mounte to t 48000. In addition, there
and a total citizenship of 4~,OOO dO abo'ut 30 000 slaves. Land
was to be ,~OO.~,OOO met.lcs an e ual valu~ and each house~
f
was to be diVided mto h~ldlUgsl ts ~ne in or near the city and
holder was to be grante. two p dh~ldin s could Dot be ~old or
the other near the fronher'dLa~b famil~. All were to lh'e di~
otherwise disposed of outsl. ~ en~ were n~t supposed to do me~
rectly off th.e land, b~ t~ef~lttl\he slaves whose function con!'nial work: It ~~s to e. e ters witb everything necesRary,
isted in prOvl~lOg their maJ. ,'ded into four property c1~sses
All populalion was to be I\lSS wealth exceeding four times
and no one was allowed to pos.se . duals were not to have any
d
the value of the pl?t. Private I~ 1\"~laced by a token currency.
gold and silver which were ~o ere e in trade or bandicrafts
No citizen was to be al.lowe to ~~~~~ foreigners. The citizens
which were to be ler~ III th~ ha
r lion were to be punished.
found guilty of violatmg thIS d~~~r ~~ the state, and the neces.
Any surplus was to be h.a~d!I into three parts. Two parts ",~ere
sity produce was to be dl:",d by the free members of society
to be consumed respeclively. J art was to be exchanged for
and by the slaves. and the thlr t Profits were to be limited by
handicraft goods. The merchan s p ould ply only one craft.
h handicraftsman c
t b
the state an d eac
. , d as an aristocratic or. 0 e
Plato's ideal city wa~ conce~;~ Its governing bodies, recmor' precise, oligarchiC repu IC,
\u::
195
fuitpd b.y (>Ie~tion, includf'd. all Arl.'opagas of 37 mpmbl rs,
a Council of 300. members. m~!Jtary i('aders (stralf"gists" tf>rn_

pie trustees. priests and prl(>sle~s(>g. markE't wardens c"t.
magistrates and other officialR slipervi.<;ing th(> state fin~n: J

and agriculture. The courts. though Hiso fornwd on an elE'ct~~~
al basis, were to bE' watched Over by a special board the .\ior.
turnal Council consisting of tell law guardians. The Coun
cil's business was to promol<' virtuc and human (>xc(>JJence
oversee the observance of the laws and choose' YOllngt>r m(>rn~
brrs of outstanding natural gift.., I:Ind powel's of obsprvation to
act as "its l'yes and pars" (961d).
Plato's Republic and particularly Laws show that he made
a careful study of tht' conslitlJtionsof oligarchic st..'lt{'1' and was
fully prepared to instruct thl' rulers ill the lise of various
crafty methods devis(>d to keep mf'n Ullfl('f control and mani_
pulate public opinion. Plato is firmly mnvincrd that all means
are good to presen'(> status quo: fraud "for thE' public weal,"
{'Iectoral qualifications, repres('ntaLion of pOOr sections by rich
citizens, open ballot. forgery and bribery, political murder ...
Of special importance is the undivided ideOlogical sway of the
oligarchs. Performance of religious rites is absolutely mandatory. Atheism, i.e. the denial of god's existence Or its influence
on the lives of men, as well a.s the conviction that the gods can
bc propitiated by magic , is punishable by death Or imprisonm('nt. The arts are to be under strictsllpervision, all music and
pONry are to be prohibited Ulllt'sS they exhibit a clear moral
t('ndency in th(> Platonic s(,lls{', i.e. are aimed at subjugating
man to the will of the sLt'l.t(' embodicd in the immediate superior. According to Plato, "lht' grC'at principle of all is that no one
of C'ither !Sex should be withoul a commander; nor should the
mind of anyolle be accllstoml'd to do anything, either in jest or
('arn('st, or his own motion, but in war and in peace he should
look to and follow his I('ad('r, even in thC' least things being
under his gllidanc(' .. And we ought in time of peace from
youth IIpwanls to practise this habit of commanding other.s.
and of being cOlTllllanded by otht'rs; anarchy should have no
plac~'. in thp life of man or of thC' beasl" Who are :o;ubject to
man (Legf'S XII. 942ac). This :o;tatemC'nt harclly needs any
comment. The modern analogy t() Plato's ideal state as de.
.snibf'd in the IA I!'!; is not socialism or communism. buf
fasd.sm.
Th('re is only 011(> ratiollHI pxplanation of Plato's totalit~rian

f'thic. HI' is detf'rminl.'d to I)rt>"prve at all costs the ancient po-
I
litical and economic cris~s and
oin
, "uhrg kj.1; .prOfO\lTIl
.~",g deterioration dwhie!' he Hll'ntl[I'" I
t- proj.\:re~.~
t'
.
''';
to
rill''
I . . . 1'1, to"o.; '"I(>a\ slate base on unques IOnh()~lt.
I,'
a,
f ' t
.
. of demo ...~ rac'-'J' ff"slriction n prJ\"3
(>
fll'S " "th "an,ln'. I.pprl'SSIOII
. _
. nbedit'llCp,:-;\I. \"" l'gimentation of all human artlvlty
Lng >"fly and nH'\I('1I oll'l r a manifestation of his ultnH'OTlI"
'1st' t laO
_
r rol~
". "0 fact
not
\ln~ I f' tl Ie "golden age" of Gre('k slav(' sunIS I
,
nd grief or
"t'r\'atlslll a
II. Criticism of the
"N iv(''' Thl'ory of Ideas and the Doetrifle of the One

fI
"
Plato's initial, 'naive theory of

As ha.s been shown car~ler,
spects This became clear
'
d
Inerable III many r e .
I
. Ibected it to a fundamenta reap
Ideas provt' vu
to Plato himself ~nd he Sl J om romising that many later
prai~al. His critiCism was so ltl~C\ thP authenticity of his dia.
. \1 d in ques 101
I
f
commentators ca e
I
guments against the t leory 0
logue Parmenides wh~re t 1e I~~t explicit form. Plato inde.ed
Ideas wcr(' presenlRd ".1 t~t lithe weak spots of his ear her
pul his finger .on prac~lca tre~tion to what was its chief drawdoctrine dcvOllllg sP~cl3l a bl
ulf between the true w~r1d
back. duali~m-the IInpass~ndfv~ible Ideas, and the senSible
of eternal, immutable a~d d'
things. As a matter of fact.
world of cha.ngeful mult,'tll :~~~s~ was apparently t~e :\Ieg~
the main object of Plato s ~ron a dualistic interpretatlO~ of hiS
rian doctrine of belll~ ~ase d. sociate himself from thIS d~c
theory of Ideas. StnvlIlg tOld l~lOt pass over his own earlier
trine Plato, naturally, cou
,
'In 51'Ience
vIews
. .
.
from t h e ",\.',ve"
. theorv.
The obvious absurdltle~ enS\~I;! a proach, and it is expo
of Id('as called for an entlrel y.
anS Sophist. Upon a thorodes
unded by Plato in the Parment
tions Plato comes lO a con
ugh scrutiny of his former c~n~~rons of being, i.e. what he
elusion that various dNcr'~~bs~lute entities indep('ndel~~of
understood as Ideas, are no
they presuppose ooe ano er
one another. On the contrar~~ was a major advance that. g~\'e
aud pass into one anoth~!'11~~OUght: ideas became a \I'd1t) ~f
a new turn to philosop Ica 'ng and not-being. rest an mo
.
(one and many. bel
han e and anv mollon,
thte
T
h
'of Ideas ur
.
f Idea.>.; Plato eh.
he t eor.)d
the
dialectical
doctrines
0
,
up
the
hitherto
,
Alongs e
tion of the One. ummlllg
. f bt'inl2:
further the. co.ncerthe One as the supreme cat('gor) 0
.
scattered VH~" s 0
?:J)os~~~~tituting
s~~~Ci~l~f aag~c~rine ~f idealistddial.:cl~ipC~
"
he shapes them into an t'lahoratp tflt'ory flf tlu' prim:.\, n.

and the highest principl(' of f{'alit)" that PI'O"Uf'I'~ 'hf' w(Jrlr:I!~
Ideas and determines il~ ~lrUdllrl'.

In the Parmenides. sp~<lking thr()lI~h tilt' mouth of the Elean philosopher, Plato strIves to comhlnP tilt' argulllents of th
Eleatics, identifying the One and being. with Gorgja~'s('on\'ic=
lioll that being is non-existent. The truth of this ft.'lation.:>hip
I
I
is the movement of the corresponding notions. Plato Contends
that the assertion of one absolute being irrespective of any_

thing else, "the other," is bound to lead to a Conclusion that
such being can neither ('xist nor be cognised. Indeed, it cannot
be compared to or qualifted by anything. Conceived as One

being passes into its opposite--not_being, or nothing.
'
However, if we posit one Being, i.e. 8~Sume that the One is
or "exists," we shall see that besides lheone Being there also
exists "is," i.e. something different, other. Plato puts it thus:
"Then the one will have being, but its being will not be the
same with the one; for if the same, it would not be the being
of the one; nor would the one have participated in being, for
the proposition that one is would have been identical with the
proposition that one is one; but Our hypothesis is not 'If One is
one, what will follow,' but 'If one is' ... " (Parol. t42bc).
Hence. the One and being are two, i.e. the one and something
else. Following this line which is anything but straight Plato
comes to the conclusion that the one implies many and can
neither exist nor be comprehended in thought without it.
Though the Parmenides, like many other dialogues. lacks clarity, Plato's thought is not difficult to gra~p. It consists in that
the concept of the one contains all the other determinations
of being unfolded in the dialectical process of transi tion from
One concept to another, its Opposite: the One and other, being
and not-being, identity and distinction, part and whole, eternity and temporal finitude, etc.
Expounding the dialectic of being and not-being in the SoPlato treal., the subject from a different angle (236c2':)9c). He critiCises the sophistic theSis that everything is true
and falsehood is impossible (Protagoras) or that everything
is false (Gorgias). The sophists, according to Plato, do oot
distinguish between truth and falsehood Or, which is the same,
b('lw('en their objects; bping and not-being. They posit truth
and falsehood, being and not-being as independellt notions
plaCing thern, as it were, next to ('ach other. Pa"sing on to
Parmenidps's doctrine of one beillg, immutable, motionless
P~ist,
)lIt that if being and onf' an' ,)(>n

d ~ /It'rh' I 1'1. to pOIn~. ds for tllt'm. If th'y are rtinf>re~lt,
;Hi
tl
being cannot be onf>. \or
:rr lwo.l.Int.l.
J;;ole hrpaks up
parts of
thlY' t 1)1' inlit'ilslhl,',
Thf> doctnnp of one
can I.
tl' Ulore su as It IS a ,
lIecesslty, Il lo ically IIntenauh'..
d 'mmutahle
being
i:
;he mind's
Now,
'r '1 Wt're
sllch It .... 01
'1' h lIows
'ther, since I I.
.
k d of action, it neceSSRfI ':i ~
.'
el
. "If knOWing IS a 10.
And on this view reality, 10
grasp. ill known is an affectlOlI.
knowledge and is therethft
is known, is
state of
cannot be
sO a a motion; for that w
0 heavens, can we ev<'r be
on '\S we affirm... n '.
d s ul and mind ar(> not
fore
that moti.on
that being is
on.
Presen t with perfect. dbelllg.
and eXIsts m ~o lemn unmeaningness
.
, (Soph.
. '?'9
) Tobesure 'thpans\\pr
deVOl'd of life. and mill ?"
_<i. p .
. ,
nd everlastlllg fixturc. .
nlv be in the nega.tnc.
a
. rhetorical q\le!'ltlOo can?_ i
rest, motion, then
to
singles Ollt fove categones,
as 'he greatsamen(>ss (identity) and dlstlU:!~rne their interrelatio~s~IP,
est" (2Mc) ~nd sets Ol~t to e"mix" with o~e ~nother. Strict
.P'(>dunotlll,t'dtwO\\O~
tI{';~,
eOIl~pql.l'.n
smc~ ~
,pr~;'il~~
in~
~phere
in{~ollcl'ivahl.e a~ IIIYdtl~~I~:SY~~d
~~~ i~
aC~f~ ~P~i~Ya
r~st
1I~ ~
ac.tj~ tt~Pbeli~ve
~ng "fe\\~; im~gioe

~n.
~\~~O
~~e~~gnised
.abih.t'Y'ls'oac(ol:~~foeno~f
a%OClagtrlOeendo~;:tm~:~le
i.e. theikr
logical
I spea 'lUg, I
,
.,
~'e are a
of conccpts.
say.s:
another, and
have a commUluon
rew and others wilh Illan"
and some have.commun!on \~~\' some should not h,l\"e l~nl:'~i~l
and that lhe~'e IS n.o real~?,n (ibid. 254c). Motion and r(~~igt).
sal communIOn \~Ith a. es wit.h both, for both ar~.ble- but
not mix, but beLng ~~x distinction are ~ot c.omptt~em'. For
Further, s~menlessr ~t three which share III bOl~:th identical
associate With tiC l.r"1 b ' g motion becomes
,
' , g Will eLlI,
res to res.
instance, m.LxlI~ t from it. Thp !'lame app \
er recognises
with and ?Iftetetl from thc above, Plato no
hilosophici.s
and
rigLd IInmuta (
conc(>Lve' "ysa\ categolie!'l, for
arc l'hey are invoh-ed in a
.and
tradLctory..
b' i 19 Wit \ so
.
essentIally CO;1
hi\"a\{'-nt relations com \0 lotable feature of
tem of mutua
others. Yet
n em hasis on the
standing
r y of Idcas was IllS
: .. pect afl' thl'
Plato's new t lel~r Very characteristic III t IS:" "(H is not. one
'I
/ OppOSI ,So
"\\'hNher one I.
I r
unt y 0
fl'" Pllrm(,lIid('.~:
d
another 31 0
closing lines o. 11. I r)n to th('msel\"('~ an one
,
and the other:; 11\ re a \(
~Iit
Pla~o
~Ias:es
.~:
other~ no~,
W,l;~ ~
~~~o:;
~s eVldel~~~dalld single-val~lt'd connce~~t'le ~h~nge[lll

Ot~("
apa~t
a~om
~olmpm'e
tl~e tnOS~
sP~la~.
,.
them. in every way. are and arc not, and appear , bl' Hnll appear iloilo be" (t 66e). In otlll'f words, LIlt' .H nalY:Ol1~ 01 lily de_
termination taken separate ly ilnd III n'latl(l~1 to other IIl.ter_
minations shows that each of th('m Ilas;';l'.'i ITlto ib 0PP()~it
Each higher concept splits into ('ontrari('s which. in tll~'
exclude each other a~d resolve into a mOrl' g('nl'ral ('"n('<,pt. I~
contrast to the SOph iSts, Plato. lInderstan?~ that the dpvelop_
ment of a concept IS not an arbItrary tranSitIOn (rom onf' deter_
mination to any other determination. Each of the OPposiu-s im_
plies its own counterpart, its "other se lf:" being is in!'leparable
from not-being , one from many. rest from motion, identity
from distin ction .
Groping after the laws of logic, Pluto also came very Hear
to what later was to be known as the law of contradiction, He
in fact formulated this law in,the Phaedo (W3b) drawing a
distinction betwee n the OpPos ite s th emse lves and the th ings
which possess them, The opposites can not change into each
other: "If change is between opposites or intermediate states .. ,
there must be a substratum which c hang es to the opposite Condition , for the opposites do not cha nge. And this substratum
remain!';, but the opposite does not." As we have seen, later in
the Parmenides Plato changed this view restricting the sphere
of the law of contradiction. Probably, he believed it to be
"inoperative" in re lation to a notion and, ontoiogically, to an
Idea which can change into its opposite, However it may be,
neither in the Parmenides, nor in the Sophist Plato clarified
his views on the status of th e law of contradiction and its
relation to the movement of concepts,
Here comes another important aspect of Platonism, The dialecti c o f the One and Other unfolded in the Parmenides is directly related to Plato 's doctrine of Idea s as the true sources
of individual objects. It is fundamentall y differen t from the
teaching of ancient philosophers about the ontological, existential generation of things from primary substa nce, as it is
concerned with the ir ideal generation in the bosom of Id ea, In
his first variant of the theory of Ideas Plato, without specifying the relation of Ideas to individual objects, ventured a hypothesis that particulars might "share in" Id eas or Ideas
might :' be present in" or " associate with" particulars. Now the
analYSIS of the Ideas themselves brought him to the conclusion
tI~at Id eas were also mUltiple and, consequently, needed some
higher ~rinciple, This principle is the One (to hen).
In POlOt of fact, most Plato's dialogues , particularly the
..<IIH I/Jlwedr} rpft'r to'

the,
One.
a!'o the . supre'
PI/(lf'
d
rlls
"
{
Rl'pllh It
,
I fOllfl(latioll of all l)l'wg. Ho\\(>\er, HI ~()n
Id{'<l, It IS 1 1(>1.
1.,1,,"'111'-; in whirh the One IS ldenhflPd
" '"
. I tl e I'"\r I{'r (1< '" '
,
.
'I.
Ir;l!Ot Wit I I , 'Bt"wl\, and Trllth, i.('. is conceived III axiO agl..... ith GO(l.dn;'~SLtt'~ di'alogllf's !->how an i~cr:asing tendf'ncy to
< '"I "I,d unt{}\o<1ical sigruftcance. The Om'
Calltrllls,.1ItsHI oglca
'"
'd
focUS on ' . I"l\t't'tical prorc!'os all other categoriC!; an ,011
geoeratt'S h~ ,\ f I"'d' both of its hyposta!';cs or realms-lh'
the ontological
triad characteristic of all ancient cos,
h h
.
d the .SOli. I\Is 'Ioperl by' nco-Platonism
w
IC
presmin d an
,
,
, was later ('V(
ilIologles
N
(tl e Mind) and the Soul as the succeSSive
I,
,
ted the One. ous
eO
! th e nalntion of bemg.
,
stages 0 ,(, I
<PI to as the father of idealism OCCUplCS a
To sum up ,thet~~ h~"tory of philosophy. His i~pact on the
unique plha~e In b~ca\ thought was enormous, yet It was by n~
world's ~ I osoP.'
ivalence derives from the dual n atur,e 0
mean s Simple , Its amb
h d Plato's thought exemplifies
his teaching, On the one d ~n s~stained by an overmastering
untiring quest for tr~lth anldlsHis philosophy comes from an
desire to imp~()ve t p ~o~e~uty and perfection, On the other
irresistible dnve towar sd'
ted towards restoring the hop~
hand, all his eHorts are Ir.ec tern and inspired by the will-olessly outdated ~odmTundalS~~tan aristocratic state in itpsl co~~
the-wisp of the I ea Ise,
ave-owning democracy,
ato s
trast to corrupt A~henla;. ~l with reality and this was bound
ideals came in tragic c~n u~~ pessimism and foreboding of an
to leave a mark of pro 0
'entire philosophy,
impe nding catastrophe on hiS
. ts in the con\'iction that
Plato's fundamental cr~or c~:s~:l~p of ideas, be they con
reality can be changed wltl~ t , ' g action or transcendent
' I ead be ) 'ond
ceived as human th ou ghl" IIl
,Splrlll
" Ideas ca n never
Ideas allegedly sbapi ng reah~y, d the ideas of the old world
an old world order but only ~~O~hing at all. In order to car~~;
order, Ideas cannot car;x ~utwht can exert practical forc~:
out ideas men are ne ~
reflecting the real progressive
Moreover, it is ol,lly ~he Ideas re worth materiaiising and are
tendencies of SOCial life tl~ald~as were not this kind, ~hey ~~~~
indeed materialised, Plato s
f absolute values which,'
med a rigi~ immut~ble ~;Sl~fd\~\'e emerged as a despotic and
translated Into reabty , \ 0
sl' ;r'l ..
in: Ka.rI \tan:.
hcartlp'ss social structure. \\'t, han' got a g l imp Sj' of it In Plato'~
Lau's.
In his Ideas Plato hypostatised I~H' rUII {l'Pt:.; of th t' di a h.(' t i.

cal mind and strove to array tfl~1U 1Il a (,~HlIplC':\ ~ Y~l t'm r{' pre.
senting the model of the unlvcrst' with all It:-; d ivl'rsitv.
Abstracted from the world, they Il(>canll' tht' obje ct of a ve~y
thorough philosophical :scrutiny. How('~l'r. ~b:-;oluli st'd and divorced rom reality, they were turned lillo Indepe ndent intel _
ligible entities of the divine kingdom and ix'came th e fOunda _
tion of most reactionary religiOUS and mythological world outlooks, The strength of Platonism went side by s ide with its
weakness.
12, Pillto's School: Aucient Academy
Plato founded his school in about 387 B.C. and remained

in its charge till the end of his life. His succeSSors were
Spellsippus who guided the school from 347 till 339 B.C .,
Xenocrates of Chalcedon (c. 339-315), Polemo and Crates,
After the death of Crates, which occurred about 265 B.C., the
Academv succumbed to the influence of scepticism, The
period of the first century B.C. -second century A.D. was
marked by persistent attempts to revive the do ctrines of its
founder along the lines of Stoicism and Aristotelianism . In the
third-fifth centuries A.D. the school dissolved in neo-Platonism,
The extant remains of Plato's school, meagre and rragmen tary as they are, show the first signs of the erosion' of Pla tonism that reflected the new social conditions of the oncoming Hellenistic age. Already Speusippus departed from the
Platonic understanding of particular object'! as mere reflec tions of ideas devoid of independent existence. lIe seems to
have been quite Sure that the sensib le world was no less real
than the world of ideas and that both of them could be the
objects,of scie~l~fic investigation, but I'equired different means
f?r theIr cognllion. According to Sextus Empil'iclJs, "Speu~IPPU~ ~eclarcd that, since some things are sensible, others
~ntell~g~ble, the cognitive reason is the criterion of things
IIltel~I~lble and the cognitive Sense of things sensible. And
CO~llItlve ~en~~ he conceived as being that which shares in
rall.onal truth (Sext. Ad~, m,ath. VII, 145-t46). Speusippus
beiJeved that the art of sClenlific perception could be learned
10 the manner a nutist learns not only to extract various
)7
Is frolil III ~ I ,I , trlllHl'llt lmt al so \() ppr{'('ive and differprl '

sOlln(.
liou s and lli :3{'onll:LlIl lIott'!'I. ,
.
tiith' h.HUI~ )~ t Plato who pO!'litc d only Ideas and rnathematl
In ('()I1tras~
0
,
' " ." 11'1111' " till more kiuds of sub!'ltaIlccs.
U 5 11'PI "
',
,{
...
S
P(,
,. ,. I
r
h
b
cal~) l~ ( . 'With Ill(' {)IW. and assuffillig prmclp es or ea~
bej;tllllling I '\ ' ( ' P OIlr fnr nllmbe r";, another for :patlal
kind .of ~~ l~I;:;lti;t"1I ill1fJth 'r for th p. so Ill; and by .~O\ng .on
ma~n,I~\Id~"
Illultiplil' s thp kind s
slIbst.ance . (Arl,s\..
in tlll!'l . ~t~ 1028h) . A'i< a res ult, S peu s lppus did not Idenllfy
Meth. ~ ', : Om' an el the Good . On the evidence of Stobaeus,
God w.lth t l~nain' tain('d tha t God wa s different from ~th th~
SpelislPPUS
('
I " but of a nature peculiar to hllnsdf
One and thp )O? (' .
200
(Mul. III,. Spe\lSlp.~1 rrag~{' n~~p ajei the Good are !'Iomt?Hence, .11l Spe~~I~~~I~~vin: connotation whereas :he ?ivine
what depnv~d of
. d pendent principle approximating to
Following this line of thought.
Mind tmB,s mto an \0
the world s ,Soul of PI~ . ff 'th the world of Ideas and the
SpeusippuS \0 fat~t brera B~~utyW~nd Goodness as the primary
PlatoniC concep iOn 0
.
causes or principle~, of the un'vers:~nd int of his teleologiCriticising suc h views f,roffilthe St. FThose who suppose.
.
r b . g Anslot e wro e.
cal doctrine 0
elO,
' d o that supreme beauty
as th~ Pythagoreans and Sp~~s:~Pt~~ b~ginning. because the
and goodness are not prese
d f nimals are caUSt's, hut
beginnings both of plants an i~ t~e effects of these, art'
beauty and completen~,ss ar,e Met Xl [ 7 1072b).
.
..
(Aros l' . pus
. abandoned
PI
wrong in their opllllOn
the
(lOur sources indi~ate that SP~i~~IP mathematical number:"
tonic Ideas replaclOg them ~
e uote him as saying
Aristotle and Jamblichus, for :~lstancd' t~at the One itself b
that numbers are the only ~ea ltv ,a~
. . Ie 0' startlllg. pOlll I, 0 ph'-'sics an<I h'
t heir first pnnclp
IS
rttle
IIlteres
I
J
Speusippus ~ho~ve d I be 'ond positing the fifth elem{,lIt.

contribution to It did not g? ~ f II wed Plato but held th.at
"ether," In ethics he maInly. 0 bO~h being contrasting e\"lls
pleasure was just a,s bad ~1)al~13, ~153b).
,
(see Arist. Elh, Nlcom.
I' f the Academy. made Important
Xenocrates. the ne~t hea< 0 )f knowledge. He posited t1~rN'
changes in the PlatolllC. t~~ory ~ens(> perceptions, and opin~on,
levels of cognition - thlll mg., d to three forms of bemg'.
n
and held them to c..,orrespo s "Xenocrates says that, t~ere
According to Sextus f~I~IPlflc~ihe sensible, the intelligible.
are three forms of eXlslence
\H'
".r
\0
Hean~l
dtht~l tlH'
and tlH",comp?:sitl' and opinable; and of

that \\h1Ch
{,:\I:-;t:-;
within the
...
out;id;"~h
,~,\~(ll
.
t~,';
ens ihl,'
whirh belongs to all things

t'rl,utclligibk
opmable and romposite, that of the \I ,e" eaven, and th
by sense but inwlligible h
,t,<'If: for ,t i:
(:;ext. Adv. math. \,ll, 147). To thes~ th (,~I~:-; of a:-;tl'f)1l0IllY'~
v,~,ble
~.('~
Lache~~~
correspond three deities known from H
Atropo~
orm!' of E'xisten'c
(Inevitable) for the intelligible,

(Crates:
sensible and Klotho (Spinning) [or the '
lal~ce) for the
nable.
,composite
d Then come three kinds 0 f I"IVlng b elOgs'
d and op'\an .
Philosophy, too, was to con'. " go 5, daemons
logiC, phYSICS, and ethics (the standard
parts-
morlal~.
down to us from antiquity and evide
Xenocrates).
s~s~ ~f lhre~
tJdlVISlO~ ,which
came
n y owes Its origin to
A characteristic feature of Xenocra'

.
of philosophy and mythology. Unlik~e~~;eachillg is a fusion
as a convenient instrum
to who resorted to
notions, particularly
his
turned It Into a separate ob'ec
P YSICS: hiS pupil

He starts with Zeus as the O~e t i 0 phllosophlc.al .inquiry.
the absolute form of all being N "t .e. the first prlflclple and
longer the motive force f' ex cO.mes the world's ~oul, no
Zeus's wire and Mother ~f ~~e senSible world but kind of
universe. Tending to view eve e G?ds .and all things in the
Xenocrates devoted much at?t~~ng Ifl mythological terms,
~n the world. He relieved the en IOn to the origin of evil
It and lay the blame
I ~odls of any responsibility for
X
exc uSlve y on the b d d
enocrates's conception of th
a
aemons.
human, reveals a stron inn
e Soul, both cosmic and
a.rC'~pt'd Plato's under~tand~~nce of Pyth:"goreanism. Having
{,flllty, h' specified it as a s ~tf th~ Soul as a self-moving
Xenocrate.,fr. 29) . Th'IS d eunlt"
" emov,ng
.
. number (Mul . III ,
ancient authors egA'
lion IS reiterated by numerous
A phrodisias, Philoponus
"
"
nstot
Th e : PI u t a,:"c h us, Alexander of
30-16). The Soul's nume'ric lernlstus, Simplicius (fragments
tal as well as motive o~estructure accounts for its menIncorporeal. This ensues Pbothr~ tho~gh the Soul itself is
~nd from thl' fact that unlike an rO.m. Its n~me.rical character
any sustenance (fr. 52).
y hVlOg belllg It does not need
m~thology
phlioso~hi~al
i~n~. f~r .ex~~e!)~ing
The <.;oulbody antithesis und .

Xpnoc,:,ates who believes th t t erlu?s the ethical theory of
('manC'lpation of the soul ~ he goal of man's life is the
According to Xenocrates.
the body.
prinCiple of
in man's
soul
ther~~vi~~e ~{'tt~rs
n1,1: t o . . erpower the titanic ..,0I1I('i(l1e through the agency or

right. 'J.( ions. On \\11' t'vioPIlCl' ~ r Sextu~ Empiricu~, Xl'rlOC"rat{'s c\as:-11iE'C1 ~vrrytlung ,IS l'llhe-r good or bad or Iwither
Thi:-; IMSifJ("tioH W;lS to playa vPry important part in the
subseqlH'nt dpve\opUlt'nt of Helh>ni~tic philo~ophy. partic:ularr
Iv Stoici~m, laying thl' foundation of its doctrine of "indiHe
..
euts.
under the gl'nt'ral head of "good" Xenocrat':'> included the
,
good of the soul, i.e. virtues (areUq, the good or the body,
i.e. pleaf'lourp, and external go()(ls, such as wealth, power,
honour, etc. Though virtue plays a decisive role in attaining
a blissful life and securing the soul's emancipation, Xenocra
tes does not dpny till' importance or bodily pleasures and
external goods for man's happiness. According to Aristotle.
Xenocrates held that a happy me alld a virtuoUS life are
identical since both are given preference over all other modes
o{ life (Top. VI1, 1. 152a). Commenting on this statement,
Aristotle points out the logical fallacy of Xenocrates's
inference from preference to identity and contend~ that
happiness should be subordinate to virtue. Concluding the
review or Xenocrates's ethical teaching, it is perhaps worth
mentioning his distinction between theoretical and practical
wisdom: happinesf'lo can only be attained if the knowledge of
first causes and intelligibles (theoretical wisdom) is complemented by the knowledge or practical matters (practical
wisdom)
.
The \-vorks
and pe,dagogical activity of Polerno and Crantor
testify to thC' growing trend of the Academy towards ethical
problems. On the C'vidt'ncC' of OiogeneS LaertiuS young
Polemo was
by unrestrained behaviour and wild
temper: "One day, by agreement with his young friend~. hI.'
l
burst into thl' school of Xenocrates quite drunk, with a ga 'land on his head. Xenocrates. howl'V('r, without being at all
disturbed, went on with his discourse as before. tht' ~ubj('ct
being temperance. The lad as he listened, by dep:r('(:'s wa~
taken in the toilf'lo. Itt:"' berallle so industrious as to surpass all
the other scholars and ros(' to be himself head of the school
in the 116th Olympiad" (IV, 16). PolelllO is said to have ad
vocated strict mOfab and "used to say that we should ('XCI""
cise ours('\vI'S with
and not with 1l1erl' logical
distingtli~hed
fart~
~p('cula-
lions" (Dio~, L. IY, \8).

X('llocrates's and P(>\(,1ll0'S pupil Cralltor went down in tilt'
history of philo~()phy as the author of a comllH'ntary to
Plato's Timoeus.
OIlE'
of tht' first work
II!'
I'
illS g"Hfe
wa:-; also the founder of another philo

II
il" "con' 1 t"
."1 H"
sop Hcal gPnr
.
. so a IOns.
IS contribution to t.th"
. e. kT10\Vn"
assprtlOll that we owe ollr p<lssioliS to
Halt(lIr~Onsl."'h'd
In tllf'
I,hey, art> not to be ~uppressed. but onl" kP) and IhefC'fore

.>''1."
l t IIlldt'f ('oIltrol
.:--'t'ltmg
. variolls
II H goods of lifl' 3,....
S
011(> all 1'1
.
Imagmarya - ellt>nic contest C ,
(
1('1' in a
I
h I d
., ran or prpSt'nb; II
.
II
Ilerare lca or (lr: virtue (arete-) I I I '
.
lem III thi~
T d"'
. H'a t 1 plp'lSI)
.
fa ILion ranks with the Ancient A . d' _ . fl', wealth
oj Pont us and Eudoxus oj Cnidus I ca l'1ll.~ als~ Heraclide;

toni~ts proper, they paid much mo~' :t~~~tt.r'\SI With the Pia.
nat,ure. Heraclides's greatest contributio~ J(~n to the study of
which owed him the hypothesis antici atin \, ~s to as,tronomy
theory of Copernicus: according to He~acl'~ htc' hheltocentric
tates on its axis and Venus and M
I es, t e Earth roSun, Contrary to Plalo who re ~~~cury revolvf> around the
Heradides believed them to be h:ave~r t~ ,star~ ~s deities,
Earth-whence, perhaps his convict' y thO Itc'r sJlndar to the
m,g their incarnation ~n the Eart~n
~J t I,e ~ouls await\\ay, In phy~ics, Heraclides rofess resl e I~ the M,il~y
theory, H(> maintained that theP
, ed a pecuhar atomistic
re eXist rragmenls 0 "I
"
( onkos) not being particles of an
, r umps
making up all thinl{s,2 Presuma~ el~ment 10 particular but
concept of a purposeless mechani IV' eb,was, opposed to thE'
believed them to merge with a ca com Ina,tlOll of lumps and
~eparate musical tones ruakin ne ~noiher In the manner of
As regards Eudoxus he reo;; g a sing e melody.
homoeomers in physi~S a d~tor~d Anaxagoras's leaching of
Aristippus in ethics.
n re lIrned to the hedonism of
Such , in shor' ,IS
. th e hIstory of the An',.nt
'Academy.
I \\rllillll'.'1 of Ihi~ kind, rath~.t po ula .

;nllil ~ wretdwd l'xi~I"n{'(I in this w p II r ,mhuL~l'IllI(lnt
c{'nturi(l~ contrasted
II'II~P". ,rr,
. or I \\It tht, hliss Awaitinll his ~oul in
SitZfoll'"r (Ed) {)/pPhl,
.
f, r\ flll,,{' FUI'!IJ r'.'
. ,~oO~Ophlt'dl'rGrierJ.t'"
II 1'h('il. ,.
., .('Iplll{.
oo~. S. 10:-:15.'
~
Ib,""'""".
Ch<lpler 3
Aristotle
13. Life and Work
Aristotle, the greatest of all phi losophers of Ancient Greece,

a pupil and a resolute opponent of Plato, was born in
384 B.C. at Stagira, a town on thE' north-eastern coast of
the Aegean Sea. His father ~ichomachus came from a long
line of Asclepiades (claiming their descent from Asclepias, the
god of healing) and was a court physician to king Amyntas
III of Macedon. At the age of seventeen Aristotle came to
Athens in order to join Plato's Academy and remained it!'
member for eighteen year!', After Plato's death he left Athen~
for Asia Minor together with Xenocrates, one of the probable
reasons, according to ancient sources, being his strained relations with Speusippu~, the new head of the Academy. In 355
B.C. Aristotle settled at A~so~ with several other Platonist5
under protection of Hermias. the ruler of a small Anatolian
kingdom and the tyrant of Atarneus. its capital, who patronised philosophers and gave them everything necessary to
pursue their studies. Three years later Aristotle moved to
Mytilene (the island of Lesbos) on the invitation of his
friend and loyal disciple Theophrastus, This event took
place shortly before the death of Hermias who was treacherously captured by the Persians 8;nd said to be crucified,
In 343 B.C, Aristotle accepted the offer of king Philip of
Macedon to be tutor to his son Alexander, the future great
conqueror, After Philip had defeated the Greek army in the
battle at Chaeronea, Aristotle returned to Athens, There
he founded his own school in the Lyceum, a grove with
covered walks (paripalos) near the temple of Apollo Lykeios.
The school known as Lyceum was also called PeripatetiC'
(its members being referred to a~ peripatetics) due to
Aristotle's practice of walking up and down while diS("us~ing
philosophy with his pupils. DurinR: his second 'period in
."thens which lasted for tWt'IH' yt"arl' Aristotle O'av

tllllion In t h e L yc('um w h Ie 1 attrartrd arg(' audiI' oral
.
d S('lell toI fi C researc ,1('!'l an d('' a borated his syenees
continue
t "
O
"
The death of Alexander the Grl.'3t in 323 B.C.' s;t ('~~

a general revoitagainst the ~la('edonian rule and the Ath"l
., \ . ,
~ lIan
d
a~sf'mbly vote on war Wit 1 t nllpalC'r. A ('x<lndl;>r's regent
Grrece. Aristotle. known for his Macedonian sympathi('s. Wl~
as
00
imIl1ulH' against political charges, as he was not an Athenia
./
ll
citizen and had no right to participate In til(> city's publi

life. However, he remained liabl e to prosecution on religiou~
grounds and a charge of impie ty was promptly bl'ought up
against him, the pretext being his poem in honour of
pl'o-Mandonian Hcrmias in the form of a hymn that was
alleged to befit only a god, and the quatrain on the monument
to Hermias set up at Delphi. Aristotle was compelled to go
into voluntary exile and retreated to Chalsis in the island of
Euboea, where he had some property. Thl' l1(>xt year, in the
r:.lIllllller of 322 B.C., he died.
Aristotle's surviving works mainly belong to the Lyceum
period, though they contain ideas and authentic fragments
of his earlier writings. \Ve also posr:.ess a number or fragments
dat(>d to the Platonic period. Generally speaking. it is
extremely difficult to pin down Aristotle's works to an exact
date and establir:.h their chronological ~eqll(>nee, as almost
all of them show unmistakable traces of different periods
of his intrllectuai progress. Ne\'ertheless, the earlier works
('('ariy rewal a strong influence of Platonism. For instance,
till' Ettdemlls, an early dialogue that came down to us
ill fragments contain;.;. Platonic arguments for the soul's immortality. Following Plato, Aristotle declares the soul to be
a form (Eidos) and commends those who call the soul
rpcrpti\'(' 1) ideas (cf. De an. III , 492a). In full agreement
with Plato Aristotle thought of it as existing naturally
{)lIl~idt' thC' body, whereas lifl' in bodies is unnatura l and
"'Ok
I I' dOI"(><\S('. "
Another largp work written by Aristotle in his early period
i!'o thl' ProtrepliCtls (Exortation) that also su rvived in
fragmf'nts, largely in the composition of neo-Platonic
Jalllhli('hu" under lhr !'oame name. It represents what was later
to becomt> rathN a fommon gt"nre of philosophical essays
i~vitlllg thf> rl'adf'r to philo"ophical "tudiC's and exalting the
IIfp !If ('ontfolllpialion. Still in th(> wakC' of Plato's theorY of
ilif"'''!', ArisloUr spj'aks highly of philosophy as being 'the
obl(>sl of all oCfLlp.\lions, fn'!' from <lily matprial intert>!-II.

Il d ('xlols thinking' (phrolli>sis) as th(> greatest boon. Hl'
I
~n.('!'o til(' wonl in its I )' alOlIl(' "1'11"1' a" t h e penetratIOn 0 r I I\l'
lI
io!'ophicnl mind into till' hight'st reality, the worl(\ or
idPas. Characll'risti('ally, til(' S;~IlIP word. wa" I~ter to OC' u!'f'd
bv ArislOlll' as synonymoLls WIth prafll('ai WIsdom.
'It is only in thl' diaiogut' On Philosophy datt'd .by !'oome
critics to Aristolll"s sP('olHI pC'riod tha~ the phll()goP~H'r
~hows ('s,,('ntial progn'"s frolll the P.h.lton,(' ~oglL~as. T.akmg
cxception to til(' thl'OI'Y of illt'as Aflstotle. like Speu~lppllS,
rcdll('e~ t.hem to Il\(\th(>matieal numbers and notes that If they
l+;P tIH'Y
111l',\1 It "onlnl'linrr
'"' ~
,..,..
. .. would be comp letely beyond
d PI OlLr
. )
understanding. Ill' ("1"l\I('I);('S til(' Pytha~orean an
atonic
viC'ws and conte nil); thnl im'ol'porl'al p~)lnts cannot produce
a linr. It'l "IanI.' a body.
..
Treating at 1('lIglh thl' origin of relig ious bell('f~, A':lsto.tle
attributes thrill to two ('aU);(');, one being the IllsplratLon
descending on lilt' human ~olll in d~eam~, a.nd .tll<'. othe~,
the orderline~s of celC'stial Illotion~. \ C'? In~lcatlv~ I~l thiS
respect is th(> altitude of Ar;stolle to Ilal? s poetl.c L1n "ge,
o th C.,lall1,
. no prisonersVIImten
e<
of an underground .cnve \\1
-Idl,aas an allegorical I pl~lur~ of Oil!' .world (Rep.
, .0
I
-17) A cording to Plato the prLson('l"~ cannot mo\C' and
.J
c. C
,
Id
.
0 I . the
I
do not. know ;\lIything abollt the ~eal wor . st'e mg n) t
shadows of its IrlC'[lR. Using th .is Image, Anstotle t\lr~~ I ~~
tables and savs that if the IInagLilary race of men born II f tl
bowC'ls of t.he l'Hrlh were allowed to come to th~ stir ace
and see lhe wonder); of our world, they would str~lghta":ac~
bcli(>vc that Ihr!'C' are gods who wrought them. 1 ruth,
\ ~ol'din to AI';stotll', residC's ill the world around 1I~ an{ IS
~to be s~lIg ht 1101 by conlell1phlling tr:'1l1s('endent Ideas. but by
0
hi
t.
observ in g livin g lLaLllIC'.

df{ , nt from Plato's
This approa(h wa~ flLndlHlIt'lItl.llly I CI C,.
,
\-:l.ry
I . I !-;mo,,; as sometllllg seCOI\( < '
co nception of thC' plyslc.a (,0.
. <'.\
I c nlitie<; Contrary
l
a kind of rencction of a high.er I.ealO 1 l(
of lhi'!-; world
:fl
.
r t Ie lea lity.
to Plato, Aristot.le is conv,n('c.d 0

,. ,
ds ollv to be explallled.
to
W lIC 1 nee
I .
k ' k g up Ihe CopruR Aristote 1Arislot.\e's Illutlll't' wO,r s n~,~ I.~ r.nciple intoC'ight.grotLps:
cum, can be divided on t IC' su Jec p I . .
Cate<1ories On InterpretatIon.
1 L ogIC (tilt'
rg<lnon.
!'
'
.
0 ~ I /.
Pri~r Analytic,'; and Posterior /llllllytics: TopICS: 11, op liS leal Re/utati ons .
I
I ure,;< 011 Ph.II.'~ics
re:
Physics
or
L..ec
2. Philosoph y 0/ nlllu
o
I ',n;\H
()
).
(('ight book~): On the Hear'ens (four hooks), (),l Geller/a

and Corruption (h~'O books) ; Meteurol(~f!iCIl, V~~1l1" hoob. ~~It~
la~1 on(' bC'lng" l'ndenti): n o n -autnC' ul! I'.). 1IliS Rrollp <ll~h
includes the ps(>udo -AfistolC' lIan lrl'all:<(' On the ~I Id
or
cOIlllllonly dated to the "Jlr~l century II .C.' .
Psychology: On the Soul (thrN' hooks) <\lU\ Shorf
Valural Treatises (ParvaVaturalta) ('onsislilll-: of lil(>
following works: On P erception and lhe PI'reeieed, Oil
Mrmory and R eminiscence, On Dreams. On I nsomnia, On
Prophesyin!! by Dreams, On Durati on find Brf't'ify oj Ute, 011
Ule and Dealh. Un Respiration. Inrlud rd ill this gl'Oup isalso
tlH' sham lrt'ulis(' On Spirit hplirvrd to br writtl'1l rOllnd abo ut
a.
thl' middle of the third c('ntu!'y H.C.

4. Biology: History of Animals (l(n hoo ks): On the I'arts
of Animal,,;; On /III' Gen('r(llion oj Animals (fiv(' hooks),

l3(>sidt'S tlH'SI' uutht'nlic works of Aristolip. rlassit'a l ('diliolls
also indud(' a IltJlnbt'r of tn'alis('s wrill('11 in th(' Lyct,tlllI hy
anOllyTTlOtlS authors, TIll' mos l importallt of tht'lII is till'
Prol>i('ms tr(>ating' \'ariOllS qtl('stiolls of milth(,IIl;Hi('s, Oillics,
music, Ilhysiology and Illt'clicint,
:l. First philosophy: Metaphysics consisting' of fourlN'1l
hooh. In BC'kkl'r's edition this work is pn'('t'{]('d hy the
tff'elliS(' ()n1f elissus, X('flophllnp s and Gorl(i(lS (l!.Yr.).
6, Ethics: I'-;cli omaclieon Hthic s (\('n books): ,lfOf!11I1,lf ora
iio (Larg(' Ethics ) (two book!<.); Elldpnlion /':thics, Ib hooks
" to f) ('oinciding: with books 5 to 7 of th (' .\'fcl/OnlllChl'un
Ethics. Chaptt'rs 13 to 15 of book 7 art' sOIlH'linl('s puhlislll'd
as Book 8 of lht, t:.:lIdemian Elhic s. Two boob or tht> JI(lf!"~1
lfIJrulio ar(' rC'g'<udC'd as quasi Ar istot('lian , just as tht' trNllis('
On Ihp VirlllPs and Vices wrillt'n 11('\\\'('{'11 thl' first C'l' ntul'Y
B.C. lind IIH' first ('enhlry A,D,
7 . Politics lind f'colwmics: Politics (t'ighl hoob ); FcotH!'
niles (thn'i' books). TIH' gellllitH'IlI'SS of thi~ lallt'1' work is
I.!t'IlI'rally d('ni('(1 and it.s third book is only u\,uilabh' in the
Latin tr<IIt~lalion. AristOll("s school is cl't'dih'd with H~ many
<I'i I~)H polirl'ius which olitliUl' tlH' history of Gr('('k ~t.\tes and
dpsnii)(' tht'ir politi('al sysltms. _\11 important addition to this
('orpu:-o was Iht papyrus AIJ/Pl1ian Polilic.~ di~oVl'red in 1SnO,
X. Hhl'/ o rir s rind poptics: Rlu toric ,,;
(lhrt'(, books).
rulloVt'l'f1 hy pSPllllo -r\ri!'.tott'lian trt'atiSl' Hh et()ri c,~ .-1f!ail1s1
llPflltifil-r (;tII "ilrly Iwripatl'lir work), and Po pti CS.
II Wf)uld Itot lIP an ('x<lJ{gt'ratinn to say Ihal .\ristotll'~
..... 'Irk!l ,lIrvt\-I',1 b\ il minH'lI' , .\ht'r his ,1(';Ith thl'Y pa~s('(1 to
210
I
I
I
\',
Theophra:-o\u:-o, and IIii'll to his pupil \"I'I('tI~. Thl'Y remain('d in

an tlnti('rgrotllill (1I'po:-oitor\ ti1\ till' ilrst ct'lltury A.D. wtwo
thl'Y WNI' takl'B to tilt' librar\ nf ;\I)I'1\it'on of T(-'(IS in r\th(,t1s.
Aft('r that lht'Y w('n' hrllll~ht 10 HOIllt' and published by
Andronicus or Hhode:-o, lht' Iwad of Iht' pl'ripal('tics. Hefen'nCl'S to Arislotlt"" works arE' usually madt' b~' the Bekkl'r
edition or IS:{I
Thl' lisl of .\ristollt"s works alonE' ll'stiilt's to the encyclopa('(Ii(' SCOpl' of his gt'nills. Ii(' not only embraced all the fi('lds of
contemporary kll~)\\'I(>dg(>, _hut._ ~lls(l gave _thcirprirnary
class in cation. 11 is 10 Aristotl\' thai Wl' owe the de!1larcMioll
b('lw(>ell philo...;oph:-,' illHI sc il'lll't" and ilt'twe<'tl one scie nn'
and anOlher. Thl' PI'I'-,\risloll'liilti Jlhi1osopher~ did nol
distinguish h('lwl't'tl individuill subj('cts and treated the whole
Held of knowit'lig't' as ntH' domain, Tntt'. tllt'Y dividrd th(>ir
matl'rial into sl'pal'alt s('('tiotls in o rd ('1' to conslr uct aft(-'l'
wards a s in g\l' philosophicill sysl(' Ill , but lh('y did not do so
conscio usly on il dlfrnjtt 'p_"ifldpl(,.1
Ari"loU(' classil\C'!I all knowletigl' 011 the principles of
PUl'jlOs(' ant! s lIh j<'ct. .\ccordin~ to lhis classifIcat ion. knowl
l'dge can Ill' ('ilh(-'l' lheorrtlcrli PUI'SIH'd rOl' ib own sakr. or
practical ill st rum('nlal in ruling so('i('t~'. o r cr:~jtiL'e inlended
to bring matl'fiallwllt'tHs and hl' lp rt'ails(' th(' ldl'al of Iwatlly ,
Theoretical know\('dg<' inc\lIdt':O; philosophy , mathematics. and
physics; praclicul knowll'dgl' <,thics, (c(Hlomic!<., and politi cs;
cr('ati\'(' knowl,'d~l' J,)(Wl i('s. riwlol'ics, and lh~ arts _0.1' skil~s
(tl'chne). TIlt' lll'c('ssal'Y prl'iitllitl<l~Y 10 all SCl('nces I~ logIC
IInd('rslnod bv Al'istotlt',ilS lht'ir eomtllon ml'lhod or l[\slrlLnll'nt (organon) alHlth<>rrfor(' not includt>d by him in th~ roo
rr~oin~ cla~sirl('alioll, This sc h('llIl' mltllrally suggests logIC as
the startin g point fot' ('xpo~itioll of At'i~tolle's philosophical
systetll ,
I"'. WAil' find gt'il'ntin. 'll'lhml
V
1\
AristoUC' is Ih(' ulliv(,I'sally r('('ognist'd fOUllt!l'[' of formal

logi c' or the ~cil'ncC' of CQl'lwl. lI .. tL~~t1g wht~h _Jl(' .5,all<'11
analylics, His l"llo:..;ilion W3~ so t'xll1lt1sltv(> and we1\ rC'ClsonC'tl
thal in its special field logic had remaill('d practi(' II.

Chtlll~('d till thc nineteenth century and, ;lccording ~
"has not b(>(>n able to advance a single slep and is (~huant.
tlln.
all appearance a closed and comp\('ted body of doctrin~ ~.o

I~de('~. Aristotle succceaed
a paradigm of
glcail
thousand . , and was
i
of dial H<!r~ ('
,an d
i d
1
mellO 5 in this
knowl('dg(" cctlCS
io
Th(' sequence of Aristotle's logica l works listed 'ab
in tli(',ord(,l.' of .thC'ir ~o!nplexity. r~nec~<; the didactic struct:~~

of lo~p(' which IS traditIOnally diVided lilto th rN' departmc I1L'I'
concepts, l)fOpositiolls and inferences. ThC' calegories d .j
with lJnr('lal(>(~ sing le words or l('rms which, acco,iing e~
Al'l,stotle, fall 1I1tO ten classes 01' calcg,ories (from kategore~
wilich [!Ieans ~o harangue, assert). Artstotle l'nUm('rHt('s 1('11 \

call'gOrtes wilich. seem t? cover ~ar iou s asp('ct." of Iwing.;
!'Iub!'\tanc~, quantity,. qualtty, relation, plaCl." limp, position,
stah', actIOn or a rtl'cllOn (see Categ. 1b-2a). 'I'll is cl assifira lion
must have bl'ell regarded by Aristotle as bUlH l<'lItatiV(' onl'
sinCl' in .llelaphysics hl' either reduced th(> number or
categom'~ to thrN' (substance, quality and l'('lations .~(>
XIV,2, 1089b) or included the last fOIiI' lInder till' heading of
motion.
On(' ('311 hardly proceed to the analysis of calegori<>s
wl~h()lIt 1I11(1(>fstalldi.~l.S" ~.I~eil" natul"('. Werl' they ('on('eiwd by
~l"lstHtl~ a!:\ c1as!:\es of being, forms of thought or [[[erl,ly a's
linguistic ('1(,lIl('nls, names? Each of thC~l' alll'I'lIatives
aciv'Hu'NI in hislorico-philosophical literatllrt' was not
IIllfotlll(\('d as it rl,nccted one of th e aspects of Arislolit"s
('nl('gori!'", (it is IIOt accidental th{'refol'e that the di sc uss ion s
of 1hI' P ropost'd i ntl'rpretHlion s were IH'ver CO il fi ll('(\ wi th i n th('
IlrmillC(' of I)Urt' lol,tic). Th(' truth is that Arislotle hims('1f
11111111' 110 distinctioll bl'twl'en thcm as his doctrinc Spl'llllg from
tlu' study of (hffNPllt modes of one and the sanl(' being. In
Ills. ('yps, tilt' <'al('goriC'!'\ could only hI' lrll(' to the {'xtl'nt to
willch lhl'Y r(,nt'etNI thel11, ;'t'. rl'prc!';('nted a ('ombinHlion of
Iht' .Olllologil":ll, logi cal and linguistic aspl'cL" of l"I'alit\'.
Th.l:lr "'t'paraIHIII Wl.ls il mallpr of distant futlln'.
'
.IS suilsl'1Tlct' (oysw)
.
. I'.hI' rlr..;t
. . . 111. th,> I",
. of " a ('gorlCS
~Ihl(h -".lalll\:-; ,lpart from thl' rcsl. It is, accordinU' t.o Arbtotle,
t H' 1I\(1I"lIllIal:
"'SlIb",'an
. tIE'
I trlll'St 1111(\ " f)I"IIl;.lr~'
.
, .
. ~ ce, 11\
and
!1I"~1 111'1111111' ",('11"('
of tl 1(' \\on,
. I .IS that wl1ldl
...!.
.
IS 1I<:>llh('r
K" I. A:n/lk rl,..r

I
'''II'''" r",..,wI1JI.
\ 11 nill{l', Bill", 17s7. S \ 'IIt
predieabll' of a subj\'ct nor pn's\'nt in a snbj('et: for in!'tancl',

the indi"illual man or horSl'" (Cutt,~. 5, 2a). Indi,;dual
things as StlbjN'ts may ha\"l' variolls dt'terminalions a!'l
their pr('ciicatl's, e.g. ~milh is a man, till' horS{' is white,
et("", Ari",totl("s conception of sub",1;.\I1C(', i.('. tru(' n'ality
",eems paradoxical, sincp hoth for him and Plato n'ulity ran
only h(' gra!'lw(\ by thou~ht whieh Mnls with thc univer"al
and not individual. Indccd. concretl' objecL... art' in constant
nux of birth and dN'uy, whert'as substance is immulahie and
('\"erlasting and t.hcreforc OpCII only to 1I1(' mind.
/
Firmly holding on to the sl'nsllul world, out bClng unable
to 50Iv(' thl' dialectical contn\\\ietion of Ull' indiv idual and the
universal. Aristolh' posits, by way of eOlllpromisc, secondary
substances g('nera lind gp('cil's, '.C. universals deriving
their existenCl' from indi"idua.l", as ind('pendent primary
substanccs. Thus thf' catl'gory of substanc(' on lhl' ontological
side acquir('s til(' most gC'lwral dHlractN denoting all
indep(,IHI('ntly ('xisting lhinj.!s, and nn the logical sidl',
renecting th(' rclatioll'" within till' hit'rarc'hy of the individual.
lhe particular and thl' IIlIi\"l'rsl1\' ol"{'upil's simultaneollsly
lhc upp('rmosl and thc lowt'rnlOst POSitiOllSL including both
th(' genera find thl' individuals.
The Categories is presumably 011(' of Aristotle's early works
written in til(' initial period in the LyrrullI. Having divined
and, in fart, e,presscd tl1(' dialN'tics of the individual,
th(' particular and the IInivNsal in till' "prima.,~-,
Aristotle faih'd 10 c\evei<ip llis brilliant conjl'cl\lre
a consistent th('OfY and hlter rl'visec\ his views ('orning to
rt'gard the llni\"('I'sals (gcll t'ra nnd spl'cies, i.e. sllbstal~ce.s)
as forms (morphe, idea), i.t,. ll.'i r.oncep tual churacterlstl cs
inherent in individual objcct<;. " By form I mean the essence of
('ac h thing and its primar y suhstance," writes Aristotl.\".'. in
Metaphysics (VII, 7, 1O:~2h). Though thi s definLtlOn
'lppar('n ti y asse rts thc idcntit~ of the form or essc nCl' with
indep{'nden tl y exigting indivi{lu als (i bid. , yl. 6, 103Ib), l.11l'
Platonist tradition wC'igliillg' hcavily 011 Aristotle cfltlsed 111m
to turn to the universal. th(' "for m" or " i{\('a" as Ihl' "(,ss('ncl'
of being." On til(' one hand ' I],'l i: Irtrrnlly cOIl\'inlced tlhl"d' ',II'"
only reality is the in(\i\"idLltl w IIC I a one call )C ca I'
e
substance and (,SSCJlce of being. On thc othcr hand. l'ach
individual is a com pound of form and mattC'r and thC'refon'
."
<,<annot
.
I b<' ~Llb:-;lanc('
- and
' t'!':-'('Il t'l' which Ill''''
. I11'
Arlsto! p,
i\c('od lll~
Y
1)\;",:I','('ls",y
to L('llln. "gets inln <l IllIHIIII'
"1111
,II 1\
o\"er til(' dia'l'('ti('~

<lnd thl' . I(liar, r
. . . of the IIniH'r:-<rd
r
('0 11('<'1' , aIHI :-<eTlsatlOll. Nc .. 0 ('ss('IlCl' and Ilh"lIom," lOll Plt "
"I
_\ri:o;totle turn !' to 1"'0 '.-.'
I ntapretalion
I .II " () Ii r
d
'
d"Irtc("C'nt rl'iatinl" POSition'
('()n~l~ 1O~ {) l('rllls
an statHlIt
Iwtw('('n'
<
"
H' ~u I)J~('~.<H~.d ,I IH' pre d lcat' ~\"hicb n~ay he> Irut' 01' fal'
the man 1~ rUTlIliJlg ). i)('PC'II'S('

Yl!<lI1tiLy
(u
and
,on
I
. niH'rsal
)
. . particular). and qualit".f (.,r:,~ln~
'
II,matl\'('
IUH l1egttllYC' . prOpositions (prrllllsC's) fall into fOlll' tV) s"'
A-" universal
affirmative (all
., S are
, . . . leu ar,
.
a rIlrmat lve (some S are P) , E - uni\'cl'sal nega tive (,
S"P)
0particular
"
10neof
I~. ,and
negative (SOffiC' S arC' not Pl. TI
"(Socrates
IS
!:ilttlll~,
p) 'p",.,." .,
~C'latlow,
betwren the four types of premises al'e g raphical;eY

Illustrated
'
1 " by the so-called square of OPI}osi
' lion P"O
pose d
III t. Ie sIxteenth
century 'as a mnemoni c devie"~- b".f J U I'IllS
I
PaCHlS, trans alor and commentator 01 Aristotle. - -- 'A
Contraria
Subcontraria
Dis~l1ssing the modality of PI'opositions, Al'istotle divides
them Illto necessary (apodeiclic), possible (problematic) and

.(as~(>r~?I'i~) and I)fOcee-ds to the a'lalysis of their logical
1'1 lallon", wlthm the framework of inference,
Th(' ,r('latioJ\!; he tween propositions (judgements) are
~I('t('r~llll('d by t.lI(' principles or laws of thinking: the law of
HJ,:'1I1It Y, aC~fJJ'(llII~ to which every con('ept must he lIsed in
I'f<lS(JIIlII~ 111 the sam.e meaning (A=A), the law of
non r~!fIlralhdll)n, a(,cording to which Iwo propositions
nl'~illing ('a('h olh('f cannot be simultaneously true (A::f=
TionA)
.
to whirl, <Inn
.',, ti.('.. law' of th. {' (,X(' IIl(IPC I middle,
according
I If'r 1\ or non-A "." '""
,II..: an( I no 'M(
. III
( C' 'IS posslh
. Ie.
rl:a.'
!.'''!Lin p,'CHn_,"
Wr,rk ..VI
, VI>1.
11;7,
\1'1:
t"" (f
' t <I t I('",
' 11/)()k II I'/(/p/lysrn", Co/lt'dt'd
i \ r.~
1\
,h'nrl',
III
.IiSI"Ollf
h'rlTl:i
and ilropt'~ItIOIIS
III liSt
not
eontr,ulid Oil!' allollll'r, tl,,'lrllill of 1111 "fI'LI'maliv!- propo'iitil)n

is lht' [ablt;-. of IIH' IH'It;!I; \'{' OIH', l'lt', TIII''i(' printiph,'i
ronslitu\(' till' fOlllHlalioll of infNPIII"1' or rpasonill~ [rom
pr('misl's pr(,'il'nhd by Ari'itolh' ill thl' form of a syllogistic
system.
A tlt'laiil',1 (Hlalysi~ of 'iyllogistll i:i glWII by Aristotl(' in
lh(' prior A/l(llytic,~ opl'ning tlJl with this (\('I;lIllion: .. :\ s;"II
logism I:; disco\lrst' ill wlii("II, ('('rla;1I things h('ing stated,
I
other lhan what is statl'd (ollows of nl'cessity
from
,
(ArisL AII<l1.pr."', r; 2t.b). '('huS: from
th e stateJHents 'AlllllC'n arC' mortal" and "SO('I',ltt's is a man"
follows of IH'cC'ssily thM Socmh's is morl<d.
Aristotle dislinguishE:'d thrl'(' fTgur('s of syllogism (the
fourth figure was addt'd hy his followers), t>ach induding 16
moods. In his eyes only the r,rsl-fTguJ'(' 'iyllogisUls we re perfect
,~nd o nl y four moods of tht'lIl were ('or rect. The syllogbms
of the second and third fTgurC's W('I'e regarded by him as
"impe l'fect" since the ir condusions <lfe not ,'alid for nery
case.'
In a syllog ism as a forlll of reasoning th(' two extreme
te rllls (S and P) are rC'latC'd to e,Ich other through the agency
of the middle term (:\1) COnll110n 10 bOlh premises. If there
is no middle term nr if it i~ u'ied in di{l('l'ent meanings
(four-term fallacy), thC' syllogism brC'ak~ up. It expresS'!' the
xiOIll known as dictum de omni el nullo (L): whatever is
a frll'lned (de "ied) of an eutire dass Illa y be "frmlled (deoi('(\.)
of aoy object induded in this Chl'iS. \\'1' do not propose to go
into syll ogistic wh ic h i ~ l''''pounded in detail in any manllal of
logic, y('l il is worth notin g that sy llogi sm i'i ess('ntially \. /
a method of unfolding: the knowledg(' we alr('udy possess: the } \
co nt('l1t of the cond ll sion is implicit in the premises. Therefore, syllogism cannot be id cnlifu:'ci with demonstration in
g:enNal. Aristotle himf:.<.>If was not unaware of the possibility
of direc t inf('l'('llc(' by COIl'"C'l'tilll{ a pre1tlis{': from the
s la Lemen 1 "somt' poli t ida liS 11 rt> liars" w{' i II fer "some li,l\"s arc
politicians," Ill' also wrott' abOllt lhe so-c<l lled dialectical
10 ArI~I()lll" Ill., p,'rll'{'l ~yl\n~i~m " (m~i~I" 01 1\ major

II ntiuor
lIud a
rllIlll',ininj:t Ihr,:,' I,'rlll:
"';Jrf' "n r"l;:,\l'd to mil' <1unt\wr Ihul tIll' lil~l I~ ("nnl llllll'd 11\ till Illn\dl~ 01., Ill.,'
\\"hol". ;11111 th l' middl ... ;~ l'it\wr (".ml,,;lwll ill, ,Ir ,'xrlud.'(\ from. Ill(' flr>'I"~ 11\
qr frnni II II hoI,," (,\n ;'1. pro I. :t 2;,b) II~ f\l1I~ llWI ... l~ aft' th," ,f{lIl'l\\'I1~~~
\laP.Sa~1 = Sal'(llllfbllr:l). ~I,' I' S,,\I S,'P(Ct'l;m'n t ); \1 ,, 1 -S. \I = S.\
I
A('{:nrdin~
pr"llli~".
pn,," i~l'
( Darii): ""d \l< ' I' -:-;i~ 1
f(llldll~iou
~I P(F l'ri " ),
\~h"'\.'
_~.vll()g-i:'Hl Ih':,rribing' it :1:< a proct'liul't'
"Wlh'I"I'h\'
-,
'I
n'~arrl('(1 as s('lf-I'vil\(-nl or I\\inmllti .. appl;c'ahh- to Sp('c;al

!'ril'IlC('S and to kllowl('d~1' ill ~1'1Il'r<d, Thl'rl' call b(' no such
rl'<l~OI1 frnlll ()pillion~ that arl' gt'm'ral'~' :~(~tt~)';I,1\

,IIWIII I'n'I'y pro hl pm propollllllt,d to lI~. alld 'II , I ltd
()Ur~e1H's. when ~lanclill1't' up to Cln Hrg ulllt'nl. a\;) i~7) _.:-.I~all
tw ;\hll' to
an~:thing
thai ,>111 ob:.,tru.('!
1 Ills' 11\('\11011
I
IS
\I~"
(Arist. Top. 1. 1.
'the
I suhJ('c\ of till'
TOI)ic~'.
~~l~:'~
ii'
" j,{tltlH'n I).'
. . .11
11"1'( I Itl H t It'o['('ll(',,, <It'batf'. TIJ(' In'a\ist' d'sCt'ih",

, 'jllll'" OP1(~
" -" \\,b
-,.'In\crHI(>( I as it rdl'I'l'Il('t' book'
.
IIlgI
,I 1,111.
'
('OSt'it
,I HII)( I In all argun\C'nt.
I
~tlilloglJ{,s
mOre
k
oh'('I"
nalysing" th(' paltel'll of PI"
'r~/
and formulating till' " ' opks," Aris\oll(> in

InlC'1Hicd to dC'vclop a mt'lhod of rNl soning 110\ onl\' I
' ,
I
f
'
.
rOIll
apo..
"
I
t I(1(' 1/', JUt a so " rom pos~lhle
prol1Os
itiOllS
,,"
.
. CO llf,!rnl!' ilg lo
('UITl'III~'
I I1(' I1I oplll lons, I Ill' T opics t{'a dh's a dispUl' ,
"C
I I rom "\'{,I'ISlnll
"
'I ar " to "Irll{, and primal'", ,Ill
i ~ ('Il(
'I' lo
"\\'1'1
' d on I Ile s lr{'n glh not o f nn,thill 'f ' "I lings
11('1 tin' b
Cl
ICV{'
I
,
f
,I
I
(
\
'
l
'
,
'"
~
,,(,
() ,It'lIlS{, \'('S
f m"l.
op, I, I , IOOh), Thi s ailn, llc('Ol'di ngHIt
to
\nstoll{' , can be ach l(' vcd through Ih e liS, of \'"ll'iOlls " 10 ' "
For instanc(',
Ih'
'" I,lSl,C,S,
'
, ' topi cs pertaining to 'pol 'vs~m~'J
"
rumenta I III all~lnrn~ thE', truth if difipr{'nt words M e synonymous, allil Illlsl('ading If the \\'or(\s arc hOlllon\'tnOH"i TI ' \
nlt'di('int' can
d,cfined both as the knowl('lig(' 'Of
)
,:('('ord"l1cl' \\'Ith ~ls p~lrpos{') anti as th(' kllowlcdge of the
(nrn'('t mlld{' of 11f(' (10 accordall c{' with lh{' nw alls uscd to
'lcll1l'~',(' a ~t;lt{' of health), On th e other h 'llld, til(' llse of t he
w()nt h;.!t as a mammal and a WOOdl'lI impll'lIlen t in 011(' and
till' "allll' argunH'nt is bound 10 lead to confllsion,l
Alongside,the ('xamination of individll al " topies," Aris totl('
Ill'\'elop" th('Ir <;~'''tCIll showing that a dialogu(' lIlust iucl ud('
fiv~' ~11;:III,C()ll1pOtl('nt~: (I) ~tatcmrnl of a pl'ohl('Jll: (2) IlLcan s
fill (nslll.'lng corrcct IIlfcl'e nc(', s uch as the I'u l('s for adoption
of pn'nll!'('''i, analysis of diff('r('nl nl('anin~" of l'ach t('I'm,
~ I('kcll()n of r('s('Ill\)lanc('s and di\lcI,(,tlC('S; P) I'll II's of
IlIfl',['(' I1('(' , 11Idll('ti\'~' (from thc individllal to tH~\ IIniv('rsal)
or Syllogist iC: ('I) IIllelTogatol":o. s\rfltpfrV; (5) l'('sllon(\{,lIt's
str,ltl'gy.
",.
Th(' "d iall'ctical" (dialogical) mrtholl is l'l'gard('(1 by
Arlstotlp 1'''" tIl(' \\'\V
'- to ,I 1(' II~ PI'III(' lpl('''i of ('H'I'V Scil' n Cl',
' -, otf' I'11111 IOgIC,
"
.
I II fad " IIkl' 'all .\rlS
It is a th('ol'\'
of
d('
" I IOC('I'tHIn
' hasic l)roposl
" , 1I10n
, ~tri\\1(J 1l b\'
,1'1'<\"0'"
.
I" 1I1)\\al(S,
tlOIlS, /)1' Il0wlI\\'ards, hy r('il~onin~ frolll th('m , 1'h('s(' arc
;;1''
~)('
he~ith (~I~
J\
r', . ,
,f,
~et- \\. K_ ,r: Culhri!. \',,1. \1. p, :!o~'- .\ri~h"l'''s uwn pX;\I1'llh' "I
O"'''II~Jlly .' ;",H~ whirh "",aI" ,,",', ,'," k-(,\' uf " ,jour Mill II",
.h""ld..
101,,,",
thing as tIll' lo~ic of rii!'('o\'l'ry, Till- IInlil-lIIon!'trabl(' prior

truths Ii" oll,,",ill(' tIll' pru\'inl'l' of lo~i(', Thl'Y fall within the
scope of "Ilrst philn"ophy" (lIll'tallhysil's) and arf' ~raspE'd by
the mind which COlllPI'('IH'IHIs tlH' I'SS('r1('P of things, thpir
form and suhstl'lIlC(',
Cha l'act(>l'isti cally, ('\,('n induction is fl'gardl'd hy Ari:;lotif'
as demonstration of a Io(l'n('rHI lill'!'is, as the (I(hance from
particulars to univ('rsals: il is a spl'cifle syllogi~m ill which the
major prem ise ( th {' un i vel'sa l) i~ (\(,Illollslrat('(\ f rom the mi nor
premise (p remises), Un lik l' th(> con ventional syllogi:o.m in
which we infN the mortality of Socral(>s from th(> mortality of
all men, in induction w(' illf('l' th(> m o rtali ty of man (men)
from the mortality of Sorrat('s, Plato, Callicles, Strictly
s peaking, therE' is no infNl' nc(' in th(' propel' sense of th e
word, as we cannot (>xamin(' every human being and statE'
that all o f tlwm a re mortal. This is mN('ly a restatement
of theg('nNal th('sis, An apodeictic g('nera l statement can
only be providcd by so-cl\ lI'd perf('ct induction in w hi ch ,\'pry
relevant individual is slibj('ch'd to e'xaininatioii, Xeealess to
say, inductive arglllll('nts used in actual debat(' are VNY far
from thi" idl.'al.
The closing sedion of Aristo tlc 's logic is an analysis
of logical errors conHllit\rd by man d('liberately or unintentionally, In his la s t logical tr('fl.tise called On Sophistic
Refutations and sometimcs r('gard('d as th e last ( ninth ) book
of the Topics, th(' Sta girite s hows that all fallacies are in fact
nothing but sy llogi s ti c (,I'mrs, Th('sl.' arc di\'ided into wrbal
errors (ambiguity ill terms or homonymy a nd ambiguity in
grammatical co n s truction 01' amphiboly: incorrect composi tion or divis io ns of propositions, wrong acccn tuation and
inco1T(>ct substituti o n of gnlllllnati cal forlll s) and logical
e rrors (confusing thc accidental with ,tJ1C e~senH~! or the
absolute with th(' 1'('lative, aq!;ui ng e rL'on eollsTy from a g'nerai
rule to a particular Cflse 01' vice versa, a fallacy of th('
COllsequent or arguing from a ('onscqu(,lIt to its condition,
argui n g in a circle, a fl\lIacy of incorrectly assuming an
anteced(>nt as the ca llSC of a ('(lnseqllcllt, i,l.', post hoc ergo
propter hoc, a fallacy of many qu('stions wh(>1'ein sE'\'el',,1
questions are inco rl'ectly combined in one).
The c1assicnl svst(, 111 of Ari:-;totelian logic outlined abo\'('
ca m e into being a's a thr(H('licnl lit'sciplinE' and was us(>d for
elidartic pllrpn~{'" for mort' than Iwo thou slIllll \'I'M!! I .

"1'Oll'<I thl' form" of thought in;l ill'tinilt, hit""u",:" ". I' t It'pr\,.
I
[
1t.1"1 I'U('1
. hi
W I11(,. ,WilS an () IJ('clIH' ~l'.sll t () tht hisloril'al prol.'l'''''' I)
urI'
rn~llItlOn.
1-I0WI'\,t'r. owmg
. I
I "I
In IIH' ,linh'I,tie" of th. I . r til"lt

. t
1Ij.!I('al '\1 I
,IH' IIlstor!C;l ,a ogl(,~ PI'(':<.t'lIlallOli tlf thl' 1"1,,,1111,, of a : H

lop mf.'nl IS of 1l('('C'S"lty the rpyt"''',' of tilt' wit "I
til \('"
. II
I .
.
.
I, pl"tU'I'"''
v, t 1(' mqull'v Into tlH' 11I1'lhollolo,,\ I[ . ".
II IsI01'1('<1
" k"
"
d [
.
!">.
t
S('II'lIiifl'
rom th(' allaly"l:-; of Pluto'" ,1-"
, t
'I1111 "lOg starlr
disrolll'''C'
(Topics).
p,'o(,(,t'dpd to IIH' nl),',"",,:,
[Id OJ.!lt'ul
_
.
"
nl'llls
r
Infer('Il('(' (~lIalytlc$) lind roncludt'd with J'll,I<~"" ' I.. 0
""
(0
I
... Iln .." or
PI'oPO:,i.ltlOn"
"nlerpret(ltiorl) and tl'!'III" or
(Categories),
CO!lc('JJls
I
I
. Categories .should Ill' ['('g",,",I,'
<
(II" L \e
I This
I "e\pI lai nds why-the
ast ~g \ ca an the firs~ "\l1('taphy~ical" treatise, Till' Conce ts
exanH
there are IIIdeed ' congenial to til(' "I)r'
,PI<'5
Ined
"
,1lH'lp
an( C~~I~(,S that are the object of Ari~totlt"s "fIrst )hil _
sophy,
I
0
t5, Fir.<t Ph i l o'iO p h~, The Doctrine of First
Pri nc iples and Call!'es of Being and Knowledge
,T h ~ fl,rst philosophy as a sCi,ence COllcprned with the prima~~ prlllcipies and causes of belllg was expounded by Aristotle
In a, funflampnlal work that was later cRilt'(1 ,lletaphysics,'

As t ime went on, metaphysics came to dpllote the doctrine
of transempirica,l, supra-sensible principles of reality as
()~,pos,ed to. phYSICS dealing with the manifestation of the!)e
p ll nclples,lIl the world of sensible objects,
~omparLng the first ph ilosophy wi th other disciplines,
Anstot,le W I' ole that the "physicist'" concerns himseIr with all
the actL~e and passive properties of bodies, the mathematician
deals wl,th them as inseparable from bodies by an effort of
absL ~acllon, a,~d th e First P hi losopher or I~Naphysi c i aLl
studies t h e m whe re they are separate bot.h in [" ,ct
",n
tho
It" (0
P I Ugl,
,e an. I , 1,4 03b). Th is s la te men t. seellls' to ,hav,' a
T
. ato nl ~ rlTlg a nd suggests the concept.ion of rnClaphy:.;icai
Plr~perpes as princi pl es and causes d ivorced from l)hysicHi
oId)J('cts and the I' e rore esse n tla
. I iy .uien
' - tt',-'
.t:
--cai ---with inror
po['eai
(',as. Such ~ co n c~us i on, how(>\'('I', wou ld he a n o\'(>J'simpliflcal io n of Ar lstotles v;ews.
As we have ,seen carli"cr, ['I,
.
a 0 un del";lOo<l m athelllatH'al
"",d
'1'1 ... work owes il~ nallle to Arist I'

'
IUlIlflh (f.r~t c,'ulury B.C,) who 1,,1'(" 0\ ,f.' ~ COI~IIll('nl"l()r ArHlr()UH'II~
lIalllr" ulld('r Iii" h('adin<r ~'" ,P ,d.I.1I h.~ .11.\11)11 uf\pr lhl' w()rk~ un
...
1/ (I P "I.'.tw_
"r
2Jx
-I
Ilhj,','I' 0[' HlIIlhcr1'l II !u par,dlll' alld " r (' ""\'

tf'd frolll
1I1,IIt,'r "wi till' lIIall'rHtl "orld, 1" "Uf)" ~1 \\ilh his t('adu-'
:\ri~lotk 1'lJllfi'i\l'd 11"'111 ~ prolpl'rti, hll)JIgIIII{ to bHdi,~
bllt sl'par;,hll' frolll tI"'1II "by ,II' I'fforl 01 ~t)1'Itr-dl'lilJn Thl:! IS
;l cI;{"I'I'nl ,i.,\\
ill!'lll"palihl,' \\ilh ti,e I'v hagor,'an all,l
Platollil' ('oll""pl iOUi IIf ulltIIllI'r- ;I ... 111"a~ !M'II'lralt' frolll II )rli,'s
aile! u( Idl ',\" a~ IIl1mlwf1'l. Illal,,'! ,lo,'lrill" W !I ill (a('\ UII'
oJ\I~' ri,tional .-'XphIlHltioli of til., rI,latil!ll,,\tip betwI'I1l Id.' 3
and lII,rll'J'ial ohjl'('\s, alHI Ari"LI)ti"'!I dj'\wrtllrl' from it w, '3
a chal$,lIg(' tn onl' of till' Im"I(' t"II!'IS or Platonism.
According to Arist"tl." till' ohj"('is of thl' rtr"t phillr.;oplry
have no exist(>ne(' ,,"Iside till' sl'llsibl,' WI)rld; v,'t lIll'\' rio ('xi"t
in it and call $(' thought of hoth i'S illsl'pa!'ahll: anrl a~ s('par<lte
from bodies, Tlwir dl'h'ction ,!Till inwstigati(1O ('all for grf'<lll'r
mental effol'\s and a highl'r ell'Krt'I' ,)f ahstractilln than ar ..
needed in pur(>ly mathemati(',ll rf'sl'arch,
The Metaphy sics in its traditional form I starts with a deflOi'
tion of philosophy (wisdom) and pron,(d" to a ('ritieal <lnaly
sis of previolls doctriJl('s, its aim bl'inlJ; to pave the way for
Aristotle's own ronceptions and ~iH' them preliminary ,.Ilhstantiatinn. In a brief historiral SilrW\' ,\ristotle poinl~ 0111
that the first philosoph(>rs con;;idered mailer (I/y/e) as thE'
primary cause of all lhings, whereas Empedocles and Anaxa!{oras introduced th(> eflicienl cause which in Anaxagora:-;
assumed the form of Beason "a." the cau!-e of order and of all
arrangement" (Met. I. 3, 98-'1 h) . After that the Pythag-oreans
evolved the concept of caliS(' as "sub"tance and eS"E'ncl' of
being" by stating 'thal finitude and inflllity were not attrihutes .... but that inflJ\it\' ib(>1{ and unit\' i~elf were the
substance of the thing~ of which they are predicated" ,1nd
tha t therefore" TIll III b('l' was the ::;ubsla lice of 3 II t hi ngs" (i bid ..
\,5,9873). Finally, to Plato philo"ophy owes the concept
of the {onnal and flnlll caus(',,: "Plato .. , held thllt the problem
app lied not to sensible things, but to entities, of another kind fo r t his reason, th at the common definition could not be a
d e fin ition of a n y se ns ib le thing, as they were always changin~.
, TIll' cnlir(' work ron~isls of "'IIUr!tlp lr('ali-t>~ (h"nk~) "'rillen nr TO'
rordcd at din('T('ul lil1w~ lind l'''"luil\~ l1UnH'r!H'~ rr'rrlili(ln~_ ,\rc"nlinl!; I"
\"PTOer JIIP!!I'r. It If.' II"/npil!ls(('s in II cnhprt'llt (nrm \\'m.l,I inr-luri., hn"k~ I
(I'lmptcrs '-7), Ill. 1\, YI. \'11. \ Ill. I\., \,111. '\ anri XII (II""
<'h"lltrr 8), All "Ih('r ho"k~ allli rllI'I11"r' 111'\' rI'\",UII\c. _\n lIlh'Tt'Stl1lli:
"lI1'lllpIIO rl'rllll~lrllri 110,' .lldllpily.<,p \\;l~ ,'l~) uod"rlakt'll hy _\dll\ La"""
{sr., '\rislotC'lt'~' 1I('llIplly,<,J.', In ..
u/ull ..
rtra~en ('(>11 ,-ld"l! l,lJ$$oIIl.
n..
Diedcrichs, J,'na. 1!1I.)7),
I(" ..
Things of this othN sort, then. he ('all('(1 hll'as, "nd . 'I .

thiJlg~, h{' said. were all named after tlH'H'. and in _.:~ lsild{l
,
'
\lIlul' 0('
relation
to t Ilese: ror tI
1(> many eXisted In- parlicipati)'
.\
Id~'-'s that. hav~ the same name as th~y .. (ibid., I. ~:l~~iih{'
It IS at tillS pOtlll. however. that Aristotle's rt'a<'tioll'
.)}
' .
'lgalnSI)
Its t
s rongest. 'I
r "
IS criticism
of tht tiwo
' .
PI alo appears at '
Ideas. which was to a certain extent the former PhI r~ of
~('If-criticism is mainly unfolded in chaplNs /1 a~dOI~st's
Book X" I.
. or
Aristotle's objections to the dorlrilll' of Ideas W('re
follo\~'s:. (I ~ It I~lerely doubled the sens ibl ~. \\'ol'ld Wilho~~
e\plal!llJlg It as If a greater number of ent lt J(~s wel'e easier
to comprehend than a smaller one. (2) NO lle of the argum(>nt:for t.he existence of Ideas could achieve its end. (3) To exp l ai~
the relation of the ideas to the sensibles one needed an intermediary, so that het.ween man in general and an indi vidllid
there was to be the "third man," just as between man and a
Greek, a Greek and Plato, and so on ad infll1i tum. (4) Motiollless Ide~s alleged ~o be ~auses c~uld not effe~t mot.ion Or any
change In th e senslbles, I.e. prOVide the effective force in causality. (5) The relation between an object and an Idea
described as communion, participation or presence "is empty
talk and poetic metaphor."' (6) In gene ral , the essence or Idea
of a thing cannot be separate rrom the thing il'ielf: "It would
seem impossible that substance and that. whose substance it is
exist apart" (Mel. XIII, 5, 1079b). Sim ilar objections were
raised by Aristotle against the Pythagorean notion of mathematical objects allegedly having a separate ex istence from
material things: "The objects of mathematics are not substances in a higher degree than bodies are, and ... they a re not
prior to sensibles in being, but only in definition " (ibid., XIII,
3, 1077b),
Aristotle starts unfolding hisdocll'ine of causes wilh a statcmentof til(' law of lion-cont radiction which in lhe MetaphySiCS
tUl.'TlS il,l,tO the foundation of being. This " most cer tain of all
aXIOms says: "The same attribute cannot at the same time
belong ,?nd I~Ol belong to the same suhject and in the same
rt'i-ipcct (Amil. J\~et. IV, 3, 1005b). Again, " It is impossible
ror any ~ne to believe the same things to be and not to be, as
i-iom(' thlllk Heraclitus says" (ibid., p. 737).
In co~trast to Heraclitus, Aristotle assNts that a thing ca.nlIot be slmultaneoui-ily the same and not the sa me , exist and
1101 E'Xii-it since it jc. only the stable, the permanent that le nd s
>
,-
itsclf to a dl'iinilioll 1\1'11("1'. A.ristotlp lIot only substitutes

,
{urmal logk for (liah'("ti("~, hut ,I"dan's all reality to be lion
conlrarlictorY
<Iud lIH'rpforl'
{'ssl'ntially
immutahle. The
--_.
.
upshoCis that Aristotlp's '"'lIIplaphysin;" turns into a doctrinE'
of the immut<lbll' t'ss{'nCl' o[ till' world dinl'r('nt [rom the world
its{'lf. ~e\"{'rthell'ss, tllP Stagiritl' canllot rlose his eyf'<:' to til{'
movement and changefulllt'ss of al\ things. Attempting to
explain them, he g('ts ('nhHlgiNI in a host of contradictions.
Aristotle's main hitch W.lS th(' diait'ctic;; of the universal and the particular. His ('I'ilicisnl of Plato's theory of Ideas
testines to an inclination to regal'lI individual things as the
only reality and this is exactly how he ~'IOlved the problem of
the "primary sllbstancc" in the ('ategories. From this viewp(';nt, the "secondary substance," L(>. the universal :;hould
be conceived as one throughout the many, but not apart)
from the many. Yet the Stagirile inherit'd -.!r~mJ~h\to _the
conviction that witholil t"h-tr universal, -YllOwledKe iSfl- possd)"le."Belrig tTle OTljPct of knowl('dge, thP" universal as sllc.h
becomes for Aristotle sOIlll'thing primary and more authentic
than the individual, and this idea runs right through his
doctrine of causes.
According to the Stagirile, "causes are spoken !n four
senses. In one of these we mean the substance, I.'. the
essence (for the 'why' is reducible finally to the definition, and
the ultimate 'why' as a cause and principle); in another the
matter of substratum, in a third the source of the change, and
in a fourth the cause opposed to this, the purpose ~,nd the good
(fOl' this is the end of all generation and chang~) (M.et. 1.~,
983a). Hence, all cause~ can be c1as:ilied, uSlllg Anstotl.e s
later terminology, under four headlllg:-;:. lonnal, mate~lal.
efficient, and final. They have been deSCribed separa.teh b,Y
previous philosophers and co nstitute the nucleus of Aristotle s
flrst philosophY
In his analy siR of ca uses Aristotle proceeds fro.m the patte~n
of human activity since llrtificial products prOVide a good I~
lustl'ation of a\l the fOUf causes. Tak e, for instance, th.e beuu.lIflll pot referred to by Socrates in his conversatIOn With
Hippias. Its formal calise is the shal~e, 1I~(' ~xternal appe~r;HH'('
which gives it a def1llite conflgul"Cl110n; It's a concept :\ltho ut
which the potler will not b(> able to .ma nufa c\ure It.. ~he
material cause of the pot is clay, a p~sSI\'e substra:um \\ hleh
t' potency Its efficient cau", IS the potter "ho molded
,
Isapolll
.
It
to
the pot to the required shape in accordance Wit l i S c~ncep I
~--
.}.,
_.
,A
form. Lastly, it~ fmal cau.o;l' is tilt' plIrpO:-t' of thl' I , . .

, o Ill' a \"{'gse I S UI,a bl e f
'
I II Its gOal .
or ,"anOll;';
lIS('S,
ProeN'd ing Crom th(' patt('rn of human activitv 'Is'
_
.;al lllodf'1, Aristotle appli('s it tv tilt' world 'll i'I~;"~ 1I1I11\"('r.
'
'.... line
t('rm..- of thC' ;.;('If-t'P'lli''
I' I allis natura I p Ileno me na III
r l'\,forms. Significantly. his favouril(' silllil(' is th,lt of 1"1'\ I~n flf
' ,JlI( I nature: Just
.
I
. .
. <
lVSIClan
as t Ie phYSICIan is thp ('ffki(,llt ,:
I
.111::;(' of
. k
\ I\('<1 I t I1 JI\ a SIC' man. so nature a way.'! act!'; with an <'y(' to tI
/)<'.'11 and is its own doctor.
.
1(,
A qlH'Rtion naturally arises, which of thl' eallSt's is to he
I'('gardrd M'I primary.

AristoU; poinls out that tl~e four (" IIl S!'S ('Hn hI' n'd uccd
to two "orm and Maller, s~n c(' th(' for'mal. t'rnci(,llt a 11(1
final cause." lend to coalcsce III one. i\latt{'r Or till' ma terial
calise cannot he primary , as it is ,in e r~, Rhapele~s awl liable to
tissurnf' an,Y form, th~t.rnay ent~r mto :t tltUR M'l"\'ing m('r('ly a!'l
tlu' male~lal of m~'v'dual objects. Nor Ill a separat{' body
repn's(,TltlOg a unity of form and maller Iw r<>gard('d as
pnmary in \'lew of its composit(> c haract(>r. This I('av(',,; Form
as th(> sole pretender to the litle of primary call.<.;e Or ('S.'<t'IlCl' of
bt'ing which is promptly conferrC'd upon it by AI'is totl e.
Ha\ing thus set out to owrcome Plato's " nain"" lh(>ory of
Id('as, the Stagirile lands in th(' same idC'ali st quagmire ~\'ilh
hut a slightly modified theory: his primary forms conct'ived
as IIH' concept o r "esse nce" of things are practically as
Itllnltltable, eternal and univcrsal as thC' Id C'<lS of h is for Iller
mast(>r.
Aristotle r(>ason s thus: everythillg' that co m(>s to be arises
fl'om, somNhing du e to so me motive forcc shaping it o n a
rl'rlalll modt'!, For instance. a bronze ball is madc of brollze.
YI't 10 mak(' a hronze ball does not mean to makt' tilC' form of
thE' "s plH'rieal" which must pr{' ~(>x i sL in order to be the callse
of th(> ball: " Obviously then the form al so, 0[' whatevel' w{'
rJIIghl to call t!i(' shape prCS(,llt ill the sensibl(> thing, is not
prO/III/'l'd, nor is there nny production of it, nor is the
I'SSI'II('1' produerd; for this is that which is mad e to be in
sO'll( thing l'lsr Ith(> sub!-;lratulll, matl('rj t'ither by art or by
lIalllrl' or by some f~clllty" (~Iel. \,11, 8, 1033b). :'-Jor doeR
maltl'r as Ih(> material of all things com(' illlo b(' ing' it i."i
{'t/'rlla!, rhallgJllg from one state 10 another linde" th(' eff('ct of
hI' rorm,
. J)/'spitp Ari"totlf''s Own eon\('ntioll lhat then' i..- 110 matter
wllholll for m lIor form withoullllutlf'r, h(' !lOW COIll('S out with
.
\
a (,01\('('pl of primp IlIatt,'r 1I11f1'lait,d to Illrm!', alld a prim!'

fortH ("form (If [01"1"" ') IIIIrl'11IINlio mattl'r. His (\pflllitioll of
prillH' 1l"lttl'!" I"lIns thus: 'By. lIIiltll'r I IIl1'all .that wl~ich in
il':l'H b IlI'ltiH'!" a par\lI'ular !tung Il?r of a ct'~l;lIn (!"an,t,ly nor
a;<"iglwd to an~' otl1l'r of liH'l';Jt(,~Ol"l(,s h~' whl('h IU'Ing Isd('(l'rmint'I]"
(\11'1. \"11. :3, \o21}a).
This ('atpg"ol"ical s\atl'lIl1'nt 11I'ings .\rislotll' facp to facE' with

tl\(' old Eirati<" prohll'l1I: if trill' Bring (i.('. llHlllt'r and form)
I;; 1I11g'rnt'r<ltefl. how ill'I' WI' to iH'('(Hlnl for !lu' origin, drv\'lop~
tnrnt and dt'cay of individual ohj('('h? Aristoth'\.; fIrst answcr
wa;; that tht'y oWI'd lhl'ir ,g:1'lIt'~i~ to IIII' formation of malter,
thl' union, (IS it \\!'r\', of form and malleI', 1I0wr\'c(, if mul\('r
,md f01'1Il (l'x('PP\ tlH' "p,.illll' lllUltl'l''' i\nd the "form of
forms") rio not ('xis\ Sl'paratl'ly, how can they com!:' togeth<'r?
In order to ilvoid tlH' Parni\'nidian !iolution of the problem
(jl'nyillg thl:' reality of thl' ehungf'ful sensiblc wo rld. Ar istotlt'
hilS but Oll{' wa): out to illtroduc~ two IlI'W important n~~il?ns:
pott'ntilllity (dYIUUTlis. potnltia) and actuality Tenergeia,
act) .
The notions of potential ilnd a<"lllal be illg are closely linked

bv Ari~toth' wi th tlH' no tions of ma llrr and form. \lilUN is
conceiwd il" pott'ntiillity si nn' it is 1I0t what it can be. By
contrast form is idt' lIlifi ('d with _act na lity, De;.:cribing their
relation~h i
rls(()t l(' ('x I)m-Ill-as a per u liar d i3lec\ ies of lIlat tl'r
i1nd fOl'IIl, potpntialily ilnd actuality. \Vilh the rxceplion of
"priml' mattl'r," no mate rial Clln bl' conceived as absolut!:'ly
unfornH'd, but o nl v as a compound of matter and form
p('rforming at 011(' ;lIld thl' same ti,me differen~ funct.ions in
relation to o the r com po unds. FOI' Instance, bnck belllg t~IC
fo rm for clay is simulta u(,(HI!-liy th(' matter for a house bUI!t
fro III brick. Th('['('fore hritk is POlcutially a hou se and clay IS
potentially brick. B!'i ck is .the actuality .of clay, ar,ld a ho,usp ~~
thl' actuality of brick, Again, the actuallty of a chtld (f~[Ill) IS
the pot(>ntiaiity of a man (mattt' r ). etc, Any change. I~ _lh \ls
the actllalisation of potency..
. '
~
AnstoU("s (ToClrilJ(.'or potelltiality alld actuality was a[.1 L111
portant advance in I>hilosophy . Fir's\' it 1).rl)\!dl'~1 ,\ ratwnal
('x pianalion of the phenom enon of g(,~l~SIS. r111ngs do n~t
comc into be ing " from nothing, " hut ofl~:p.nat(' as.~h{' actll~l1sat ioll of pot(,IlCY which is no iong('r C()lIcl'lvcd ~s ~vcrYthltlg
from {',,('rything," i.r . rrom a mec hani ca l comblnaltoll,of lila
terial particles, s uch as homol'omer~, rool,.:.; or atom~. ::-;ec~nd,
it gavr a more r('alistic account of tht' ;;Olll'ce of motltHl,..
p: ,\
retriC'ving it from the Plato nic SlIp l'a-S('IlSIIOIIS woriri .

hringin~ it back to earth as a ile of thr IISp('ct.... of natlJrl'. Fi .1,11 <1
'
nt!.
1
Iy. it pla ced t 1
H' . our C;HI~~S III II n('\~' pl'rsp('cLiw ('nab1ing
then~. due to the lIlt.erpretallon, o f motion as aclualisatioll, to
he viewed as dynami C forces. different from what they lookl'd
like in the analysis of matter and form.
It should be noted that Aristotle's i ntcrpl'etation of for III as
actuality evidently intended ~s elaboration and substantiation
of hi s doctrine of ca uses led
III
t\l'rn of hUIII<l1l lu,tivitv onto {'alls.,1 rplationship!< in fiaI

t It' pal", ,Iii'" IIIU"" Ill' .uldl'd 'till' crllei.1i change III' illtrodu('lod
tur(',
(
,
-I
I
I'
,
"
I
ill till' tradiliollil 11Il! pr~lallf 1IIJ.t /) lIIat {>r: It IS no ongN
tlH' living alld ('horn'llly, Illiltahl(> "physis" of the lil'St "phi
fact to a duplication of causal
relations and tautology of term s . Ind eed , t he intc['pretation of

form as actuality implies that the cause of o ne or another phenomenon is different from the phenomen on ilselr. Yet if a
change is understood as tran si tion f,'om potency to actuality
due to the actuality of form, it cannot involve any new e lements since the form itself pm-ex ists and is not s ubject to a ny
alt('ration. Hence the proverbi al h o llowne~s of medieval
pseu d0- A ristote Iian sc holasti c is m,
Aristolle 's first philosophy c ulminates in a concept of God,
a natural corollary to his teleological conv ic tion that nature
makes nothing without a purpose and that eve rything in the
world converges towards one goal. Positing God as the fi rst
principle and ca use of the universe, th e Stag irite calls him th e
"form of forms" when he speaks of the matter-form re lation"hip, the " prime mo ve r " or "u nm oved mo ver"1 whe n he
describes motion and change, and the "t ho ught of thought"Z
when he refer~ to his activity.
The concept of Unmoved Mover is internally co nt radictory.
As we have seen earlier, Aristotle himse lr censured Plato
for assuming unmoved Ideas as th e so urce of motion.
Confronted with the same prob lem , the Slag il'ite d ecla res God
as the Prim e :\Iover to be the goal of the unive rse: pedec t
rea lity or the Good is at th e same time the ultim a te goal
of th e entire universe and every indiv idua l thing in it. Thi s
is nothing but the same idealistic tel e ology, s lightly modifi ed:
what was with Plato the transcendent, extralimital go al
reS iding in the intelligible world becomes the imman ellt goa l
of the world of nature.
!his t,eleology, as we have already see n. d er ived from
Aristotle s tendl'ncy, baSi ca lly anthropomorphic, to project
T h(' Prim(> ~Iover must moW', without b(ling moved, oill('fwiS(> we
~hO~Jld. ha,"(> to .a,~~ume another mO'-PT that mo\'e~ il, and !;() on lid infinitum,
( ,orl ~ aC~I\'Ity, accordmg' to Ari~totl(>. i~ thought, and h(' must think
o
flJlh lOr what I" tlu hl~he!>t, i,(" of hiol"elf, wh('rein lip~ hi ~ bli~s,
I
I
I
losoplll.'rs wilh its /)WII 1,IIIIlli.lIIpn~ SOlnCI' of motl~n. bllt an

'wrt lIlotionlt'.'Is and IIldetl'rmlll'ltt' mass. ThiS IIfel'ss
~~IOllc~Pt dorninlltl'fi thl' phiiosophE'rs' mind~ for tv:'/) tho,lIsand
cars and was largf'iy un{)lIntablp for lIlCOnslstellClPS of
;naterialism and arh'an~lg(>s of th{' idealistir world outlook, It
was all the mo['c elTOIH'Olis that matter was presented not only
as an unformed substratum, a mere potentiality, but as. a
so urce of natura l n('('{'ssity and chance restricting the purpose
orie nted ac ti vity of man and nature. [n other, words, n~ att~r
ca me to be r('gardeci ali a sotJl'ce of all kinds of lin perfectIOn In
tne world, and this, in turn. caused natural ~roces:es
to be app ra ised in ethical terms and led to a further distortion
of t he world's picture.
It s hould be noted, however. that Aristotle's own concept
f matter as potentiality allowed for a considerable fr:edom
~f interpretation and was by no n~eans as lean and hfel:ss
as it was made later by hi~ scholastic commentators. In p?~nt
of fact . A .. is totl e understood potency not only ~s th,e ability
to y ie ld to a form, but also as. res,is,tance: to ahe~ m~~~nce
and therefore as a principle of mdmduallty of th\llg~. If a
thing ex ists in potency, it is not the potency ?f anythlll~ an?,
everything, Different things come from. different thlOgS
(Met. 106gb 28), Hen ce, a thing is not indlffe~ent t~ the agent
which acts upon it and itse H possesses a motl\'(' prlllClple,' ~n
inte rnal so urce o f motio n, suffering change only from a ::OUlt
able external .. gent.
d' i .
tl '
Here we again sec, the li ving germs of I.a ~C l.I~ S, ll ~
time in the concepts of matter and form, potent[ai lt~, <l,nd ac
tuality, Ar istotle wavel's between ideal,is m and m~~el'lalism l~n
a number of issues. bllt th(' idealist trend I::; genera y
prevalent.
16, Physics, World, Uf(> lind M:m
In contra st with Aristotlc 's "n rst philosophy" .wh icl~
treats of immutable and llIotionl('ss sub~tances, th(' o~Ject 0_

his natural philosophy or phys ics is moving and clHlIl.gII1~h~
dies These acrording to A['islotle. "present<l: fealurt' In ~\ IC I
the' diller '[['o m things which are n~t c.on~lItuted ~y [Mture.
Ea~l of thelll has within itself ;1 PfIIl clple of motIOn and of
,)
"
"',..
- "
--
~t<ltionJ.rines:; (in respect of place, or of growth anti df!'l"rr' ,
or iJy way of alteration)" (Ph~s. II, I, In~h). Phy~i('s is ~:,\:t

yrt !'eparatrd fr:)ol the ~Irst phtlo~ophy. In hooks I and II fJf
the Physics Anstotle dlscLisses thr [our cau~rs of all heil
known to us from his Jfetaphysics, and in book VIII, thl' la~~
O!le, return'" to the problem of god as the primr mover whiel
3rcor<iing ~o Aristotle, is the Ill.lim.ate calise of motion in th~
universe. 1 he problems of physIcs In the modern ~en:-;e of lhe
word arl' discussed by him in such sp('cial scientifiC treatises
as the Meteorologica, Problems, and others.
The concept of motion comes to the forC'groun<i only in
book III where Aristotle defines it as "entelechy ,'" i.e. as
"thl' fulfilment of what is potC'nlial when it i~ nl l'eady
[ully real and operates not as itself but a movable, that is
motion" (Phys. 111, 1, 201a) and as " thl' fulfilment of this
potentiality, and by the action of that which has the power
of ('ausing motion" (ibid., 202a). Entele('hy in Aristotle is
ess('ntially identical with actuality (energeia) l'x('eptthat it
suggests greater emphasis on the completion of an l'nd-di rec t('d process. Paraphrasing Aristotle, we may therefore define
entelechy as possibility made real or potentiality actualis('d.
In AristoUe's eyes, things exist either as an ('ntelechy,
1.('. a~ 50lUl'thing actualised and completed, or as a potency.
Ll'. as a possibility, or as a potency and an entC'lechv simultanl'ollsly. It is this latter I'elatiollship wher(' the problem of
n~otion st('p'" in. Indeed, a moving body exhibits both a capa(,lty for change and a tendency towards completion which is
Its inlu'r('nt goal and motive force. Thus any chang(', accordIng to Aris~otle, implies the ability to undergo it, the goal
towards which the change is directed, <1nd thl' entelechy as the
actualisation of the goal immanl'nt in the body itself. Using
Jl .cy hrrD..l'lic .. tf'fffi
enlRlechy can be dC'fllled as the
"p~owamme'.' orc~ge. The goal and the "programme" of an
ar.tlstlc creatlol.1 are outside the object itself existing in the
m.'nd o.r the artist and representing the pattern and the end of
hiS Rctlvlty, where~s natural objrct~ possess them inherently
to ll~(' ('x~('nt to WlllCh they carry in themsrlves their source of
motion, 1.('. are capablf' of self-movem('nt. Developing his
dodrilll' of ,'nll'II'ehy Ari~tl)tl(' ~troV(' to take fuli aCCOllnt of

the prt'viou~ philo:o;ophkal d\'wloprnf'llt and pre:-:('fVf' th.:> irl('a
of :o;p(lntallt()\.~ HlOV('III('nt. 1I00\\,v('r, having (\ppri,\,1 thl'
111<ltPriai ca\l~l' or "mattrr" of tht rapacity for sponlanf'olls
mOH'Inent, ht wa~ ('olll1>l'II('d to r('vis(' the notion of natllr('
its('l[ hy di~tillg!lishing ttw ~tatie. inert and indetl'fminate
element, i.('. th(' mall'rial caus(', from the dynamic and
determining l'1('m(-'nt, i.(-', the form. In contrast with Plato who
assigned them to dift('rent"kingdoms," those of b(-'ing or Ideas
and not-Ill,jng or Matt('r, the St.."Igirite referred thl'tn both to
"nature" whi('h lil('fefor(' rl'lailled its capacity for st'lfmovement hut oWNI it t'ntirl'iy to it~ ideal immanent forc(',
l'ntelC'chy, rl'sponsiblr for thl:' purposivenl:'!'!' of natural
processes. Hrnc(' Aristotle's idealism, particularly In
the concepLion of the "soul"
as the "principle of
motion. "
Aristotl(' distinguished fOllr kinds of change: (I) becoming and p('fishing: (2) qualitative change, i.e. the chung(-' of
a property; (3) quantitative ('hange, I.e. increase and decrease
(or, rathrr, gro\...th or diminution since Aristotle mainlv took
his examples from biology); (4) locomotion, i.e. cha;lge of
place. By motion proper he understood changes (2), (3) and
(4), regarding (I) rather as passing of one thing into
anothcr: " In fl'spect of Substance thcre is no motion, beCR.lls('
Substancf' has no contrary among things that are" (Arist. ,
Phys. V, 2, 22!1b). G(,lleration and decay undl'rstood as
motion would be com ing into being from nothing and fading
back into nothing, whit'h is impossibll'.
The analysis of change (1) brings Aristotle to the old
paradox of becoming, l'esolv('d by him, as we have already
seen, bvlintroducing the concepts of potentiality and actuality: son-utmng- o.l:iS('5 only owing- to -rhe-actuality inherent in
the initial substance. Ilence, becoming is always the perishing
of something else, and perishing always the becoming or othl'r
(see De Caelo, I, 3).

,,
Understandably, the analysis of motion calls for a ciosC'r

examinat' n of thC' categories invQLved in the proc('s~ of
c ange: unlike quality and quantity which can be grasped intuitively, thl' category of place is subjected by Ari:-;totlC' to a
thorough scrutiny. \-laving rejected the concept of void main
tained by the atomists, he linked the notion of plac(' with till'
notion of body and deflll('d place as the boundary of a spa('eoll~
thing: "Place is coincidf'nt with the thing, for bOlln("lI'il'~
/
/
coincident with the bound('d" (~)hys. 1\, .'.. 212<1). Th-,

approach p1.1ved the way for till' nlll',hlltH'\' undt'rshllc'Is
, >, I came I
> ' t'(, not as 11 slIlishn'
"In~f)r
"p<let' W lie
0 b
e regan
,
as an attribute of things.
. , (P, lUI
,Irl'
The problem of ,time, is,'rkent~d by :~risl()tlt, in a sin}i.

ar .manner ('~cept t ~at H', III ~s It Ilot wIlh tht' ("ish'lIr(' of
'
bodas.
but with motion. T1IllC IS not till' samt' ,lls lIIotion I
>
> apart: "1'"till(' IS just this
, )111
motIOn
an d t>ImE' d0 no t eXist
number of motion in respect of 'beforc' and 'aft('r'" (P';ys.

1\, 11, 21nb). \Vhereas th(' plaC' of the world is finite heill
limited by the firmament (which accounts for the posSibilit
of absolute. i.e. relative to the "hC'aven," movement and
"('sf
as well as for the existence of the absolute top and bottom)'

lime is innn ite since, in contrast with pal'licular p l'ocesse~
possessillg a limited "number of motion," the univel'se is
unique and eternal and its everlasting movem('nt measured
by the rotation of the nrmament is circulal' locomotion as no
other kind of movement can be continuous,
Now, having defined time as number of motion, Aristotle
directly links it with the concept of soul: "But if nothing but
soul, or in soul reason, is qualified to count, there would not
be time unless there were soul, but only that of which time is
an attribute," i.e. motion (ibid., IV, 14, 223a). So the materialist understanding of number which does not exist, according, to Aristotle, outside the mind leads the philosopher in a
CUrI,OUS way to the idealistic conception of time regarded as an
attribute of the soul. the cosmic prinCiple and nrst calise of
any motion in the world.
~n the olher hand, understanding space ("place") and time
mainly in the attributive sense (as properties of matter and
mO,lion r~spectively) and relating them to each other,
Ar~stotle Simultaneously treats space which accommodates the
~lIl1qU(' and flllite world as a kind of substance, i.e, as an
I/~dep('~d('ntly existing receptacle of a ll materia l things, This
dlalectJ(:al,approach was an important advance in the
1J11f1('r:-;tandlllg ,of the complex nature of space and time,
Much .atl('nllon was d('voted hy Aristotle to the genesis
~)f matenal bodies of differ~nt nature. His doctritl<' of genesiS
~: b,as('~ O~l, the concept of "prime matter." Characterised as
pnvatlon, (sleresis) of form aud PUr(' potentiality, it is not
to, b(' ,UII?( rsto~d as the ~I.'~olute negation of all pt'operties,
1)1 ('aust' It ~~taIlH'; the abdlty to b(' qualifH'd by the appropriCll!' form a ld to ('hange from opposit(' to opposite (forms
22'
c'oll!:pivpd hy Arislolip il'i pail'S of ()PWlsilps). ()will~ tf)

tht' hasi(' f)Jlpo~itps !,olpillially illhprf'lIt in maller, i,I'. hot and
cold, dry and lIIoisl, lIIaltl'!' ~I'nl'ratps fOllr e\PInI'lIts: hot and
dry ('mnhinp inln lin', h"t a 1111 moisl into air, ('old and Illilist
into watpl' ,11111 ('old awl dry into I'arth. E,u"h of till' ('11'1II1'lits
has it:-; OW/I "natural h)("aliulI," " Fin' and Air al'l' Forms I)F tJlf'
body moving toward!:! till' 'limit,' whih' Earth and Watf'r are
forms of the body whirh moves towards thf' 'centre.' Fir!:' and
Earth, moreover, af(' ('xtf('Ill(>S and purest: \Vatt'r and Air,
on the contrary, ar(' int('rlllt'diat(>s and mor(' lik(' bl(>nd:-;"
(Arist. De gen. el Corr, J(, ;~, :3:)Oh-331a)
Proceeding from the notiOIl of "natural 10cation," Aristotle attempts to accollnt for th(' upward movement of fire
(flame) and warm air on the one hand, and the downward
movement of water and ('arlh, on th(' other hand, This essentially tautological explanation (fire is the highest because its
natural location is at the top) became a characteristic feature I
of later scholastic science and was intended to substantiate
~the geocentric doctrine of the world: th(' central or down most
position is occupied ' Oy" l:he' "{'lITth, then follow in succession
water, air and fire. The fifth element, ether, is uncreated, indestructible and subject to no change. It makes the sub~tance
of spheres which carry heav('nly bodies. and of the bodies
themselves. The outermost sph('re is the heaven of stationary
stars, then come the sun, the planel~ and the moon, one body
per sphere. Since ether and its formations are eternal. their
motion can only be circular as in it alone the beginning and
lhe end coincide.
Fire, air, water and earth make the sublunary world wher('
more complex bodies are generated. Thus the elements combine into homoeomers which produce all other things. In
contrast with the "physics" from Anaxagoras down to
Democr itus. Aristotle understands the genesis of complex
bod ies not as a m ix ing of their components, but as their real
fusion, Mo reove r, he ma intains that a natural body carrying
within itself its "OI'lU" or "entelechy" is qualitatively
different from its parts. Here, again, an atlempt at a dialectical
deve lopment of a con('(>pl, this time of genesis. results in its
ideal istic perve/'sion: the irreducibility of a whole to the sum
of its parts is ascribed to a mystical forc(' allegedly residing in
WPI'('
According 10 Arislotl{', maU('r l(,lHis iI~l'1f nut 10 any, but onlr to

a particular forlll that ('orr{'~ponds to it~ prnpl:'r function, i1,'n('{' his ~onH' ..... hat
puzzling ~tatl'ml'nt thai S/f'rl'si,~ il~I'lf ('ould hI' vil'wl'd a~ a form
I
I(
the whole. This general lendl'llcy tnlcl'ahl(' ill t/I(.' ~ I

. IJlnma~ \lrl~Y
. () r (..l'{'(' k thought lila
alia I.ysis. t? the l IH'oretlca
and
ib _~ II!i~lIltY to CYpress _ tht' o!)J('(tl~:(, conlradictorin('s:-; of \
reality I~a sy~t_~m o_r c~~~t!:i _l::i PilIllclIlarl.y cOIl~pic\lOlJS in
Aristot/p s ('JOetrine 01 soul.
Turning to living creaturl.'s, Arbtotle also trf'ats them
in terms o f the matter-form relationship. The form which is
the princip le of an organi s m is called the sou l. and its matter
the body. M?re accurately, the so ul is the fir~l entelechy

of an organIc body (De an. II, 1, 412b ) , I.e. its first
cause and motive for'ce. According to Ari s totl e, natural bodies
of plants and animals !,!re inl.r.JJments of the so ul and exist for
its sake (ibid., 415b) , tli'"erefore living beings ex hibit \\'ith
utmost elarity the purpose-o riented activity of natu re. In
accordance with it.s function s, the sou l ma y be nutritive or
vegetative, capable of self-Ilouri s hment and reproduction of
its kind, sensitive or animal possessing the ca pac ity for
sen~ation and motion, and rational charac terised by th e pOwer
of reaso n or thought and belonging only to man . The functions
of the soul are ranked in a rising scale on th e principiI.' that
a higher faculty and, accordingly, a higher so ul ca nnot exist
without the lower ones, but not they without it.
Showing no special interest in plants (the title of the
"father of botany" justly belongs to hi s pupil TheophrastusJ,
Aristotle devoted much attention to the animal kingdom. He
held that the animal body is composed of homoeomers and attached special importance to "flesh" regarding it as the seat or
sensation (the function of nerves was not yet known to him).
The direct carrier of the ~olll is pneuma unders tood as the
Source of natural heat in a living body. It is akin to ether
and passes from father to child with the former's semen. The
master organ of pneuma, its focus and centre is the heart,
producing blood from nutr ients and supplying it to all bodi ly
organs. Aristotle's scienlific heritage also inc l udes a detailed
elassir.cation of animals, a description of embryonic development, investigations into val'iolls methods of the generation of animal life (spontaneous generation inclusive),
etc.
. B~ing endowed wi~h reason, man OCcupies a higher position III the ladder of life than other animals and, accordingly,
has a m?re advanced soul and body, Their conformity to the
."nro n sclo u ~ teleology .of natlln' , i.(>. to the goal of completion
and p('rf('cllOn, nnd s Its expr('.'ision in man's erect carriage,
.10
nrgHn~
of work 111(\ )ol1l("'(:~I, highl'r hraiJl-h)-hod~' \'oIUIIH'

I",tio J,!;rl';I\t'r "\ivillJ,!; Ill'al, {'tr
,
Co'gllilion in biologil:al .I~rlll:-i is conceived by .An~tI~tI('
.. ,I ' al'ti'\'jtv of thl' SNISlll\,1' and ratIOnal SOIlI. S('nsatu~1I
.IS H .
.
I
IT t I
or pert('ptioll (/listf'sis) is ch'srri~H>d a~ a c lange ,e ec (-'c I~
til(' soul by lIH' pl'n'('I\,lIl~ body. Sensat.u)O, accorcilllg' to Anstoth' i~ a power of r'c('i\'i~ form Without, maUer, as wax
rl'(..l:jIWs lIw shap' of a sigll('t-ring withou.t its material.
I':ach ~('Il:-i{, can only PNCI'iV{' its special obJ~ct (~s colour
is th{' sp{'cial obj('cl of s ighl, and sou nd of hean.ng) 111 r{'sp('(':
of which lhNf' can be no error. Com mon .0bJects of sense,
sllch as motion. r('st, ."hapI> , etc, are ~~rcelve? not hy o n~ ,
but bv all :-it>ns('s. Th(' "common sense resultlllg fr?m their
inh.'ra'ction is not a si mp le sum of individual, perCe~llOTls: b~t
an flCt of tht, psyche which compares and dl~eren~tates ITldlvidufl! p('rCt'plion~, r('lales per('e~tion~ to tI~elr. obJc.cts, com
pr('hend~ the relalion of a pe l'ceptlOn to the sub ject. I. e: to the
perceiving individual. Nc. The com mon sense deals ":'Ith one
and ma n y, siz(', shape. typ('. re!'t and motion of obJects, It
cfln be lru(' o r false.
I
Prrc('ptions are the direct effect of sensible ~bjects on t
o r~an:-i of s(' nse. How ev('r. if the excitement III th~ organ.
ca llsed by suc h ('ffrc l does not die down after the obJec.ts a~e
w ithdrawn bringing back thei~ i mag~, we h.ave what ArL~~O\ e
ca ll s. "phan tas ia " or imagination. If It rClaws o~ recover~/
ori ina I perception. we have a mem?~y Image .'
rel~iniscence. Th(' fun ct io ns of the senSitive soul. beSides
.
those .
1ll(,llllOlled
a IJove, aI
s~In e l I,de sleep '. ph~flSl1re
I ' I orf
u )
displ{'asllre, desire and averSIOn, ('tc. The, rat~o.na
hum an b('ings adds to them intellectual lIltullion ~o:.s.
The a bility to think as potentiality precedes a~ll~al thl1~llllf
which accounts for the common notion of .tI~, m~n'l aSA~i"t~~~e
s heet filled with the records of the nlln s OJ: I ';la l'S
maintains that thinking is fllways attended by sensl.b ~ l1a~t~y~
and th ere fore distinguishes two asp~cts of theD mlll(, III 5
' nd p"s,vc or Cl'eative and receptive (sec e an. I ':' '
"
<
,
I'
. t b 'ngalH IS II
430a) The Cl'eative reason cfl lls all I 111lgS III 0 el. <
sort of pos itive state like light; for i.I,1 ", s.ensc ~\~~~~e~I~\I~~
potential colours into actual colours .(Ibld.) f tl
I~t and
"e'pl, v, reason is acted on by the objects 0 . IOUg
.~
', .
"beeo""s
" llthill<~t' ." In otll{'r warlechy.
I:
I:
k'';
',.,e
_31
This ll'ilH'sopeTl OIiP impol'lalll qlJt'~ti.)II, that of Ihl' '"

I '
1111111r
tal it" of soul. Art!'itotlt,
I(>a\t'~ 110 dUll J\ n'g'nnhtl'. II". r-'I
_
.
.
- ,
"
. . . . I' 01
tlil' H'gelatIH' (nutr'tl\-,d ;tlld allllllal ~~I'nslll\l') ' :';OIlI~: th,,\"
dt'compost' togC'thrl'
with tilt' hody.
I hI' 1'I't't'lllt\'I' r,.-,, :- -11
41
apparently pertshes too. As I"l'g-anls tlH' (,!"I'ali\"!' n'-"
- - ',s
- lI~lI~lOlta
I ,\II( I 1',III',IIi11. A['p \\'1'
' . onI.;
he staIrs expll:-,tly
t Iwi It
infer frolll tillS that thr IlI th\'ulllHI soul I. . 1I111llortal too?
Aristotle C'\'ades the anS\H'r. On thl' Ollt' Ii'lllli. tllP inahility
thl' superior soul to ('\.isl without thl' iofl'I'iol' (Ull's .st'rm~ tn
point to its ultimate mortality. On Ih(' ot hl'l' hand, Aristotl t,
asserts. the possibility of the ,m ind ('xisl,ing without th(' body
and pOints out that the creatlv' r'C\sO Ii 1:-; thC' (,lltC'IC'chy of its
receptin countcrpart, but not of the body: cet'tain pat'ts of the
soul "may lie scparable becausc tllC'y arc not thc act ualities of
any body at all" (ibid., II. I, 1 13a). And ('\"1"11 more ('xp li citly :
"whil(' the faculty of sensatio.n is dependellt upon the body,
mind is separab le from it" (ibid., I I I, 4 . 429b).
The obscurity of Aristotle's doctrine of the cI'eative I'eason
and the skctchiness of his notes allowing for widely divergent
interpretations gave rise to a long controversy that has run for
many centuries without much appreciable- resull. However,
the general trend of Aristotle's thought appears to be s uffic iently lucid. Taking the concept of the eternal creative reason
as a premise. Aristotle infers the existencC' of God or Divine
~1ind. His rcasoning runs thus: "\Vithoutthe soul the faculties of knowledge and sensation are potentially these objects,
thE' one what is knowable, the other what is sens ible. They
mllst be either the things themselves or their fOl'ms, The for mer alternative is of course impossib le: it is not the stone
which is present in the soul but its form.
"It follows that the soul is analogous to the hand; for as the
hand is a tool of tools, so the mind is the fonn of forms and
sense the form of sensible things " (ibid_. III. 8. 431b-43:ri)_
Hence, the creative reason whose object and content are
forms alone is not on ly free and independent of real objects,
but prec~d~s them logically. It "creates" objects by thinking
them. Similarly, the world is the creation of God as his
~ho~ghl. Ho~e~er, ~ris~otle's Cod does not precede the world
tn time coexIsting With It. It is separahle from the world only
in the sen~e. in ,:"hich the form (border) of a thing is sepa rable
fl'~m. the thtng.I,tself..In fact, the rtrrlJity of the world implie!'
tlll~ IIlseparablhty, slllce without it the world would cease to
ex ist.
' phy ~ ind ' II'rlll s il 111t'all~ that god. i~ tlH' yrlllll' 1111
Jrlovl.d 1110\'1'["." \Vl' art' bOlilid to rp("f)gnlsP It f'XI:-;tPIH"(' 10
III
u\"oili tlH' inlinill' rl'gr' <lion fJf f'allSeS (till' cau",(' of OIH'
,ilI'IWIIII'IIIH1 i~ 1liP ('/111"'/''1111'111'(> (Jf aflollwr that I1n'('/,(1\'5 It III
LillI', and
~o
011
ad infinitum) .whirh in Aristotll'\
";,'1'", I",
[ll"illu' 1111' ...(1' IS till' I:all:-;(' of gl'nl'ralwll,

J
pl'l'ishillg allli etl'rllai dICIng!' of things, It cOllsi",t". as it \\"I'rt', /
of two part:-;. (HlP 1II0villl{ and stati(Hlary, th( othpr !l\o . .ablr
,Ind ppdorl1ling ('t('rnal circillar moliol,l
..
.
liellce in thp first philosophy and III PUYSICS (,od play~
dirfel'C'nt' parts and pl'rforllls diffl'rent .functions, posing ~~
the "form of forllls" and tb(' first caus('.'n th~ fQrmer, ao? ~~
the prime movcr in the laller. In Arlsto.t!e s concept It IS
obviously God which is predicated of the ptlI~e movcr, but ~()t
vice versa: thC' universe is actuated by the pr.lme mover ~'hlch
therefore deserves th(' name of god. The pfl!lle ':I10.\"er IS lh~
"god of Philosophers," but oot a P?pular. deity; It .IS facC'les~
and indifferent to man,l As Martin H~ldegger \\as to .sa)
2300 years later, one could not kneel In prayer or ,?ak~ a
sacrifice to such a god, nor hop and prance before him like
king David before the ark. .. In Heidegger's mouth .these.words
sounded as a reproach to philoso~hers, )~et for us tile). ~re ~~
testimonY to the superiority of phllosophl~al thoug~l dls~I~.
ing, evel; in the context of the Aristotelian ~o~tnne 0 t. l~
divine unmoved mover, the true, source of rehglOn .and fal~e
in god and thereby contributing to the collap~e of t
d'
it was,
religious world outlook.
b
The physical teaching or Aristotle a oun In~. a~
I
in accurate and detailed descripti?lls, of varlOllS na~~lr~
henomena did not show, even in hiS t~me ..the besl "1.l~i1g~ t
Fnto their ca uses. Warning aga,inst the IJlfiOl,~e regre~s\On 10
causal explanations and pointing out tha.t 0ln (' ~nus't ~t~
.. (Met 107a 4) Aristotle hlmse f t Oll~ I
I
so mew lerc
.
". I .
t 'deal cau:-;e or
nothing bettcl' than to end up In tie mna e I
.' I' the
entelechy identical, in the world of nature, \\ It I f
the realisation of the lorm )
Potentiality 01' tendency towards
causal
exp ,tl
ana-('
- l ' ~\"::; ,1 rt'<;,ult
inherent in every natura I 0 bJec
-,
.. d
r' obJ'('ct was COI}('et\c as I
- I'
tion became tauto Ioglca , .ev.e )
'I,'d
ical with the
that
realisation of some potentiality ('ssentl~1 ) I el~t f
object in actuality. It is not fortUitous, t ere ore,
irrational. Thl'
or
I S<,<, \\. h..C. GUlhri<', Tht' C;rrrk Philosophers. From Thales to ,1 rI.~l"tI!'.
lI!1qwr, N('w York, I!l7S, pp. H)II.
Aristotle's philosophv
distorl('d hy. cll'I'kalis",
II.."
'.s
theoretical basis of medieval scholasticism. In ordl'"
111'1(1
t '"
(I
t h'
the dictatorship of the Church o\'t'!' mPIl's miT~ I ~I ~ laUE'r

n(>ces~ry not only to abandon till' ohsolet(' ,'h,.,1 ~ ,Il Was I
.
dr"
d
,SI1. 1 \"Pw'
but. Ill'st an oremost. to ('velop a nt'w paradigm f .
s.
(',planation. The result was that the AristoLf'lian (',-pOl' (':\u~al
. , 'ltv
" gaH~ wa\' .III Illodt'rn sci('Il"'"
. .IIl,llIo
ll
rrom "po,entIa
,
'r
'..'
~r
0 tht'
1',' P I i-1llallOll mm la\\'. III rOlliI'll!'! \\,Ith .\l'Islol',' II I"~, ,.,
,
.
-:-.~-----"-
. .
t~al'(l'd
tht' l'lTpct
.Slll]!\,
. of a llH)\\'!' alld I'I'J('cll'li tllp ,lOS",,
movement. which
was not maintain{'ci by",
.
"x ernal
motloll ,b
n', .
or
r.oree, ,t,Ie, S(,len~lst,or
new epoch appl ied himself to the
IIlVestlgatl~n 01 t1e aws of mechanical movement and
pl'omptiy discovered that t~l(' effect. of the action of an external
f?rce was ~ccelerated motIOn, ,l~ a body is not acted on, it is
either motIOnless or moves rectilinearly and uniformly H
.
r .
.
h
. ence
th e notIOn
0 Inertia w ich brought about a revolution in tl
doctrine of mechanical movement.
1e
Bot~ the first, (metaphysics) and.the second (physics) philosopilles .of Aristotle were rooted In the conv iction that the
form dominates over matter, the soul over the body, the mind
o~er the senses and passions. This conviction carried to the soc,-al sph.ere constituted the basis of Aristotle's ethics and politiCS whlc.h he treated under the heading of the philosophy of
human life,
',he
17. Sociely, Ethics and Politics
According to all Greek philosophers, Aristotle inclusive, the

~lnal goal of all human activ iti es was the attainment of what
,s good f~r man,. Proceeding from this general view in h is ethi-\
ca.1 doctrine, Anstotle declares that theses activit ies concerned
WIth the highest and the noblest must be governed by reason,
The purpose of human,life is not enjoyment or happiness, but (
the fulrllment of the dictates of reason. However, Aristotle is
fully ,aware of the duality of human activity theoretical and
practical. To be sure, "the act of contemp latio'n is what is most
pleasant .and best" (Met. XII, 7, 1072b) but no man can surrender .hlmself -:vholl~ to contemplation' as he cannot pursue
~e.oret,cal stud,es w,thout caring for th(' n('cessities of life.
hl.s approach accoun,ts for a ~reater viability of Aristotelian
r.trh,cs as compared WIth Plato s impractical ideal of virtuous
, e,
Happiness, according to Aristotle, can only be achieved in
:.n~
a ('omplplilt. Itt ddld ",hid, is man only in potl'ncy ('annol

KilO\\' it, as Irup happilll'SS impli('S till' fulfdml'nt of mali's
funclions in ,l('('ordall('p with moral virtuf>s, This, in turn, d(,munds c('rtai" pxlprlH.ll ('(jflflitioIiS. Pov('rty, illness ami mis
forlill\(' arc' not ('ondueivl' to happilll'ss which gill'S hand in
hand with wt'alth, good fortllll(' Clnd hodily powers. Hegarding
the ext(-'rnal conditions of li[(-' as "matter" and th", good as t1H-'
"form" (goal) of p('rfcct life, Aristotle singles out intl'rnal \
dignity and virtu(' (arete) as the key element of a happy and
blessed life. Happiness comes as a result of rational and moral
activity which is the virtue and proper function of man,
Hence, Aristotle's solution to the classical problem of the
relationship between pleasure and reason in a happy and
virtuous life is based on a compromise: pleasure ensuing from
rational, I.e. virtuous life is itself the good.
The upshot of this theory is that goodness is not a transcendent ideal in the manner of Plato and the Megarians, but
a practical goal attainable in the' sensible world. Aristotl(,'s
concept of virtu(', clearly more realistic than that of Plato,
rests on the conviction that virtue is not an innate quality but
rather a matter of habit. Contrarv to Plato's conviction that
virtues could not be taught, Aristotle believed in potential virtues actualised by good habits and advanced a doctrine of thegolden mean: "Vi rtue, then, is a state of character conc(>fned
with choice, lying in a mean, i.e, the mean relative to us, this
being determined by a rational principle, and by that principle
by which the man of practical wisdom would determine it.
Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect" (Eth, 11,6, 1107a).
, This doctrine of virtue understood as the preservation of due
measure and the avoidance of extremes was in fact rooted in
the famous p"inciple "nothing too much" that runs right
. through G ,'eek anc ient thought.
"
.
Ar istotle gives a detailed analysis of vanous vIrtuous m,d dies and the corresponding extremes or vices. Spf'aking, for
instance, of magnanimity, he contrasts i~ ~\'ith c~n.ceit
(excess) on the one hand, and with pusilla~mllty (dehcwncy), on the other. In like .. manner, courage lies be~wee,n reck
lessness and cowardice, liberality between prodIgality and
avarice. etc.
,
Now, just as we distinguish between the nOl~-rallonal
(nulritive and sensitive) and .r~tion~1 souls. so all ~'\rtues being acquired by till' soul arc d\\'Ided IIlto moral and Intellcctu-
II
.,.,'
-'
,)
;II: "\'irluc,thcll
lH'ing
'I
' I of two kinds, inll'lI"t'tllal ant I lIIonl .
, l' II (,C I Uti ,I '"Ir (
Ul' lilt
H' main OWl'S hllih ils
.
. hifll" ,1111 I'lis .. ' , I n
to teac Iling' for which n'nson it rl'tl"in's t ' \ ' . ' ""ro\\'lh
) ,I 'I
I '
. . I t'ru'lin"
I
1111(' \\ II t' mora \"Irlll('_
CO IlH'S
aho,,'
'
"
"
r
II
,LlH
.
,'.
PSLl
of 1 ' I '
"wh:n~(' abo Its nanl(' fUlike is 011\' that 1:- fornH'd hy '\ ,1.1 Ht,
\"arlatlO.n from til{' word COlOli (ha bit )" (ihid" II t
Moral
' HUa)
, nrluC's
' I are> essentially
d
' aclin'. I n<iN'\! ' w ....~' I".'
{(onwJ
lI sll
actlllg
Just y. mo cst by acting modes t I\" <a nd """".
,ly
~
.lg<'O(JS
b
acllllg courageously. NevC'rthC'lf'ss
intelle,ol I
'Y
'd
d
d
"Ull
'''llu
( ~\,IS om an goo 5(,115(,). though based on knowl ed g (" cs
dln>Clcd
not '
towards kn ow ledge ilf;;(>lf
are
.
~
,u
wat'{ Is .good
be IlaVlOur, practical deeds, I-Ience the definition of tI '
"practical philosophy."
e llCS as
,S ince a moral action should be govC'rned by .. easo 1 ' , '
Iree domo I ClOlce
I ' betweenO'oodandevil'
. '' I, h[ , I IInh:::;a
pi
,
\,
"to
,coosesOr
en d ures t Ilings l)ecallse [t IS noble to d o so. 01' beca", ',' b
tt d
"(EI
.
",115 ase
n,o 0 0 so
,t l. 111 , 7: 11,16a ) , J:laving })rought in the uotlOn of free chOice
(promresls) ' Ari s totl e -turned on a,
' "IIrst'
me
'
page 0 I Ih e h Istory o,f the age-o ld philoso phical controve rs
over the
of
To
sure, th e Stag irite has no
abou~ man s freedom In makmg a choi ce and th e relo
d
not ~l~\\' II le Sl' I
'
,
re
oes
uation as III any way disputable, yet the prerequ,ls.ltes for a philosophical problem are already there
GIVIng a ~etailed survey of virtues in th e co ntext of th~
comm~nal Ii~e ~f ancient society, Arist.otle foc uses his
attention on Jus~lce, He defines it as a mean bet.ween two
~~!remesl~~~~akl~g t~e ~aw and partialit.y in the attit.ude to
, equa s.
he Just IS mtermediate and the unjust is what
;~oJat~s .the proportio~; for the proportional is intermediate.
e JUs~ IS proportIOnal... Th is, then, is what the just is ~h~t~rVO~~I~~~~bthe unjust.. is that vio lates th~ prop?rtion"
). Now, since the law presc l'lbes virtuouS
"
be h aVlour
e g courage'
b, I ' , ,
which
COy' " II
h
III ate, Justice IS the highest vi r tue
e rs a at ers.
Comparing'
. I1 the law and equality Aristotle dis'h
JU st'~ce Wit
lnguls es two mam var' r
f"
'
butive. The aim of thl: ~es 0 Ju~tlce -co rrective and distri "
exchange of oods bel
?rmer I~ t? 'promote equalit.y in
with the amo~nt.
d ong;?g to IIldlvlduals in accordance
whereas the latter ~sn emq~~ Ity .of labo~r ~ontaincd therein,
cd
n
funds and olher benefltsPi/
III the dlst:lbution Of. COllllllO
( rank) of the par"
accordance With the SOCial worth
.
,
.
les concerned.
Aristotle s division of tl le virtue
'
of justice into two kinds
i :-; 1~l{hl
1"" '0
0'
fr~edom WI~1.
-,'"
. ,,,)
b~
doub~
Wil>l hi~Idy i"II~lralivl' IIf tiLl' ,0clOIl cOlldllio[l. ill ~Iav" ~ocidy
...... ilh I!'~ill illl'ljl1ality of il!'lllwllllwrs anll hl'refiilary privill'J;!l's
of till' fl'w Oil t"l' "'H' haud. ,tIId till' l'1jllali<;illlo!: ilLnlll'IWI' of
('olllllHulity ilild IIIIJl1l'Y nlation". 1)1\ !hl'lltIH'r. Ari ... tI,tll;" ('011
ception of jU!'itiC'1' II"HI~ llin'l'tly to and "wrges with hi:i
doctrinE' of !IH' stiliI'.

TiLl' Stagiril,' liu(':i 11111 Hlilk" ,1i"linl"lioll" ~WIWI"'1I ""cil'ly
and th(' statl" and (JIW !'IH)1Ild flI'VI'r \1,,,1' "ilo:ht {Jf this eir('uU\
stance wht'll n'uliillg hi!'! PlJlitits. For 011('. Aristotlp's ripfllll' f
lion of man as n politi('ul <luilll<ll r'gi1rd"d ollt"ifie tllP ~1'IIN<ll
conlexlof his vi('wS may havp two cliff,'rPllt rueauings d"I)(,II(Iing o n whethl'l' it is nlntt'd to !'oeil'ty or to till' ~lalt'. TIH'
dirtercllce is not 0111' to Ill' disngarllNI. a!'. society call I'xist
without t he stale. Thr Stagirite, howf'ver, could not COllc{'i\'{'
society without the statt' and viewed the latter as the natural
and necessary mode of human existence: "A state is not a
/<
com munity of living bE'ings only, but a community of equals. /
aiming at the best life po!'\!'ible " (Polit. VII, 8. 13283), To
attain this goal, the citizens must exercige ,irtue and study
the arts that go with pleasure (philo:;ophy in the nr~t place).
enjoy wealth, powe r and good health. promote such ;>.o(ial
qualities a5 justice, co ura ge. etc. The ~tate. accordin~ to
Aristotle, may inchul e only free men who enjoy equal right!'.
Yet even among the m , Ari!'totle declares, there are ~econdrate ci tizen s who are not "seJ[-~;ufll cing" and lead the i~noble
life of mechanics, tradesmen or husbandmen", Aecording to
Adstotle. n o man can practic(' virtue if he ha:; no leisure,
Being a realisti c think l'r, Ari~totle cou ld not di~rl'gard the
importan ce of private property in Greek city states and wa~
but too well aware of the fact that the position of man in COI1tempor8l'y society was mainly determined by the amount of
his weal t h. Pr ivate property appeared to him. and indeed
was in his time. tlH' o n ly pos~ible and progressive form of
Pl'OPC l'ty, Aristotle censured Plato for banning it among the
upper classes of his ideal stale and declared that collectiv('
J \ property foste red discontent and dissen:::ioll among peopl(' .
deprived thl'm of per!'ona! material incentiws for labour,
acted against !THill'S naltlral proprietary in;;.tinct, etc.
However, under~tanding the importance of unity in th(' fac('
of the threat coming from thC's l,I.'\'"eS, Al'lstotle ~tre~ea lhe
need for generosity, I'\.horted the rich to help tllf' poor and
declared " fril'ndshi ". i.e. lh(' solidarity of freemen to be the
highest virt-;;C; () till' slate .
'\ I
The aim of all these restrictions on priv<l.tP prop' t .

to prevent the freemen from splitting into two an"'l~ y .w<~~
I
..
...,Olllstl('
camps, as t IliS wou d put In Jeopal'dy tht, V('rv n:i",
..
. d
.J
SlIlC('of
I
... aq~ _.;orIN)': Its pres('r\'atlon ep.end~d enlirl'ly On wh{,lh
t('fi~li{' of
mall a~ a
the !:Itate would be capable of ke~lng III r1lC'rk Ihl' fore' h('r
!'trovf.' to destroy it.
--..
(Os t at
The same consideration und?rlies Aristotle's doctrinl? of tI

forn~s of government. Proceedlllg from his philosophical COI~~
ceptlon of form as the entelechy and aCluqliLy of the stale A .
s~otle classifies the existing forms of government on two 'prr~:
(''Illes: the number of those who rule and th<:' e thical aim they
pursue. As a result, we have three sound forms of govcrn~
menl - m?nal'chy, aristocracy and polity , whirh aim at lhe
common lIllerest, and three perverted forms - tyranny, oligarchy and democracy, in which the rulers have their Own
advantages in view.
Aristotle's assessment of the above forms varies. I n the
Nicomachean Ethics he declared monarchy to be the best and
polity (based on the proprietary differentiati on of citizens) the
worst of the sound forms, whereas in the Politics he regarded
polity to be the best. Though monarchy appeared to be
su~erior to all and the most divine, it had, according to
Aristotle, no chance of success in his time. In book 4 of his
Politics the Stagirite linked the form of government wit.h
its "pri~ciple;" "the principle of an aristocracy is virtue, as
weal~h IS of an oligarchy, and freedom of a democracy"
(Poilt. IV, 8, 1294a). Polity, according to Aristotle, should
co.mbine these three elements and be regarded as true
?rlstocracy-the government of t.he best, catering to the
Interests of both the wea lth y and t.he poor.
Elsewhere Aristotle contends that all the fOl'ms of govel'lln:- ent can
reduced to democracy and oligarchy, the two baSIC ones: The form of gove rnmen t is a democracy when the
free, who are also ,Poor and the majority, govern, and an oli~archY .when the. rich and t.he noble govern, they being at t.he
same .tllne. few In number " (ibid., IV, 3, 1290b).
As IS f'vldenc~d fr~m the above, Aristotle viewed the problems of th(' stratificatIOn of class society in terms of wealth and
poverty and his terminology became a SOurce of political vocabulary. for many centuries to come. Yet the Stagirite,
according" to ~1arx, expressed the essence of non' other
than thf' 0reek city state. "Strictly, Aristotle's definition is
that man IS by natur"~ a to,V" -CI't'Izen. Th"IS IS qUIte
. as charac-
,?('
illlI"il'lIt das~i(:al sO('if'l", ,,~ Franklin'~ d('flnitioJ\ of

tflol-lIIakiuj.{ animal i~ rharactl'rislic of Yank('("
dom.'" Thl' truth of Ihis (Jhs('rvation stands out with
particular darity whl'1I Aristntlp turns to thl' <lnalysis of social
relations within il statl'.
Aristotle aVl'i~ that hi~torically sf)('it'ty dpw\ops from fami
Iy to community (sl'lt\('ment) ;lnfl further to stale (polis). Yet
(
,
logically til(' slate is primary, since it represl'nL<:, the ent('\('
chy of socil:'ty. Alongsicie th.:> relations betw{'en the ruler and /
the ruled characteristic of the state as such, it also preserves
t.he relations ex isting within a family (between the husband
and t.he wife, the parents and the children, t.he master and the
slave). This ext.ra-historical pattern derives from the concept
of domination and submission as the "natural" form of human
relations const.ituti ng th{' basis of slave society . It is this can .cept, too, that underlies Aristot.le's apology of slavery.
According to Aristotle, slavery exists "by nature" as some
people are destined to rule, and others to submit. To substantiate his theory, he uses the doctrine of the body-soul antithesis and asserts that the people who differ [rom others as the
soul differs from t.he body or men from animals "are by nature t
s laves and it is better for them as for all inferiors that they \
should be under the rull' of a master" (Polit. I. 5, 1254b).
Thi~ applies, first and foremost, to barbarians who are diffe~
ent fnom their masters bv thcir body suited for coarse physlcal labour and by the "s lave" SOli\. A slave, according to A:istotle, is' an instrument, a living possession of his master havmg
the soul and the body of a man.,j\..?lave. ha.s--.!!.~ rigllts an~ no
injustice ('an be done t.o him. However, Aristot!e m~es n.ne
characteristic qualification: there can be no friendship wlt..h
a slave as such, but a s lave can be a friend in so far as he IS
a man.
...'
.
r I , "b y
On closer examlnat.lon Al"Islotie s conceptIOn 0 s a\Cry
nature" reveals inhel'ent weaknesses and appears to run counter to his own convictions: AI'istotle, for one. hel~ t1.lat the
s laves perfol'med a necessary social func~i?n of l'~liev\Hg t1~e
citizens of the need to provide the neceSSities of Itfe an~ that
this function could also be performed by oth.er categor~s of
people, e.g. bv penests in Thl'ssaly or helots III Sp~,rta. ~,rue.
in Arist.otle's eyes they were slaves, bllt .then.a free bu~
self-sufficing artisan earning his living With hiS own hand::;
1
Karl ~hlfX. Capitfll. Yo\. t, ProJCn'~s Publishl'r". Mo~cow. 19i't. p. :lI1H.
was actually a s lave too, th o ug h not by naturC',

Curiou s ly e nough, Arislotl~ him~('1f app('ar~ to haw put
hi s fillller on what could termlllale till' fatal lHa.s{('r-~la\"l' f(>_
lation shi p: "If, in like manner ,. the sh uttl l' wou ld W(>av(, and
the plectrum touch the lyre without a hand to guide them
chief workmen would not wanl serva nts, nor mast('fs slaves'~
(i bid" 1,4, 1253b) . Suppose now thi s stream of th ought Ca rries us furth er and we fancy a society with high labour
productivity which makes s lavery tess rigorO li S and then
aito..ggiher redundant... This possibility , later tra nslaleolTI1o
reality by history , must have never ocelll'l'cd to Aristotle.
Aristotle 's theory of society and state viewed as a who le
lacked scope and vision to become a tool of social prognostica~

tion, though it was undoubted Iy an objective ren ection of COn ~
temporary social realities. The so ul ~ body and form~matter
conceptions underlying this theory co uld indee d pass in those
times for a more or less adequate scientific ex planation of the
world of nature with its comparative sta bility , but once they
were applied to rapidly changing society their inability to dis~
close the laws of its development could not but become only
too obvious. The doctrine of society and state developed by
Aristotle was in fact a desc riptive science intended as a practi +
ca l guide for the ruling class in its efforts to co nsolidate the
C'Xisling political institution s and the s tale as a whole, Realis-tic and down+to+ea rth though Aristotle's politi cal theory
may have been , it was anything but revolutionary and co uld
uever have inspired a thinker or a political lead er to overstep
the bounds of the existing social system,
Thc philosophy of Aristotle was the summit of ancient
Greek thought and it took the future generations over fifteen
hundsed years \'0 assimi late h is phi l o.so.phi~flnd scie_ntific
heritage. The first step on this long and often circuitOus way
wa s made within the walls of Aristotle's own schoo l, the Ly +
ccum,
HI. Aristotlc's School (The Peripatetics)
~n
223 B.C".o n the eve of his last emigration from Athens,

Aristotle appointed his pupil Theophrastus (370-285 B.C.)
as head of the Ly~eum .. The years of his presidency were the
he yd~y of the pe.r1patellc school whose total membership was
!he lughest and III some years ran into two thousa nd. In 287 ,
fheophrastus was succeeded bv Strato of Lampsacu s who
I,
lu'ailt,d till' ilILonltor I'IR;ILtl'1'1i "yI'ars, WhNPlIPOIl it wa~ lakpn

OVl'r hy Lyl"ll disting 1It' lu'd only for hi~ neat cloth~~ <lnd brllt
for ~ports. Tilt' Lyc{,llIn rapidly ft'll intH d('{:ay IIItt'rruptt.'d
only ill tht' lir ~ l ct'ntury B.I:. Wlll'lI AlJ(lrnlllC"u.sO{ I~hod('):i puh
lish\'d Ari~tl)tll"~ wllrk s ilnd till' !'c-IlOol rpg;;IlIll'd It" r(Ifi~(,. In
subSe'lIH'llt c'('nturit,s. though tI\(' IlPripatetic .~chool {,1l~oyl.'cI

a high r('noWn, its (ontrihutioll to tht' d(>v(>lopm.(,llt I)f phllo~o
phy was insignifl(" lnt. T.hC' I)('rip~tl" its w{'r(' m~lnlY cl:~H:('rn,(.'d
with COTllllwnting and IlItNpl"Pling the works of tlllir gndt
teachc['. 'fh(' [1lo:-:.1 promilwnt of thl' commentators ",:"as
Alexander of Aphrodisias (till' lalp ~l'cond- the t'arly thmJ
centu r ies A.D.). 'fh(' final ppriod of the Lyceum was marked
by a growing tendency towards t'clecticism:
.
(I) Theophraslus. Tyrt~mus of E\"~blls III Lesho> O\ck~
named Thcoplu'llSlus by Anstotl(> for hiS eloquence died soon
after dcs ignating Strahl as head of hi:;, school. According to
Diogenes Laertiu". "so long a!-l Theophrastus lahoured. he "":as
sound of l imb. but when relea."ed from toil his lilllbsfall~d him
and he dicd" (Diog, L. V. 40), which i~ yet anothl'~ testimony
to the imporlallce~.toil for !Uanlunoral and phss~ca~l. heal~~.
As to Thcophrastus, hI.' could not he reproached for Idlem',::
On the ev idf'lIce of Diogl>IH~!' Laertills .. the t0t:al .... olllm~.o( h~s
heritage amounted to 232.808 lin es. Hls.remams cO~'p~I~e t\\O
botanical works, several smaller treatises on ph)~IC::;, fragment" of tlH' Metaphysical Aporias. On th~ Op~"ions .of Phy+
sical Philosophers. and of some other treat Ises IIlcludlng logica l ones. Among his extant writing~ is also the famouSo.Chr
racters dealing with differe n t moral types llnd ex t e~::-I\(, ~
used by w l'ilNS of lat('r ct'nturies as a model for the If own
literary works,
1 f A is~
Together with Eudl'mus.of Rh?de~, anoth~r pUpl 0 '~~f
toIle. 'fhcophl'astlJs i~ ('['clilled Wltl~ IlIlr~duc~ng a ,1~Um~{\ Of
reconstructions and impl"Ovemcnts Into IllS ~achcr ~ ~oglc ...
s pecial ,IIllportancl' ror' IIC IIH'or~ 0 ry ,"Ol)o<;~ itlon~ wa!' IllS antici
I ht'
pal ',on of the nec('ss it y to quantIfy III SO IllC ca~es not o n 'y t "
<
F It' nils III l11"

subjec t. but also tlH' pr('(licate of .a 'proPOds.ltl?n. :u (
hl't\\.{'l';'
studies of interrogative prOposltlOlis Isilngliis 1Ie .
~ucstions relating to prop~r~y. sub!'lauc(' and se.~('ct:oll {~f ~~l~
mutually cxc!usive pI"OP()Sltlon~ (see Mill. II~, ElI{hl~l. t. ~ ......
Th('ophrastus is known to haH hrought to light thl' "~gl.~'\~
distinction bclwel.'l1 a proposition n'I.3tlllg to t~ut,h .and. rab~t~
r('\atlllg to affllmatlllll
nil t h l' onc I\al,.1 ,<" ".1 a< Ill'elllb('
\.
I ,Hulr (l
t ....
nial. 011 the uthN (g in'lIlllt' identical con t<.'1l l) . r not u.'r 0 1\.
innovations co nsisted in a diffel'l' nti atioll hplwl'l' I .

1\ ogl('
'1 I
grammar an d , aceor d mg Iy. brtwN'n ('OII('C'pts (10
() .. ,1\(
words (lexis).
g s) tllld
The most signiflcan~ ~hanges ~\ie.[(' made, hOWl'Vef, hy Th,
phrastLis and Eudemu:s III SyllOgistiC. TIll'\', an.' .,
s"[lllo II <I\'(' ad
('0ded five new moods to the first flgurt' of tilt' assl'rlo ric 11.
. d OLi l success r II I .
.
glsm
an cI carne
Il1vestlgation
into the sy 0b
lems of hypothetical , disjunctive and so-ca lled mi xed ~rlOI .
.
i13vIIlg
h
ilctlcal
sy
0glsms,
I.e.
th
ose
ypot
I)['opositions
"8
tl
.
.
d
.
. .
.
u
1(' lr
premises an an assertortc prOpOSition as the conclusion Th
peripatetics made an important advance on th e Aristotel' e
syllogistic whi~h de~lt with _~ Ia~~ Or l~rms a!l~ paved ~f\~
\Va for tl~
Ole logiC of pro oSltlons, tl~_~ Il e~~na lbtl hig h:
est stage In the eve opment 0 t le anCient 10glcaTdoctri ne:-Though on the whole Theophras tu s wrote within the frame_
work of Aristotle's philosophical system, he can not be
denied originality and independence of thought. The Metaphysics by .Theophr~stu.s that came d own to us only in fragments provides convlnclIlg evidence for hi s c riti ca l ap proach
to many of the Aristotelian basic concepts and for a general
tendency to s trengthen the empirical s train of h is master's
teaching and tone down its transcf'ndentalis m. Even the
methods employed by the master and his pupil in dealing with
the matters of the first philosophy show a characteristic difference of their attitudes.
In contrast with Aristotle who usually s tart{'d the exposition of metaphysical problems with a s tatement of aporias Or
difficu~ties involved as if inviting the I'eadel' to join in their
~naly:sls and subsequent resolution (particularly illustrative
ill thiS respect is book 3 of his Metaphy sics), Theophl'as tus
appears to have focused his attention on the apol'ias mainly to
demonstrate the contradictions in his teachel" s doctrines and
to cal.1 i.n question the very possibility of recon c iling them.
Here I.S JUs~ one example. Aristotle, it may be recalled, practi c~lI~ Identified metap.hysics and theology regarding them ~s
havlIlg ~ common object of study, Expounding hi s master s
co nceptlOn"of ,Cod and first causes, Theophra s tu s gives this
~omment: It IS necessary, ~re.sumably, to recognize them by
~orne powf'r and some superiority to other things, as if it were
G(~d Lt,lat we W(>f(, ~pprchending; for the ruling principle of all
~lng>t~~O\lgh which all things both ar(> and ('ndur(', is divilw.
t It I~, pf'rhaps, casy to de!\Cribe them thlls but difficult
o( () ~o more dearly or mor(' convincingly" (Th~ophr, Met. I,
or
J 2
'th), Tht'I'\' arl' good rpil~)fI~ to dOllbt Thf'ophra!'itll~'!'i interest ill this prohll'lII, as wI,1I il!i hi~ ardour in thl' matt(>!'s of
faith in gl.'lll'ral. if only for tlll' fart that the later wrik'rs, {'.g.
eiCNO, acclJ~t'd him of atlH'iS\II and attl'lllpb to ascribe divin<'
pow{'rs now to Ihp Mind, now to Heavl.'n ...
Theophrastlls was qlli('k to lIollC(' the difficulties springing
from Aristotle's concept of God as transcendent prime mover_
If th(> mover is on(', why do the h('avcnly spheres move differ
ently? If the movers al'(, many, how arc we to explain lh('ir
relalions to OIH' Cod and thl.' harmony of hl.'avenly movement. . ?
Ali.<!.!n, hC!,w call we know if something occ_ur!' for a purpose, by
Ch-ance, or by necessity7If w(' cannot, shouldn't we look for
Hie cause of motion within the COsIllO!' it~elf rather than outside it? "Even among first things we evidently observed many
events that happen at random, e.-g. the facts that have been
nam ed, con nected with the changes of the earth: for we ~ee
here neither the better nor that which is for the sake of an end,
but s uch things seem to follow, if any thing_ some necessary
law; and there are many things of this sort in the air too, and
elsewhere" (Theophr, Met. IX, 34).
However, despi te his dissatisfaction with Aristotle's universa l teleology, Theophrastus did not go so far as; to chal
lenge it as a phil osoph ica l theory. Being essentially a naturalist philoso ph er, he rejected the tel eological explanation of
some natural phenomena , but did not call it in question as an
abstract principl e of the first philosophy. In his Physics
Theophrastus in fact di smissed th e concept of the unmoved
mover and came to rega rd t.he heat of the sun as_~h.e f~)f\nal
ca use of motion, Matter to him was~fcom'b1Yrn,(iO fiof three elements: ea l'th , water, and air. Fire dil1ered from other elements
in that it could not. exist without Oammable materials, Here
again he focuses on aporias. If nre is not self-sufflcient, how
can it be an element.? Hadn 't we better positlwotypes of fire
one pure "prime fire" residing in the above-lunar sphere and
the other "mixed," residing in the sub-lunar world? But
then, what is their relationship? Rai:<iLlg all these problems,
Theophrastus calls in question not ~_~v the_ ~mpedocl_~a':.fa
mous theor.~J:it roots," bill also its Aristotelian verSion.
~ Ml;ch allen lion was de\'oted by TlleophrastuSto the dl.'fence
of the objectivity of such sensible qualities as c~ld and 1.1Ot.
sweet and bit.ter. Nc. Ll.'veliing his criticism mamly "'gam!'.t
the Democriteans, Theophrastu s indicated that these qllalitil.'~
must be objective if they dl.'pend on the properti<'S of till'
II,
atom:-o, He dismissed their arguments fur 1Ill' suhJ'l'cl"'\"I'

, on t I1, grOUJl d s t I1at till' Sl'IISl'S lHa\"" ) 01
secon dary qua I'Itu"s
.
'
. ~rr
III
' to bot hprllnar.y
re IatlOll
an d s~con d ary qua IHil'S and that
such
errors re!.'lull from particular clfrumslanc('s and an' nol inl,
i ' "
('nt '
Inh
t (' senses th
elllS' yes.
Discussing the nature of motion in his Physics. Theophrast
u,s asserts that eac~ category ~as a corresponding kind of ~o~

t~on. To the ro~r kmds of ~lotlon ~~opte? by Arisloli(' he adds
SIX morE' .rfi'rernngy~ relatIOn, pmHllOll, tune, possession,action

and,passlOll (passIvity). Contrary to Aristotle who conceived
motlOll .( change). as a grad ual process passing th rough a n Unl-
bl'f of IntermedIate stages, Theophrastlls bclil'ved that all
parts of an object ('ould also alter simultaneously and t.hat. the

entire quality or propert.y of an object. could undergo an abrupt change. He reconstructed the Aristotelian conception of
space reducing it to the order and position of bodies.
I n small physical treatises called On Winds, On Stones, On
Smells, On Tiredness, On Dizziness, On Paralysis, and others
Theophrastus gave apt descriptions of the phenomena under
inv~sligalior... In c~ntrast with the traditional Aristotelian
walse 1.0 IheJc~educt~yc method._QLrcasoJling (th~ only eX,ceptlOn ~elllg Arlstotles famolls laudation of empirici~m in his
treatl:o;e On Paris oj Animals, I, 5, 64'.b-645a), Theophrastus
affirms that all knowledge of natural phenomena is founded
o~ expN;ence. In his Enquiry into Plants he specially emphasises th(' need for observation and refers to valuable information r('ceived from gardeners, wood-culters, farmers and other
Pl'OP:C concerned with plants. In his opinion, in natural Slud-1
les all inVC'stigator ~hould .start with individllal thing!"' and asrend to gt'nNal principles by inductive 1'f.'3soning.
.,
. lT~portan~ departures were also exhibited by Thcophrast.us
In hiS teaching of man. Unlike Aristotle who considered the
!-ioul ~o ~e the originator of movement in the body (see De an.
I. 3, 'IOUa), T~leophrastus identifi('d thinking with movement,
thu:-. rio!-if'ly 1.lIlkm~ the ~piritllal and the phYSical. Subscrib11Ii{ to tt~(' Ar~stoteJ.an dliierC'lItiation betwC'C'1I the active and
thr pass~ve ~I~d, Theophrastus noted the difficulties resulting
from thiS dlstmction.
no III ('thi~s.Th('()phra.stus ~mphasised til{' importance- of (>xt('r,~I ~o()~s and d('scnbed m dNaii such moral categorirs a'_
frlrndshq>, iov~ and happin~ss. Sp('cial men lion should be
madf' I)rU~f' Hhl(' and a~sthNi(' valu(' of his Characters giving
a vl'ry. "I"Hi and rNi"
"
' IS'rIC d escrlptlon
of till' lYlles charactprist-
lH
ir or ;111(" it'll I SfJ(:il'ly 1'11(' r;rumlJlt'r, The Flatteru. Tltt' Ullr.

The .Han Ill/Je tt!/ ,lmhili()fl, l'tr
(2) f:udt'rllus ulliJwdf's. annlhi'r promillenl"p"pil of Aris
toti', is said to havt' Iwlped his lllilstf'r ill writing th(> .lieta
physic$ and to havt' forlllulat('(i thp ohj('('lion 10 Plato':" tlll'or'\-"
of idl'as known ali .. till' thinl man" (!-iI'' \1ul. III. Euclcn~.
rr. 115), II" OWI'li hili falllt' to tIl(' rnIHmrntarv on Arilitotl('.
parlicularl,, thr Ph!/sic.~. and is 1I0t (Iistin~uish('d by any ()ri~
inaiit)' of thought. Sirnplirius. for on(', invariably arcolllp<tll;
('d his extensive quotations from thf' eornm('ntary of Euuemlls
by such phrases as "following Aristotle" or "'paraphrasing
Aristotle," etc. TIl(' ollly departure of Eudelnlls from Aristotle's physical doctrine appt'urs to 1)(' the introduction of two
mg,re ca!.('gorit's, "whole" und.'!Ootion," hordering, as itw('re.
on the first philosophy. C()lIlnll'lItin~i"on Aristotle's unmovt;>d
mover which alolle {"an b(' th(' ('au~l' of continuous motion (:<ON'
Arist. Phys. VIII, 10, 2G7b). Elldellllls pointed out the intl'rnal contradictoriness of this n!llion. <15 the incorpor('ai di"int;>
mo\,('f (see Mil\. III, fro 82) cannot have any physical contact
with what it lIIoves. Eud('mlls uid I\ot all('mpt to offer any sO-lution to this aporia which inde('d appears to be insoluble.
Th(' Aristot('lian corp liS includes tilt' Eudemian ";lhies commonly heli('\'e(\ to be the I('ctllr('s of Eudemlls. They expound
Ari!Oilotle's l(>t\chin~ hut contain c('rtain departures from his
principl(>s. The lIIain of th('m consists in that contrary to Ari'
!Oitotie who pl"()c(>edNI in his l'thica\leaching from man's natural inclinations and functions. Elldemus dosely links man's
actions with the cOllcept or God. Just as a physidan nl,{'ds a
criterion for distinguishing a Cllruble illn('ss from an incI.-r
abl(' one, so a moral individual (\('l'ds a criterion for a rhOlc~'
between a moral and an immoral action. Some hold that this
criterion is r{'ason, yet. I'eason alone. according to EU(~l'n1\l:;,
is not snffl('ient. In his opinion, a man must look for gUidance
to God in t.he nl;\Iln{'(" a slave looks for orders to his master and
every slIbstHnce is ol'i('lIt(>(\ on its rlliing principll.' (Etl~. End.
V II, 15, 12/19a). God. howevC'r. does not go\'ern IIlIP(,rJo l1s l)"
but through the agell('Y of reHsOII: Cod is like health, wh('r(,HS
reason is like IMdicine.
The ethical ideal for J<;lId('lIIl1S is the unity of lh(' bt'alltiflli.

the perfect and thr virtuous r('suhing from the conleillpliltio,n
of God as ultimate goodnl's~. This unity is tIll' ('01"(' of \11<\11 s
moral natur(' inducing him to act virtlloll!'ly not lIll'rt'ly for
attainment of external goods (which it not rrprehensihle), hilt
for til(' sak(' of.tht' g'ootl a" "ut'h

In ~lrdt'r hUWtH". tha
a man milY Ill.' ."Impl): I!nod 'l,~d \~orth\, It I" I""quisi!t' Ihat ht~
I "hould choo"p what IS bl'i.llltilul III ('.ollduel for ib OWu sak,_
ilnd not Oil accOllnt of lhost' J:!oo~b which an' tint IH'autiful. h~
of all goods there are ends. wilich an' thellls('/\'{':-;' t'li~iblf' for
thl'ir own .<;ak(' ..... But of th{>~(', all slIch as art' h<tlUliful 011 thpi
own account are laudable" (ibid .. t2'tBb). TIlt' l'OIlCPptioli ()~
morality dev('lopt'd by Eudl'mus betrays strong Plutonic infiu
(,!l('(' and may Iw\'(> been inspirC'd by Ari"totlC"s earty \\'01'1..'1.
Similarly to Theophrastu5 who gil\'(' a dNailed accollnt of
til(' opinions of physical philosophers, Eud('mus WI'ole a num_
her of works on the history of sCi<'I1('(': mathematics (arithme_
tic and geometry), astrQllomy, as \\'('11 as theology. Th(' extant
fragm'nls of th' work under the hypothetic tille On the Gods
a~cribed by Diog-enes Laertiu~ to Theophrastus C'Xpollnd the
theocosmogonies of Acusilaus. Epimenidcs. Ph'recydes. the
Orphics. the Persian magi and the Phoenicians. The fragments
also contain data on the mythology of Homer. Hcsiod and the
Egyptian", (see ~Iul. Ill. Eudem. fro J 17, 118).
(3) Aris/ozenus of Tarentum came to the Lyceum after exten~ive sludi('s of Pythagorean ism which must have accounted
for his interest in music and musical theory. However, in contrast with the abstract mathematical approach to music characteristic of the Pythagoreans, Aristoxenus considered musical harmony to be based on the perceptions of human voice
and maintained that the notes of the scale are to be judged not
by numbers, bllt by the ear. Besides musical treatises, he
wrote nil Nhics. Taking his cue from the Pythagorean conception of th(> soul as harmony, Aristozenus goes furthel' and
d'clarcs it a corporeal harmony. Accord ing to Cicero, "Aristoxenus, a musician and a philosopher. conceived the soul as
kind of internal strain akin to what is ca ll ed harmony in singing and playing string instruments" (Wehrli I I, fro 120a).
Even a more ('xplicit comment came down to us from the pen
of Lactantius Firmianus, a Christian writer of the late third
and (>arly fourth centuries A.D. who described Aristoxenus as
a thinker denying the existence of any soul, even in a living
body: "Jllst as the tension of strings in a string instrument
prodllC(>s concordant sounds and music which the musicians
('all harmony. so the combination of tissll(>s and the living
f MCf> ill tlw Ii m bs prod lI~es th e ab iii ty ror sen sa lion" (i bid., f r.
120c). Th(> ('xtanL eHllrai fragments of Aristoxenlls show
a str()fIg" Vf>in of the Pythagorean normativ(' ethics of duty.
"part fcolll flllI!'oif'al a 1111 "thie .. 1 trpatisE's, AristfJxf>JlUS i~

known fm hi~ works 1)11 til(' laws of I'fhlf~atif)n and politics, as
wl'11 <I~ fIJI' tlit' biographil's of l'ythagfJra~. :\rilytas, Sorrah'", '
and Plato.
(II) /)iCfIl'(lrc/Jw; 01 J/f'SS(,rl(, in Sicily df'velopNI a dnctrillf'
of lht' soul similar 10 thaI flf Aristwwnlls. According to Ci<:I'ro.
Dic3Nr('hlls laught that "Ihrrt' iSliosuch thin~ass{Jul in real
ity and that till' wonl itsplf is I'mpty and misleading as it only
denotl's a living h<'ing. \"pitli!'[' i\ man, nor an animal has all\"
~pirit 0[' soul. hut thl' forn' whi('h mak('s liS capabll' of 1111)\1;mellt <end s('nsatiol\s is prt'sf'nt equally in allli\"ingiJodie",. It is
insepar<lbl(, (1'0111 thl' hnd:- a." it i.o,; nothing without it. Th('rr is
no e.\i~tC'ncp apart fl'om thl' body which live", and fe('l~ by virtue of ('Iptlwnls naturally mi.\ing togl'thC'['" (Wehrli I. fro 7).
\ j.>n tin' ~i\nH' ('\"i{\('I1('(>, J)i('a(,H[chu~ i.\s"'C'rted that what we call
th(> soul is ill filCt ,\ harmonious mi.\ture of fOllr('lemenl-; in the
l~ody . hot and cold. dry and Illoi~t (see fr , 11-12a-d) and
that thl' hody and tIll' ~olll d{'compos{' togeth,r (~ee fl'. lila-h).
Dira<'a J'C h U~ 's doctri n l' of th (' sou I wa s an obvious r('g re~sion
to the \"iew~ of l',lI'li('r "physiologers:' a reaction. as it wen'. to
the idealism and t(>I<'ology of Aristotle. Il<.; extension to thr
sph{'["(' of f>lhic~ ['('sll\t(><1 in i\ ('ardinal r('apprai:-:al of the moral
theory propoll[HINI by TIH'ophra~tll~ ilnd led him to a conviction lhat practical activity was far more important than c(~n
t(>mplation (th('o['('tie<li activity), Id'ntifying the latter with
ab~tract ~pt'culi\tio[\ and comparing contemporary thought
wilh til' wisdolll of the anci('nts, h(' grieved over the degradation of philosophy which. in his opinion, had degenerat('d. i~lto
the 8I't of rllI'\oric catering to the low tastes of the mob (1I)ld.,
fl". 31).
.
Dicaei\rchus is known to have wriltrn much on the hl~tory
and po litical systellls of (; r'ek slHtes, and ancient ::\OU~Cl'~
credit him with treati::\e~ ctp\ot('(1 10 Sparta, Pella. C~rJnth
and p[obably A lIw n:o;. I It.' attl'IlIP.t('d to gi\,p.a b~.oad o\lth,~ll'. of
the dev'lopnll'llt of human SOCtNy from Its natural~ I.e.
pl'imitivC' stah' to civi l i~ation and c\evot(>d much atlen~LOn In
the interactio n of lIellenic and Orieni<11 cultures. In hL~ Tnpolilikos Dic<learchus compared tilt' relativ(, mt'rib and dl'merit:-- of monarchy. al'istocracy and d'Jl1ocfllcy and .'uhanced
the ideal of mixed governnl('nl forC'shadowing Clcpro <lnt!
Pol\'hius IIIl' hi~to/'iall.
(~) Strato 'Of IAwlp.~aclIs .. a ~lUp~l. of Theophra~~u",. c~)n
{,(,I'n('d hims(>lf wilh 10,",1(', ('tht('~. pol [tiCS, psycholog~. ph:-~\O-
logy :l1lI11Ilt'dicillt'. hut

OWl'S
his plan' in Illp I" ,-;U'\nf",',
'I "
,
op I1\ 111;1111I
I; I
II iI,
I Y'In
"ph\''Ieal ,iI)('\rIIH's which hi' r".1I1I\llfo
l 'l'
III
liS
I ~nrld
"
stUi It'S. Ct'l\ln~1 til

1!lllSL!1l'
1~1." tt'~("hitlg
1'\Jllill~frrim
\\as III\' itiPiL

11:,,('lf. wilholl!
. 1110:-1
ill\ok~h"1 II",
IIl~ all~1
th\"ItH' ;1j.!1'IlCY.
CharartPrising tht' lIlost pnllHillt'ul foliowl'I"

I' \ ' s
Ci<'l'1"O w["ott': "Thl' irH'onsisit'tl('\" or Thl'(II'I",,~,\I. ,.l'1 I011I',
.
I II
..
'
,SIISls,,"
I
11110 (Ira) p:. hi' ilscrilH's dl\'illt' pri()ril~' 110\\' to tht' \1" ; IIP~'
to lilt' HI'H\PII. now
to h(><w(ln\Y
"t-lrs
.
.
. ,,\,,(1 """'1
~
S t' II it 1,1111.
lOllS now
i\
should OIH' ht'I,d IllS pll pi! :-:'h',1 to {"II It'd t IH' Ph," . i " 'I II ',' I 0['
II I III""
,S(lS.
{'wl(h
1<1 a
{1\llll'
pow('r
IS
prl's(,llt
in
nallll"P
whi"h
r'
I
'
"
f
.
( I I <\In-: tl\('
cau!'(>s 0 g(>ner~yon.' growth, diminution, but is devoid of an
sense and form (Cicero D(> d(>ol'ulll natur', I 13' f W
~
IV, fr, 33),
'
,r,
eh .. l,
.EI.-:l'wllllrp .Ci('('ro .indicalC':-;' that. accOI'tlinlr to Strato all

t,hln~~ C,'111I('. Illto bC'lIu~ b!' tl.ll' clCtion o[ I1<1ll/l'l.' and (';1;) he
~..\pl<Hnul b~ natural gra\"llatlOll and motion. :-;11'<110 thC'r('fol'('
l'l'IH'wd god of hard toil, and 1l\\ ... ('1f of fp'lr [of I'
..
<'I'
'.
,.
<
11m]
( ihid '. f 1',.3")
_ , ..... lato ma1JltalJled that natural rall~("
II
sel e' .
d b
<
,
~ H'm. V!) \l,ere swa~'e,
y spontaneity and ('onC(>ived nature a~
spontaneous activity.
.
S.trat~'s,oPPOSitio~ to t.he doctrine of divin(' POWNS gave th('
anclen~.s. cau~e to ahg.n him with Democrittls. I nd('ed, strivin
thl:'
III
of what wa:-; inlH'l"l'nt ill natm'!
.. ~ ,.Stl~IO like tht' atoml~b rem()H'r1 gl)(1 frolll an\' Y1I'tl.(,lpa~lOlfllll thl' ~ffair ... of nature and mall. II .... alhl'i:4il" \"i'("w ...
:11", r,,(',IIl. al('t "'lllndar to tho~e of Epicu['u ... , his conlelllllOl'HrV
' '
t"I (f'\ P 0Pt'( IIH'm. rll
. r the r alH I 111<1{I
i' an'Importanl ('ontl'ih~e~:~e to th~ mat~r,ahst doctrine of atomi~m, The affm ity
Jl
that
~~rlpat~tlc S.trato and the atomists att(>sts to thl.' fact
(' 1I"II'('tlcal foundation of
.
I'
p"'polI",pd [Jot Old,' I ' tl
.
<lIICI('nl al l{'lsm ('oli ld b('
~~~ ('1~PI~lI~,
~'~()rld
t('rn~:-;
,7.
1;V
II.' atollll~ts.
In contrast with th" quantitativ{' a

'
I
.
Strato rl('veloped '
I"
'p~J1oac 1 of til(' alon ll s ts,
'1 11 ;\1;1;1'-: '," II". ",at' quat ltatlve doctfllH' of physics I'egard ing
..~
IInaes B
'I"
I
tIll' ('(JI,I tl,(, f,
I'.' Y 'I ll l lties 1(' nll'ant Ihe hot and
.
'
, 1/ ('I' H'llIg 1I
' "
.
(:J('I'I'O "Stnto of I
)e a('tlV{' powl'r. AC('Ol'(l1ng til
<
~amp ... a('lI<; (",IINI th
I
I
I
call~(' of illi \wing" (ibid,. fr ~8 <
.~' )~lt su )St<1I1('(> 111.'
anC1Pnt sources are not una~il ). At ,thIS P(~llIt, howl'\('1'. the
conceived qualities a . 1
m~\I~, Strato IS known to have
S
IIH' cnld i-: ",'latNI' to ~~ltierentllll certain ,,,"hstrata. nanwly,
\\ a ('I' till( tI > I t I ~
/'\'1(1"11('" Slrah) lIl<lint<li ,I I. II II) 0 11'1', Yrl 011 ... nnW
(Ioly ill wh'lt lIIon'<.; I nt(~ t ,l<lt rlI0\"(,IIu'nt is illh('I'I'1I1 1101
,
,1I11"II<lI""'fl'l
'
,
II W II(' I all p\i:-;lllIg
r,
Ihlll~ !:.
)
Ihl'Y rf>~jll all I .tn wltH'1I tt}l" ar~

1'1,,,,,1,,,,,1 ill Ihl' I'IHI (l,i,1 f ,',) 'll lot I'I('ar 1111\1," thi!>!"'OI1
\'il'liOlI Ldli,'d ",ilh Ihl' ('Olin It, f 1 II" hot ,1'1 thl' PI' 111(' .. II'
Tlll'llt lH'rilaps Stra"~'8 vil'w8 rI'pfl'scntl'l\ til( fir ... t stf>P tl,
wards tht' latl'r lioi'tl'llll' of hpat a .. million.
In (,o~lIloll)gy StraIn ~"ilrt'd tiLl' vi! w Ihat Ih,' world Wi! ...
flllile. lit' 1II'Ilil'd IIII' ,',i ... II'[$,1' of I'lUp'l' spae~ lIul",idl' I""
world hut ill'(,ppIE'" it a~ "o~-:ihll' withill tI\f' IIni, '1' ...1', P.g. ~
porf'''' in nhjl"ds llC'I'olliltinj;( for th" ability of light to pa ... s, [or
in:-;tancl', Ihrough \\,iltl'l". It W(l:-; an obvioll'" comprollli~1' hI"
tWN'1l $C'lIlonitu:-; who ... " ('IIIl('Pllt of illlHlIIlPrahlf' worlels prp
sllppo~Nl tlH' ('xi ... lpll('P or void I'xtPl'nal to them, anli ,\ri~totlr
who clt'nnrd ~p<\('P <1:-; thl' borlipl' of corporeal object.... A ... a
reslllt. Stratn gravitatp(\ towards tllP Platonic:, who und<'l'stood spaCl' a~ ['('('epl.adC' (diastema) ('apahle of ac('ommodat("OIIIP
ing a body,
'I
14'
W INi'
intC'rC'st arr thl' ohjPC'lioll" of ~tralo to :\ri ... totl(,':conception of tim(' as tht' number or motion. A('('orrlin~ to
Stra 10, the \'('\')' nat u rt' of a nII III be I' exp re:, ... i n~ a d i ~rele \" al UP
is incompatibl(' with Ih(' nolions or time and mo\"em('111 which
arc ('onlinuolI". t\{h-all('ing his own conception of lilllP, Stra$l
d('fliled it "as a 111(',l-:\lr(' of C'\"ery motion and re:,1 in:-o far a" it
is equi\"al(,lIt to all that mo\"Cs wht'n it keep~ moving and to all
that is at rE"st when it rl'main:-; ... ti.ltionary, and ther".fore all
C'v('nts occur in time" (ibid .. fr, 79a).
Strato dillC'rentiated bl'tw('l'\l time and what occur:, ill tim{'
Hence, a day, a night, a ypar t\"{' not part:- of tim(' hut real
processes, whercu'" time i!i only tllt'ir duration.
Strato tr('atN\ th(' activity of thc so1l1 in t('fmsof motion and
regarded s('nsation and thinking a~ mowillenb, On the t'\"i
dence of Sextus EllIpiriclIs, h(' reduced r('a!-'on to sensations,
whereas P l ll t ar('h affirmed that in Strato's opinion thinking
is d iffere nt f l'om se nsations sin('(' the latter do not enter a
m an's consciousness if h i~ mi nd is occupied (d. fr. 109 and
112). The l'l'C01H\ tes t imony i~ ('\'idl'lIt1y nNlr('l' th(' truth, as
Strato IIIH\('I'SCo1'('d the importancl' of the central organ or
ll1(,lIt<l1 acti\-il\" loratcd "$('I\\"('t']\ tIll' t'\"l'hrows," Lt', ill tht'
brain. Accordi;lg to Stralo, it was tht" sC'at of breath (pnl'uma)
spreading {nUll tIl(' {'t'ntral pMt of lh(' hody to il-o Iwriplwry
along till' lIern's (thi-: rurioll~ tlt't,lil Wi.l~ ('\"idenlly an ('clIO of
th(' dis('o\"('I'Y malit' hy phy:-;iriall:< Hprnphilu:- ,lnd Erasi:,tra
tus). Strato madl' no basic di~tinction bNw('C'n the human and
animal souls and hl'ld thartlH.' SOIl\ does not sur\"i\'{' the b,)(ly,
or spt'('ial
Thl' m('a~rt'n(':-;s of the anci('nt l'\idl' IlCl' fill' St .,

IIHlhs it hardly
1)O~:;ibl(>
to recon:;truct his ('Ihic .' . I.<~t() S vil'ws

::;.1'-;'\(' (11
I
seem to havC' hirl\'
I
f
'
l
1IIll'\('
. f-IOO( 1\"\'
'
II
(octrme.
(lWl'H'r, w('
I ,
I
I)l' I Il'n' thaI 1(' pro('('(>ded from a dC'flnit(' Undl'I'st 'IIl,~oll to
human ' na.1UI'l'
to the Arisl()1
'I'" . <hug of
.and
. suhscribed
.
.
I Inll ('Otic> I
oman
s activity as an Instrument for tl'ansfol'lllin 1
tp .101l
f
it)' into actuality (s('(' fr. 132). This is not much ~Ill~)l('.ntl(ll
~_gr.1H'lIl _~)g~~h(,I'_ ~\'ith \Veh.~li: "If onlv we (,Ollld\'~ can
\
OW
far Strato wenl III pUl'!'uing AI'islotle's all' kll
trend" (Wehrli I\', fl'. 77).
~ n 1I0pologic_/ \
now
Str:ato was the last o~iginal representativE' of the

,"
p,atetlc school endowed wIth a capacity fO I' Ct'eativ(' th P('tl~
1 hough the school gradually lost its fame and fad I' ought.
';1' ,',
.
t Ilto 00
'. lI ll . . Y, A'
I'~S I 0 I I e'd
s .0ctl'tn~S,
both fl'om his own pen('(and
in II1 ~
~nterpretatlOn of 1115 puptls, continued exerciSing powed C'
tnnueJlce 011 the suosequent development of G,'.co I)
ul
1'1
I'
d
.
,,, - loman
~~~ OSOpl~ an, were adopted In very different philoso hical
!'~~tems, rangmg from Stoici~m to neo-Platonism,
P
PART THREE
GRECO HOMAN PIIILOSC)IIIY
I. Hellenism and Ils I'hilo!\Ollhy
,I
'The epoch of Helll'nism hl!'tinR: from the end of the [ourth

century B.C. till the fifth century A.D. was the longest in
t.he history of ancient ,;ocipty. The!'e eightc('nturi('s were filled
with endless wars and military campaigns, devastating
uprisings and gl'eat political upheavals. In terms of political
history the age of Hellenism cow'r!'; the period from the conquests of Alexander the Great to the subjugation of Egypt by
the Romans, though these dales are largely a matter of con
vention, From the culturoiogical viewpoint. however, Hellenism l is a much bl'oader term denoting Greek civilisation
at large. The Hellenisation of vast territories in the Mediterranean, the Neal' East and North Africa with populations po~
sessing their own developed culture!i resulted in the ~ynthesis
of Greek and Oriental elemenl... and produced a new culture
based on the Gl'eek language and characterised by a unique
combination of the common stilndards of life, philosophical
thought and t.he arts,
The states that con~tituted the political framework of the
Hellen istic wodd arose eithcr as a resuit of the conquest. of
various trihe:o; and territories by the Greeks (Macedonians), or
cOllversely, du(' to t.he subjugation of the Greek population by
local dynasties (e.g, in Car ia and Black Sea regions) and
later by the Romans, The political domination of Rome ov('r
the Greek wol'1d was pl'culiarly combined with the pr('
\ t valence of HellNtic cullul'(' in Hon1(' itse'lf. This phC"
nomenon was partly attributahlC' to the' affInity of Greek and
Latin mythologies and religiolls which had a powerful grip on
the ancient mind, Alrpady lilt' absol'ption of Magna Gra('cia
by Rome in the third (,t'ntlll'Y B.C, gave il ~tl'ong impetu!'i to
I From tht' (~n't'k IIelll'lli:o whirh mt',mt "to ~I)(,!lk Crt't'k" or ""to ad lik\,
a GrN'k."
rl'~inWlllatinll. '1'111' ~uhmissillll of it eitizcn ~o the s~

"idl' by :-;idt ..... ith hi:o:; lyrillllly llYN the family. let aIGae_
,
thl' Hl'lIt'nisation of Hllman ('ulllln' alltl 1'11;\1111'(1 Ih" '

(OIL"
' t h(' trt'<ISlIrl'S () f ( '.fl't" kl'Ih'I'<lIIlfl"lllIil
1
qut'fors to SlarC'
III
" ' (. 'I .r~'('o-.I',lillian ('U 1lurp" allt\
osophyall d art. TI )(' ('xpr('ss1()11
,,!aT~~
('conotllir lift. (If Ut'i1t'nisti(' statl'!I was ba~ - - retat ion:o:; of matun' s!avf'rY. TIll' d~c.lin(> of the an~~"'"
, dn
the cmer",'I\(',' of t'THlrlllnllS IIHlllary and admJl~.
a
...
d . L'
.
f A_
'""s
st..rtino
from
thp
Mac('
olllan
I"mplre
0
('Ill P ~.,....
[;"'.
tI'aCIII8bIeo
the Gr('8t a nd ('nding with tilt' Homa.1I ,,,mplre .were
in the flfla! a nal ys is. \.() th" dHlnges lfl the baSIS of slave ow ....
. g socit.tv which showed a dt><H t('ndellr.y towards everi...~:nd estates and handicraft eco umnit'!I \I si ng slave labou.r. 'DIe
characteristic features of tllf' ('P?ch were the expanding~,:
force in all sp heres of productIOn . vast trade marke... do ...
dC'/e-loped money circ ulation and P?werful mo~arehiE2 A
huge bureaucralk apparatus and tralll~~ professlO.nall DB
to maintain the political power and military efticleac.,- 0
convt')-'s thl;' esst'llc(' o f the new ('I \"1 1I!-'1\ t 1011 n'IHt's('t11 i 1I g' a ('on:
lradiclory unity of its cOm~OIlt' nb . Indt'('d, hil\"illg ahsorbed

tht' Gr('('k-spf'aking cOll ntries. till' Humans thl'IlIS('lws SUe_
cnmb('d to the inOIl('II('(' of H('~Il'nhdi c ('uit Urt' and SN out to .
sprf'ad it in til(' \V('stt'rn Ml'dllrrrancan. To hi' sun', H('I(('_
nisation was a Icngthy pro('('ss: Etruscan (' uillll'l' with iL<; anci('nt tradition and d('('p hi ~ torical . r oo\,..; IH' ld lJudivilil'd sway
till the fourth ce ntury R,C. an.;!. It was_ ~l lJy _a fttr stubborn
~nd protracted resis tance that II [lIIanS gav(' way .
..?It is notaole . how(>ver, that th l:' trill mph of Ih'lIl:'lIistic cu lture did not bring ahout any fundamental {' liang(' in the attitude of the Romans to the subjugatt'd p(>opies: ow ing to the
hegemonist i(' traditions firmly root(>d in pllhli(' (,Ollstiollsness
the conquerors treated Greek cllitllr(' with somNhing like
scornful condescension. AddN to this wa~ tli(> indi sputable
lead of Rome in the matters of law . Roman law nccurately
reflecting the specificity of conte-mporar~' soc ial f(lations
provl'd to be, according to Engpls. th e cO'!!PI('tr~t_~4aboration
of norms base_! on private \;rotertywhirn we knq_,,:. It is not
lortuitous 1lIereFore that t eegal system forlllall st'd in the
Justinian Code (534 A.D.) determim'd the progress o f legal
institutions aimed at safeguarding private property for many
centuries to come.
Of no little importance was also the fact that Ihe ideology of
Roman society was centred upon the rigorous idpal of citizen
modelled after the characters of Mucius Scat'vola, the Gracchi.
Cato the Elder with his famous "Carthage must be destroyed"
and Cato the Younger. who committed s uicide aftN tht': down-
fall of the republic. Brutus and Cassius. Julius Caesar. and
Augustus Gaius Octavius ... These imagps epitomisC'd very specilic social experience-the experience of abstract statehood
aSMciated with the triumphal march of the Roman legions first
through Italy, and then through the entire world known then
to the ancients: The word "citizen" had a glorious ring in the
Roman rep~bhc and no one in antiquity pronounced it with
a greater pnde thaD a Roman. The medal however had its reverse side. The cold impersonal power of the ~tate over- )
whelmed the individual turning him into an obedient tool of
"undieS! hegemonistic ambitions and su bjecting to all-round
, &of' Frf'df'rif'k EnlCf'li'I. Aflli-DUhr;flK, p. 128.
:=
sta1: a result of the collapse of the poli~ system the OIIBwe"

c ullurallife shifted from ~ small soverelgn Greek c ; : : :
to the newly founded capital of a large
_"
Pergama. Alexandria and lhe~. Roml', the
Since the population of new Cities was .

neous and even the Hellenes themselves dld not
people, native dialects ~e,=-e
mon Greek lang~age lkoine
-became the standard literary Ian
, k
conditions for the development ~f . .. . 1m s
spread of cosmopolitan HellenistiC cl~lhsatlOn.
f
teric culture as Juda.ic could not aVOid the eRect a
tion as is attested to by the traces or Grel"k
thought in the later (non-canonical) books of the
the translation of the latter into Gree~
The universal Greek language adopt.e k
lenistie world made accessibGle kGree
and philosophy to the nOD- ee
important, however. was the spread .
particularly in such fields as constructu~n:
machines and fortifications. mOD~Y COlDtDg
The Hellenistic age is eharactert8ed by the
Roman legislator ' Titus Manlius ~orqu~tUi'l
fath er to sell his son into slavery tbret> times. I.e ..
over his SODS than over slav~: a.8!~vH sr1d by h~!! mutel'
longt'f dependeot on hi!! (Diool.1I a IcamUlea
27 . I. 2).
I
!'cicllce notable for hi~~ inl('lIe('tll~I.lt\'t'1 and pra('\irally rrt'!'

~rom the fe.tter~ of ic.llglO,n. TI.w adll~\'t~m('nts of mathematics
HI that peflod are epitomised III 8l1chd ~ F.lernellls ane! in tI
dONi,ine of intersections?f a COII(' deH'lop('d hy ~h'nat;'('hlllu~~
Arcililnedes and ApolloOJus of Perga, the p['ogr('s~ in m('chan_
ics culminated in the Archimedean syst(>m, aSlronoll1v Wa'
enrich('d by the heliocentric system of Arist'll'cb Us of Sarno:
and tile determinations of the length of the solal' year, th~
distances from the Earth to the Sun and the Moon, th(> s izes of
heavenly bodies. etc. Of great practical value was lh(> inven_
tion of an astrolabe and other astronomical instrllmen ts, as
wei] as Ptolemy's mathematical elaboration of the geoCentl'ic
system which made it possible to deflll(' the geometrical parameters of the planetary orbits and improve the observa ti on
and orientation techniques, Military exp'ditions, long journeys to distant lands and growing trade relation s led to new
geographical discoveries and expanded the bound s of the
known world as is evidenced from the map with a network of
latitudes and longitudes credited to Eratosthenes of Cyrenc in
Africa and from the geographical works of Strabo of Amasya
in Pontus.
Technical achievements in the Hellenistic age were mainly
connected with city development projects, construction of
ports and lighthouses, creation of huge Siege machines and
~hipbllilding. It was at that time that the world saw its first
high-rise construction-the famous Pharos of Alexandria
considered to be the prototype of all lighthouses in the world
which rose to a height of abollt 135 m and was numbered
among the Seven Wonders of the world. NumerollS majestic
structures from the Hellenistic and Roman times sU II arouse
our admiration and testify to the pC'rfect sense o f proportion
and high engineer ing level of ancient archiLeclure.
Paying a tribute of respect to these remarkable achievement";, one should not be forgetful, however, of what they cost.
In thE' absence of any qualitatively new SOurces of energy the
chiE'f reliance of ancient architects and engineers was the
pl~ysical for:e 0_ an.imals and human beings, the slaves in the
first place. Piguratlvely speaklllg, (he world's wonders were
built on thE'ir bones. Besides, there was yet another aspect to
thf' advances of engineering in the Hellenistic world, closely
link(>d with its !'\ocial and political conditions, as well as hi:-~
lorical trad itions. The cult of grandeur and pomposity i nhl:nt
ed from tll(> \Vorlrl Empire of Alexander the Great and "
)', I
lr(,;.;;.;pd in
~\'a;.;
II
;I
gi~i\llt()lIIauia, a tt'IIC!t'nry towards co~~;.;~I.fOrT~'"
to a largt' I'xtPllt (\{'('Olllllahl, for sueh pr(}(ligu's as t le

ramoll;'; v(,;.;;.;t'l of PtolplUY Philop<.ltor powl'r('d. by fOIl.r thou-,
sand oar;.;l\I('n, or thl' Sit'gl' maehin(' of !)1~1ll('trlUs ~{Jl1orcf't~
. 'hich 1I1'('d(>(\ 3.1.0U sohlil'r;.; to aUl'lul to It. Bf'lllg In fart t}r
\\ nt's toys rathl'r than practical w(>apons, t\wy prove~ but ()

~~th:use to th(' Hellenistic s~t(>s in their strug~le ag~L.n.st the
Homans whose militury equipment was far less sophisticated
but more practical.
h'
f
Hellenistic art occopiC's a uniquC' place in the. Istory. o.
Western culture in terms of both the abundance of Its r.en~a\Os
d the dlVl'rsity of styles and genres. Magnificent bUlld\Og~~
a; t H;'S mosaics and paintings were created at.a rate pa.ra.
~
ol~ly by the rapid accumulation of wealth III H,ell~nlstlc
e ~ later Roman cities Th{' famous altar of Zeus In erg~the coloss us of
in
Coliseum arl' just a few examp es.
e C'
,. th
"Lao1 "Dyi ng Gauil " the "B ull 0 r r arnese,
e
'1
thrac~,' t le"A hrodite " or Melos, the portraits of Faiyum WI I
coon, the . p. the history of culture as great works of art.
[orever remam III
.
1
hives a sweeping panoThe immense literature of t le epoe .g . I
,whelms onl'
rama of the life of contemporary SOCI~~Y. fr~~\e:eudo-classi
with the multitu~e.of clharat~~r~;i~~f~t~ries re%onstructed in
cal heroes of trad1llo na . my
ts
ugh soldiers and
accordance With. new tlme~ t~ p::s~~oad r;pectrum of genres
women of easy virtue ~nld dlsp
'th its profound psycho-so wide apart as a lug.1 trage y.;ln
astoral scenes.
logical insight and an. Id.yl tescr~ I
kellenistiC literature
The most charactenst.1C eat~lI el \
te of the epoch was
and art indicative ~f the l~edo.lo.~l cal T~ahero of the classical
a grow in g interesllll the III IVI ua. ersonirtcation of the polperiod had been first and .ro.['emo~~ at~e affairs of the state and
is. Man was a .direc~ par~l c lpant. art from it. He might be a
did not conceive h l.s. ~x lstence ra~ farmer, a shepher~ or a solpolitical figure, a md'tar~dl('a~fi 'd himself with his City-slate.
dier yet he co mpl ete ly I en I e 'th the soc ial [unctions that
its ~ys and so rrows. lie was ~ne WI that made the backbone
circumstances forced u P ;11~~~:1~1lhe Hellenistic age \~'as
of his moral cha~acter.
~
hands of an omnipotent a\JC'1l
very different. BeIng a to.y 1I~ the
er<;on of a deified monarch.
ower of the state cmb~dl~d III thl~t ol;tcr worlds and differ~n
~e sharply co ntrasts IllS miner al ' he i<; asSigned. Accor(ling
. I es h,s real se lf from t le 1'0 es
tla
fd
~~Ill,
H~lios RrodC'~~V~\?i~:r~~~~ts~~o~
31
T;
, I
to Epict('tus, one of lIw ftllllldt'r~ of ;o;tui('i"lII I illall '0 I

)111.
a('tor in.a play wrltt('n hy ,III 1I11knnWII 1I11tllor what("vl'r t'IH
role, be It a (Tippie. a ruler or nil ordlllary 111<111, his joh i~ tl
play it \\'('11 and leave tht' ('holn' tn fait' ... (Epictt'!' 1-:111"\1. I~ H
This ill.titude I.ay at thl' root n.f a . . trong.inliividualiHi( trt.:!(i
that nlillllf('sted Itself IIOt only III thl' . . oclal P.... ydlOl()J.{\" \If II '
epoch, but also in its culture'. l\1all's ('oll . . dnusl1t'ss. '(Ii\if\f:(~
bl'tween the gene~al and th~ iIH~ividual~ gravitatpd tnWards
the latter. an~1 thl~ showed ~n 1~ls pr:'H't Ic;.,1 d(,t'ds llIilitary
campaigns. seizure and explOitation of slans, ('olllmt'rdal and
industrial activities - no less than ill pOl'try, 1'('ligion, sc i(>I\Ct,
and philosophy. The extremes met: s\lbmission to th(" ruth_
less and impersona l power of the state and resignat:on to
fate coexisted with absoluu> inne'1' fre('dom and primitive SCIfsufficiency making two sides of -one 'and the sameTildlvufual
consciousness".
In literature and art, this contradiction was reflected in lhe
combination of ostentatious pomposity of offiCial mOnuments and very realistic, profound Iy h umall portrayal of the
individual, in political science - in a somewhat artificial unity
of universal statehood and man's individualism, in philosophy-in a fateful antithesis of natural and social necessity, On
the one hand, and chance and personal liberty, on the other.
This antithesis, however, gave no grounds for optimism,
as man was considered to be powerless before wayward and
IIlscrutable fate.
The Hellenistic epoch covers a long period of ancient
history and tradition distinguishes between early Hellenism
of the last three centuries B.C. and late Hellenism usually
identified with the Greco-Roman civilisation of the Imperial
Age. Early Hellenism terminated in the formation of the
Roman Empire and on the political side was characterised by
the emergence of vast monarchies that I'cp laced minor slaveowning polises. On the economic Side, it was a period of developed slavery with ever increaSing proportion of slave population. The number of slaves was constantly growing as a result of predatory wars and plunder of conquered territories.
On the cultural and ideological side Hellenism represented <l
pf'?u liar blend of universality and individualism , th(' former
belO~ .extern~lIy pr.edominant. Philosophy was perv,lded with
a Sp irIt of dlsappoilltment and resignation: " In til(' face of
th(' dark chaos of reality impcnding OV(>f man alld threatening
to rnguir him the Stoic sage is tranquil and s(>l'('ne. the Epi
, f'
.J
. III r vefl
11 till' dl'plll of ~1I. ~'\qui~itp -{anlt' .. ,
I
cur <
''-'
IIC "how
IIU II(' 'lIiI\ 011 tu lty V('!' or IIII
uy
1I ,III' ","1'11
.
I I
,111
-hody TIII'n' I
r 1111: illig luere ,Ifllll If;;;I'
i'lIl l OI S .
I On"~ of Iln~ 'oul'UcI 'illtl

III '" I ,
)1I.tP~i
('fP,\ 0'
1I111\'e.
1111'1"
IIIOllrIJPf\ (lVI'
illi'il'P ...o OUII(.

1"""'0\
"
'
I~V
I,olilw'!l
11111 JIll.'
Voha! ('fluid b
lid" JII ]fal . II
"h'ln("il'rlslic' of L.
II'
'r
-lHt!{PS ) a sagl', a'i 1
lid 111)\ rnatpri

ILgL"S III
I~e Ho'
'',,!It'IIISIII ilwokc lUall 141
'Ill hlllplr!'
,.
. .
I
I I
I
111<.
II "vpr " la\' p -o\\ lllng !'/)("lCly \'oaS a r('al Y ((UIIlIP!
OWl,
lil
'
II
It
I ail' at.tE'ml1ts to ('lIvlgora!!' and ('D~lSlJ (i!.-I.!.' It CQl.I ( 1!0t ~u
all(
-;. TIl(' ('c(-)flOmi(' foundation of thp Homan
LmpLrr
lid ~In ' f al'\ 111'..
I
.
('
<\lie! nlOn' ]'('vpill"d Its ilHlbility to m(-pl I If' mcrt'(lSIIIt{
[\lore Is of lir{' and pow(,I'ful forc('s spt to wnrk pn'parHlIt
de[\la:~~;11 to f<'ll(ialislI! , Till:' growth of pr()(\uftioll and.lhf'
,tlily
rt
<
tranl\~sti('ation of thl' illstrlln1('lIh of labour c.alled ~or s~J!lpd ,\\
sop
.
rkmell but "Ia\('" wl'rc lIot mterested In the
anu ingeniOus wo
".
t d i p uet.
, . llts of thl'ir work and had 110 incentlws 0 ('\:e 0 . S d'd
le~\ti('S. The prodll<'t~~ity pf their labour dr~'pped, and ~?, ~
~I~I: ;rofits of large ('stati-s. Th ... sla\"'-o~\'ner:"l :~ja~at~e" I~~~~
th em into s~all plots .for lea~l' ~~ 1~~~:I~I;r: payi~g th:. prothus tllrne~l IIIto coh~I:~ -~~alll~(,~~e produce. The- co\onalu!' and
prietor a b',g proportH .
f fret'dml'n III eitle~ were ineomthe increaslIlg proportlO~ U
tion" of the sla,e ~ysl('m. as
palihle w~th .the eF)~\fll~lIC ~e:~eolo'gical super5tructure. and
well as With Its po Itlea. a~ . had alread,' outlived ibeif and
testified to the fact that sla,er).
~ dua\lv taklll~ rool
'
r productIOnU wt're
gra
.
h
that new re Iatlons 0
d 'lIch conditions t l' re
in the heart of the old system.. ~ er sd liberali~m chararlt'r"('('ptH'lsm
an
I
ligious and p111'1 osop I' .'cal
1'.
.'
t hie for the :-;ecu arlsaistic of ea l'iy H('l\enIS\ll Hlld. '\~,~t~r:~~~om from religion ga\l'
lion of philosophy.and It:' ~(,~ill\:l' con~errHtion of phllo~()ph~:
way to the opposll(' Ir('l\(
. t) bolstN up i(it'ologlcally
.
I lh(' ,.
funt'tlon
( eon~ecratlon.
"
.
1
" ( ' I.
which was a~slgnl'(
d An\"
10\\("
the Emp ire, a lso co nsC'Cr,lt('.
,
.
is deadly to ph il osophy.
s thn! th(' tran:-;Iation of pili'
This is not to say. of cour. (';\i ion and the interpfl'tn!~OIl
losophy into th(' \;l1IgllH g(' of re. gl. II\" le'ld~ to the dec\l1le
.
.
\"aiOll" tt'rm~ (Hec. <
the
of its co ncepts In rt' I~'I " Thi ... translation ron~l~tl1lg In . ,
of philosophical th?"g 1t.... .1ll' and man of th(' epoch, I.~:
idealisation of Soclet). " t < \ ' " concept:-;. at ftr:-;t enahh~
into tit(' nil I\{ .
in turning tl' ''1Il
~
."llIelir!. Early Hel[,-msm p. ',::! (in
"I
ItlC'II'nl
.
t"
\ \.1'. LUSI'\. Ills/MY
.
n\l~~iiln)
, - ""'I
.,.
philosophy to cOllsidN Ill(' ohjt't,ts of ",u('1\ 1'0rICl'III_'

I
" I1111
" lIP
I
rl'anlt'Wnr"' r
' Iii \ ""h
ahstract "form Wit
II (1!I'il' dial~'",
"
Ill"
.. r
I"
I
111,11
rt'lallOlls. ' l' IRIOn IS III .H't not 11l1~ t'St' than it 1";1111' "' "
" r rea I""
" Is alit I t I1~'fJlogy as.IStill'
I(
rt'nt'ctlOll.O
tty III {)pop I
(' "
S 1lI11\~
sC'if-conSClOtiSIlf'SS of the ('poch ('n.IJIl'ult,s \\'Ith SO\'iologr
political science and anthropology. '\ t'l thl' i\st't'iplioll of IIi: ~
leetirs to all illusory obj('ct. a dt'ity. funduIlIP1l1ally (lislor~l.
the pC'rspectiv(' of philMophical inqllil'Y and. as th(' histo/
of thought shows. is highly detril1lC'nlal to philosophy. l'h~'

majestic edifice of Ileo-Platonism that I1I'Os(' at th(' l'nd of lhe
Hellenistic age was bound to collapsf' fOl' the simpl(' reasOn
that it failed to stand the t('stor tim(' and ~atisfy til(' itllflJi~itive
human mind,
The Greco-Roman period is ofll'll d('scl'ib('d, not unreason_
ably, as the decline of ancient philosophy, its gradual degradation and extinction. Inde('d, in "physics" it I'etrogressl's to
the doctrines of pre-Socratic philosophers, in ethics, to the
Socratic schools, whereas neQ-Platonis'!!.J!.og.s down in m~l
olggy _~I.1(LJ.tQwn',:right <K~uJtism, This process, however,
was innitable and, from the viewpoint of dialectics. illustJ'atin' of the operation of the law of the negation of negation in
the sphere of ideology. The ideas of th(' classics were not
merely negated in the post-Aristotelian docll'ines, but, as it
were, sublated, i.e. negated and pl'esel'vNI simultaneously,
only to b(' again sublated in the endless spil'al process or
cognition.
.
Ass'ssing the general significance of 1I .. llenislic philosophy, Marx wrote: "To be sure, it is a commonplace that
birth, nowering and decline constitute t.he iron cil'ele in which
everything human is enclosed, through which it must pass,
Thus it would not have been sUI'prising if Greek philosophy,
after having reached its zenith in AristoLie, should then have
withered. But the death of the he ro resemb les lhe setting of
the Still, not the bur!'ting of an inllatcd frog." 1
This profound appraisal hardly needs any e labo l'alion.
('III/pin'
Epicurus and I>:picur('unism

Epictlrtls (:H 1-270 B.C.), an eminent expoJl('nt or ~IH'
atomi~tic doctrilll' in <Incient philosophy was born of Ath('nlMl
parents on th(' island of Samos, LatN he rnowd to A~ia ~1inor
and at th(' aO'(' or 32 found('c\ his own school of phllosopby.
Ill' taught fi;st in Mytilen(', and then in Lamp~acu~. In 306
he seUI('d in Ath(>ns and continued his le!'sons 10 hiS garden
which gav(> the name to the school. In keeping with.tradition.
he had its motto inscribed on the garden gate: "Friend. herr
/ ' it. will be well for you to abide; here pleasure is the highest
./ \ good," Epicllrus beq~lC'athe~ the gard~n to, the sch~1 a.nd,
when dying. urged hi!' pupils to remal~ lo)a~ to their faIth.
Epicurus wrot(> o\"er 300 works. IOciudlOg 0/ :'atllre
in 37 books, 0/ Atoms and Void. 0/ Lot'e, On ChOIce and
Avoidance, On the Gods, 0/ Kingship. and others. Thanks to
Diogenes Laertius we possess t.he text. of three lettN::;. of
Epiclll'us containing the jist of hiS doctrine. and the Card,na~
Tenets (3 seriC's of forty Nhical. apho~lsms) appar~ntl),
intended by EpicUl'lIS as <l guide ror hiS pupils, The letter::; ared
to Ih.'l'odol.us on natul'(', to Pythocles on meteorology an I
astronomy, and to Meno('cctls on ethic~, ~nother ~~X.lt~~l
source is a fOllrlcC'nlh-cC'lIlury manllscl'lpt .In the. \allc
lib l:ary wh ich was found (in 1888) Lo cOl~~alJl.a.~el"l:~lof tI81e
aphorisms of F:piCll I' IIS, some of them I enllc,\' ~,\\.I I f'".\"
Cardinal Tellents, and s('paratf' statement.s of EpIC\~rll. ",ls Mht rodo rus of Lam p~a('lIs (\ nd II ermarc h u~ of Mylllene "
P
P
~work'lan d
" also "have nlimerolisfragmC'nl~ o.fE'
\Ve
pl~ur\ls.::;. I -, k ...
letters and valuablC' evi(\enc(' for I.\I~ \"1('W5 IIlcPflen\'C~ ~\or.~
of Plutarch Cicpro. Sextus Empll"lcus and
lurc I a, l~L __
,
I I n " Iled for several Cl'n lInl'S,
The Epicul'C'an sc H)O
OUl"1s.
I
"' d" ","",
"
I"
I
f EplCUrUf'". tie
mos
I~
Among the imnwdlille ( ISClp es 0
h' d' d b('forl' his
M t 'odorus of 1 amps.(l('us W 0 Ie
1
guishec werC' e I
I~
.~'. IIt'rmilrcilUs of \t"lill'lll'
mastel', PoIY<lPlluS of ... ,UUP!-'3CUS.
,
...... bocom. &b. acbolarcb altor Epicurll8,

' - _ u a ...d bis wife Tbemisla. Cololeo and
Rumucbus .... aucceeded by Polyslratus. whoso
_
DIollf8ins and Basilidss. Diogen.s also
....Oodor .... who is said to bave written more that
tuo Pteiemaei of Alexandria. Zeno of Sidon. teacher
~u the Laconian, famous for his
_tbematical .tudies, Diogenes of Tarsus
Bpi.llatBlDjam was represented by Pbilodemu8 of
n ... workalh ""'"". MOrum (On the Gods). De
Rlletoeil" (Rhetorics). De muslca (On
as bis logical treatise On Method.
reconstructed on the basis of
pbilosophical library (about
0'
ruins of Herculaneum at the end

important discovery 01 the
to us tbe fr_ents of late
on a portico wall in the second
of Epicureanism
of Things) of
of
"horse" comes to denote the ..tiel.......

complex of perceptions. .. Ant.ictpUlcra
Epicurus is in fact the unity of
as it were, into a single image.
It deserves mention that In
the criterion of trutb Epicuru8
calls them 8 "criterion," To be 8ur.,
as they originate in sense orllanl;
between feelings (pleasure and pain) and
rus opens 8 new aspect. of the problem of
to speak, from a practical angle in \erlDlJ
avoidances. Indeed. deciding on a course 01
according to Epieurus, our leelings 8atl
"natural" life that leads UI \Oward.s
instead of that of unnatural and
to Rain and unreasonable suflering.
Perceptions result from the peDev8Uon of
t.hings into t.he organs of t.he senses. TheBe
shape to the 80lid bodiN. far 8urpnriDI
in their suhtlety of texlure" (Epo

cont.inuously separate
the
of
in all dinctionB"tri&b &b. spaed 01
orgID8, they produce true jM:ateplin',
lion into the pores of dI. bod)' _
As we see, Epicurua elaborates and
theory of "imagene." that
contras\ to DemocrituB who
things. colc)ur. taste and mell
exclusively to the sense orpnl
Epieurus considers them. to be
an
consists of
'NUl
with nUl' pn'\"itHl~ p'\pt'rit'lln' no hnowlt'dg't' \\'oliid III'
'I
pn~:-;1 ,11'
~lIdl'
_'
.
"I,
I
')" ,
,\ :-;1111
pit qUl'stWII as
S I l.\ WI'S!' or a ('ow. ,SIllI'I' Ihis till' 'I.
II
' 0111\\;\1'11 '11 ,11'-, Is
11)11
",now
l'< gl' () f tlIt'll'
..
P rl'!-'llPI10St'.., our '
1
,
',1,\111'1'
S,trl'ss_ill,l{ tilt> sl'nslIal 1I<1ll1.I"I' 01' "lIl1tlCipHlill.IIS," Elli('Ut'u;
distlng'lIlshl'S Ihl'1lI from IOg'IC'al ('oll('Ppb wlllch ht' ith'll
' 111:-;1.111('1'.
.
I'or
Wl'
wou II
( not IW;\)I It' to
" "'1,"",
propl'rlil'!1
pns!'I'
~,
, " I,I'
. . WI'I"hl
. . . 'Hili "'01111' ollH'r
.
. . ('01111('("1
r, .
.. eI wilh !-h'qll' (EJli("lIru~ IIUI '!I IIIJI 'IllI'I'lfy Ihl'lIl). L,kt' 11.:-. prl"
I' 'l'~ "' nr Epi("lIrll~ spl'ak!! or i1lnlll~ i1~ ha\"1111{ IIIrtl'rt'nl ... h.lJws.
~):1\ 'I~" i'lI",i:-<l~ Ihal 1111' IIl1l11hl'l' of ~hapt':-; i~ fl.llill' (th"U'.t h
IIH'olllprt'Ilt'It ... lhl~ largl'). l:411Llrary to 1)1'11101'1'1\11:0; who W;I:-<
i\ll:-;\\,\' .. ('\1'11
iii'S \~-ith \\'o~ds: "It is ('ss('lIlial that thl' first IIWIII;d itn;:glf'
tiss(l('UlI('d wIlh l'<lch word sh.o\ll(~ hl' 1"t'g',u'dt'(1, alld 111\'1'1'
should Iw 110 nN'd of ('xplanatlon If w{' an' ['I'ally to 1111 VI' '\
stHlldal'(1 10 which to ['pfC'1' <l prohlem of in\'('sligatiOIl o~.
['dlpetiotl 01' a IIwlltal infen.' nn' .. ," (ihi,!., ;-3R). En'llI's !'('sull
from l11l' abs('n~(' of slIch "ru'sl 1lI(,lIt.1I illlag'('s" 01' [I'(un Ihl'ir
wrollg association wilh wOI'ds, IlpllCl' Illl' Epicul'('all lh('ol'Y of
indu('lion (,IHlCC I'IlC(~ ~\ith th(' l'st<lblishrn~1I1 of tlH' lIIellning
of words and the i'..plcul'can theory of SIf.p lS (''I)OllIHil'd in
Philod(,IlIIlS's tn'atisC',
Epicurlls maintains that pl'opll' ar(' ('apahl(' of dl'v('lol)ing
('orn'ct and ril"H !lotions relating to basic physieal and moral
prohh'llls, As r('gard:; spccir.c qu('stions of natural ~d('n('l',
such as til(' Ilw('hanisms of crlN,lial piWIlOIlWIlIl, id('ntiral
sellsr ('xpC'riPllcC' in this rH~'ld IlHly han' diil('I'('lIl inll'rprNa,
liollS, n('cogni:~;jng th(' hypoth('tic chal'actrr of OUI' kllowll'(lgr
of particular natural pll('nomena, Epicul'us al tl\(' S;l1l\i' tinll'
insists on Ihe ab~olutr cC'rtainty of til(' uuiHl'sal prill('iplt's
of th(' world.
Th('s(' ullin'rsal principl('s rxpoundNI hy EpiclIl'us in his
Il'ul'l' to lI('I'o<iotus <11'(' as follows: (I) Nothing ('oriIPS frolll
nothing:, and nothing rNurns to nothing; (2) The IIl1iwrs('
has always h('(,11 and will always hl' thr S(llllr as it i~ IIOW,
bl'CHlIS(, nothing rls(' (.'xiSL<; into which il could dwrq:.("{';
(:1) 1'hr lInivt'rs(' consisL" of horii('s and void; till' t'xi~lC'nce
of bodiC's is eonfll'lnrd by lIw ('\'i<l('n('(' of 111(' s(>rl:-l(ls amI lIH'
('xistellt(' of void is infrrrrd from UH'ir motion; ('i) Bodil':-l (II'C'
('ilil(,I' compounds or thr cornpoll('nL<; of compounds, i.C'.
illllivisihip (Inri IIllchang('ahlC' partiel('s (alOlll~); (5) Thl'
Ulliv('l'sl' is inr,uil(' both in th(' ('xl('nt of void ,111<1 ill tht'
llulIlbpr of its componrllts co mpounds and atoms, Tht'
Illlrnh('r of thl' worlds is also inllullIl'rahll',
So far IllI' pic\lJr(' drawn by EpiC"uI"LlS rt'IlH\in~ within
th(, l)l'rJII)('rit('an framC'work. TIl(' diilt'rl'llces bt'gin wht'll th('
philosopht'r tUI'US to till' propf'rtil's of atoms and thpi,' lIIotioll,
In (,Olltrast with I)Plllocritlls who 111'111 aloms to lip disting'lIish <lhll' hy .... hapI', arrallg('JIlPIII and positioll, in Epicllrus lilt')'
., ' I 10 h('Ii('w Ihal all aloll1 1'1111141 hI' as larJ,!:I' ,IS ,Ih(~ I'()SIIIO",
~t~~curll~ daillll'(\ Ihill aloll1:-; 11;111'1'1'1\ in ... i~.1' ~\",~lllIn ralh~'r
. 'row lill1;l~ l'I'llI;\illilllo{ :-;0 "'lI1al\ as 10 1)(' 11\\'ISlbll', If Ih,lt
11<11
.',,)lIIS
our.
w('n' II( " .~,"
,
' would 1)(' hOllnl1 tH conn> wilhlll
.
,1$'11,111
" I I,", ",c,IoI,'
hul this i~ I\l'vl'r ~{'I'rr In ht' tlw 1'(\"",
nOl,
.,~,
"11'
how an atom ("ould $('('(11111' VlSI I l'
1, S, 1., II , , .......
. illl(, to illli\<,;rrp
...
c" ,'"""""
(ibid" :if)).
.'
I .. \ with
\V(' lu\v{' parliN notl'd Ihat I"pl('urll~, In ~on ra" , ..
.
I () I'
t, of "t'II"'lbl('
D(,lIlorritus, I'l'('ognlsl':o;
tit'
IJ{'C tlVI,
"
. ' 1'llallll1'~'
., ,I
If anything, Ihl'Y afl' altt'sl{'d 10 hy tht' SPOSI'S which, .\(r~)I;
,
to' l'p""r'ls afl' 1I1'\'N al fallit. III ordt'r 10 1I\'('rcolll~, t.ll
IIlg,
., P[t'dl'Cl'S"'Or and <11'('011111 f or tl'"
t,uai1llt's.
, . '", ,If Ili~
H:o;(
se('p ICI~
,
,.
I'
I' lUI:' Wii\'
'IS iuhl'l'('nl in bod it's, Epi(,lIrus had apparl'nl:> on), I f tl 'i'r
~Ipt'n to him to 1'('tiUCI' tlll'lll to thl' hasi~ PlroPrrl:e~~ H:)~\.
, , I \11(' ",izl' shapl' ,111(1 Wl'lg It 0 a 01 .,
compo'IIt'nbl"'[I'(: ~lh'l' ~ff(~r~'i\ dirtl'rl'nl ~ol\llion 10 till' PWh-)\,
('H'r, t j(' P \I osol (
'.
>.' I
of atoms
Irlll. li t, dt'clar~'s that ~ I.lotl,\, Ir,n~:\~~ln~~:('I;:~~r~~:li~lgllishing
but a 1j1l?lIlatlv{'I,Y .I~l~\ I W,l,~ ~o changl' and bound 10 pt'rish,
fealur('s, rhO\~gh IllS S{l ~~(\ . II i ... no l('s5 rl',,1 than 11ll'
its ('xi ... I('I1('t' III IhC' phYSL('.1 \\or (, . I'p,'nl'nts J'ILSt as it...
.
f t it, ,)('1'mall t'n ('01"
"
eXlst(,lIC(' 0 a 011\S,
'"
I"t' . f till' atoms thellls('ln's,
ljualitit's art' as real a", thl' qlll.~ 1 1(':-< .0. I' "Ie 'Ifl' objl'rtin'
"[ll"
\\ ('Ig
I , ,I", <"l'Il"'('S Ilow
Shapt', ('0 I 0111,",."
.\ ~ t, 'SlUt'" , .
.
' II',.
".)I'opCrlil's
. '[II so f
"" <,n' lll'r('(,IH'tI. '., b , - "
.
(lr'<\~' ,I h.
ch',nl1lng
1I
''''
('V('\'
IIH'v 111'Iollg !lol to ,,I I Oll\~. lIH'm..;e
. ' "\l':-;, "\c{'onling
10
'
'
.
.
.. II ' f,'olll thl'll" ('xlslrnc~, I
ohjects lI!ld <11"(' 11lSl'\ll.\I,\) ( . 1"
tlpir 0\\'11 pr('ulia1' IIll'llllS
Epicunls, "all. tlll'~{' 1)I"0p:,,,\I~!' i:i'.:,~~ \.O\"ide{\ alway:, til ,II Ihl'
of h('iller p('n'l'[vl'd alHl ("sllngl~. I' P , I 'I' I\('\"('r wr('~lt'd
...
I Ig WLlh 11i'1ll ,\1\1 ~
aggn:'galr hod;.'
goP!' a (l l .,
, "I"'l'I'l'n..;ioll as an aggr('g:atl'
,
\
S
(
'
(..'
,
'll)
.
.'
'UH'
0
f
fl'omtht'll1, I)I I 11[. \\1
,: '''I' If bo(h" (ihid., b, .
;I('11'1I1'('S Ihl' pntiu,\ t t l
i" tn';l\l'd
Of '11lllities
'
,
, . d S{'('lI!lI a1'\' ""llitil's
q'
..
TIll' ,lI'ohh'!Ll of prl1l1:\Iy .111 '. I.' .,.'", In hi ... ('\"l'S, Illl'
. 'I
It'IIt''' ' '\ I'" \( ..
'. I
l ' piclll'lI!"i in a SIIllI at I .
"
'l",nl 'lIlll I'SSI'IIIIi!
,
. .
I " II ,1 an' pl'rlll,
, '
)I}:-(
"I
,. ,lll",rol\llar\" <jl1i1ILlIl':O;
IJl" illlary, "ua\[IIl's f<In' I I
' 'I W ll'rl',I"'
.
k
' " I''''UI'('' "Wl' Illa t' It
tll th(, t'Xi!"iIt'lll't' II :III () IJtl 'N .
. IIOU I ,'uII'cllllg
1 ~..'
I I
1'\\' ('Ollll' ;lI\d go WII
. I
,I'
'1,,\111'(' of lht' w 10 I',
"
1 "I"I'II(',llt'r I I .
,I"
"r\<'ar
thaI ;U'l'U ('II ~ II~I\ 'I' . 'gl'l'glllt' and call b()(\y, nor \,\
",hieh WI' {,OInjll'l'ht'11i 111 [ '" ,Ig
'n
I,,
,
I
I
'"
or tht' qualili('~ which pt'flllanl'lIlly a("('olllpany it

.- t
which a given hody cannot hI' COI1Ct'iw/l'" (il;id""ll ~oul
:\t'nrtlll'I('~:,. th!")' are rl'('oglli~ahh' hy St'IlS(' Iwr('(>Pli{;;IS I,").
are lill'fefnre also objt,('tiy('.
. .trlll
Epicurtls makes <Ill adnll1('(' nil [)rlllouitlis in thp
I
[
I
'rl
IIn('f_
"I,HlI I lIlg 0 "pact' alH tllll(>.
It' ('Oriel' plio .. of space (v "I) ,
EpicUfliS is directly link{'d wilh motion mov('tnrnt ()I'[ I'"
:,\ow. if ;11\ till' atollls yo!'r!' rdlnll1l{ downwards at J. ('011

~Iant
spPt'd, ttll'rl' WOlild hi' 110 worifl as the atoms ('oldd IlPV"f
lIlt'l't and form ('olllpllsill' bmlil'!L ~in('(~ thl' world dot's ('xist as
a\lestl'd to by IHu-s{'nst's, Epicurus posib deriillation of atoms
from Ilwil' n'gular ('ourst', kind of a );pontanl'Olis minu\('
"SWl'rVl'" thai at'('ounts for till' rrnssing of their paths anll
('v{'nltlal cnllislolls. This wa); an important d'partufl' frolll
the> rigid-and fatali);tir t('aching of Oelllocritus that rnarkf'd
a nt'w ~lf'p forward i1\ th' do<"lrint' of ancient atomistic lIIat<ri
alislll and had fllr-rt'arhing COllst-'(IIlt'TlCI'S.
TIll' eritics of t~pi(,IIl'('<1I1ism and many historians of philos
ophy IIslIHlly I"ogartit'd th{' declination of the atoms nH're\y as
)( a trick for fln ad hoc pxpJ<!natioTl of the fQr.mallou oLcolllpositt'
boilil's. Young Marx was th('nrs(lo (fi~cern the signifIcance
of this conn'pl which is in fact central to the teaching of
Epicul"us. According to \1arx, "Ihe df'cfination of the atom
from the ,,,lraight line, is. narnt'iy, not a particular determi
nation which appears aCCidentally in Epicurean ph!lsi('.~. Ort
the contrary, the l(llt' which it t'xpresses goes throu/{h the
Il'hole Epicureal/ philosophy, in s!lch a way. howet'er, tliat, a.~
goes u'itlwul sayi1lg, lhe determination 0/ its appearance
depends on thf' domllin in which it is applied."l In physic,..
this law was dir('dt'd against the rigorou;; mechanistic
d{'termini);1ll of Ot'lllo('ritus with ils identification of calise and
n(>c('ssity. Thl' idca of tht' spontaneous ;;wer\"e of thl' atom,
Lt-', Ihl' possihility of random atomic beha\'iour was
tantamount to til(' I'{'('ogllition of chanc(' and nec('ssity in the
explanation of natural 111ll'Tlomrna. Chance. according to
Epicurlls, is by no mcalls tlH' absence of cause: if this wt'rl' so,
th(' 5\\'('1\'C wO\1ld rUIl countt'r to the first principl' of natural
philosophytht-' postllli\l{' "nothing out of t~o~hing," i,l'.
nothing without fl C_<\lIS'. The d('clinat!oll in ~-'~IC\1rllS doC's
have a caus(', but it is not 'xtrl'nal as With colliSIOn of atom~,
but infernal, inhel'enl, like tht' forc{' of gravity, in tIll' wry
essl'n('t' of tht" atOln. "Thl' Epit'III'{,lHl decUnation of tilt' at.om
thus cha",\rt-'fl tht' whole> inner slru('tllr(' of the domain of tIll'
atoms ..
Epicurlls strI'SS('S that chanet' should lIot bc indl'lllilll't\
with whal we (in flot know til{' cause of. It is objectiw ill
"
.
0 tlf'
,
Ibd
i1 OIllS ,all( . 0 if'S r('<llllfeS ~mpty SI?l.H't', ~OW(,H']" the qualifi.
ration.'"
of spac(' depend
on It.... r('loIllOlIS With maltpr'. "a ('Cor(.I
.
L~'
[1-'
11l~
10 ,",pl('lIrus, 0 t 1(> mlanglble rHltun' 011(' Ilart i s

I
, .I '
I
'I
'
I
-.
' tlarne(
VOl(. anot ler pace, <lnot Wf '['oom, the nam"s I .
, I
I"'
~-,
)C'lIlg
V~rI(>( a.e.core IIlg t~ ~h.e ,dlfferC'llt apP,lkalions, sinrr Uw same
naturr IS trrmed \Old wh('n d(' ~ lltlltl' of any bod
d
I
,
is call('d 'plac(" when occupird by a hod\' and I)~' an

,
'h
b d'
"
,
lrOIll(>s
room w en. 0 les..P?ss through,it" (~('xt. /\d\' math, X, 2),
As rrgarns tlm(', bplclIrlis. consider:; II a spcondary qllalit\"
of Illo\mg- and changing 1I111lgs, ),I't in:;ists on dislinguishin'
II from other seconda~y qualilirs, 11(' a\('rs lhat lim(' is a~
(lccldt'nt of events which ~rt' th('m~.;phl's s('con<hwy qualities
of l1('ople and places and l!-i thert'fore a S('coIHlal), qual it\' of
s~'conrlary qualitie.<;. In his opinioll, in trying to compreh'cnd
tllll(' \H' should not att(,mpt to form a notion of il as we do in
~~SPI'C~ of other qualitiL'!-i, "hut we Illllst lakl' 111(' direct inlu.
ItIlHl. III accordancc wilh whith w(' siwak of 'a lonrr,' ,
41 '
h I '
d
..
~ 101(>
,r a S or time. an eXalllllll' It, ttl)piying ollr inluition to
tlille as we d~) to other things ... 1"01' indf'l'd this requires
~~ ,(!{,1ll0nstr:lllOll, but onl): r('~r~'.ion, t(l show that it is wilh
) .. and. IJig-hb and lIH>II' dlVISlOllS that WI' asso('iatc il
:111<: II~tlWIS(, also with internal fr('lings or uhs{'llce of fN'ling:
"1111 \\lth movemenls and stah's of r(>sL' ill ('ol1l1('('tion wilh
l H'st' .l(.Ist
.... 'I' k [ I'
'
,
I.,
' (.1""\;11
.... .\ "
llIl
0 t lIS VI'I'Y pt'rcrptIO/l as a pecu,
'Ia; kilid of accldl'llt, and in "irtllt' of this we call it !imp"
( '.p, .. d. Hrrod. 7'2. ta),
.
TIl(>
/lInst
important
d','
,
["
...
I
.
IS
II1CtlO1l
0
hPIClll'US from J)clllocri,
liS IS 11(' conceptIOn of ' I ,
,
'
.,'
,.
A'
1(> atom s w('lyllt ali tht, C'IIIS(' of
, S mo lOll
toms a' I"
r...
<
'
wards tI"
le,ton ling to ',plcurus, arr carril'd down.
\Clg I an( travf'1 pa . 11 'I ,
I
uniform SIWl'd.1
ra ( 0011(' anot IN at a
ill",', ,,"
I ,F:xl.l: jnllll,~ i. rlurtrinp Epi,,"ru~ ""

" _.
.
..
do\! 1 ,II II ... al''',lul<. ~(". ' 'I'
,Irn~ "I:alll~t IJJJfh'r~\;.ndll1~ uI'
, .
"
I
a.s ,,,"C'h lill'rt, I,.I "I I
I
pOtn ..~ II
", uuivi ~ 'I',
\i!'! fl 'IC' wr ani low.'f
. r',H'~e ""unJ!!
",lv' n'".,
I, to us a,.. oh.".-rll'rs an d
10 I Y 1 tl f' f'uth as h{'
r
r II fi I "" ~p8n' ' . II rt' , '>liT ''''rld'"'" I h an' uo UI{,Hniug in r\'~p{'(t
n'"
)\
I\arl ~1;,n,})ilT.'n'nn' 11"(\11'1'11 Ilw Dt'III(>("rit.'all anti El'i(url".n

Philu~ol.hy of "at un" , III' 1\;,rI
l"rt,(h'rid. Enjl"b. tll/nt.l
W"rk.t, \,,,1. I. p. ;-,1\,
1 I hid
p, ;)a.
''''no
the Sl'nSl~ that 1l ..1lul'al pJ'(l('t.~~t':-; I'\':-;ult

. tl In
' f rom pro b <l)l
,.,"11\'. 1."pH'urus IlIu"
'
la
,'bl
d
. .
.
..
1\
I"'n'~",
\" 11111
r SI...
I I' It' 01I iI ' .ilion,
, [
II
Itllll
01'1'11:-<. i\ "a\,
'TO\ 'I"
('XI l' un C'J'st1lndlllg of tht' law

n1,1
.t.
,'., I
.... l IllUg'
apprOX10l.\IC's
' I te modl'I'u nUll'Plllioll ' I" 0" ('\PI' .It IIII\I'I'SI'
.
tl
,.
.'
\\ib
t" lint
th an a COIlJC'ctUI'(, ' lht' mort' .sOll's ,', \\l\:-;llotIlHl"
any lren d towards.\ I\liltht'mnlit'al p:\prl's..;illl r
1(11 IVl>U[
PI'o('('sses.
,.
I () prohahilislk
morC'
, ~h(' id:<l of fortui~ous declination also llIani[('s s '.

.
Eplcurus s explanatIOn of natural PI'O(,(,SS('s
L '.tsf'lf In
heavenly
phenomena. Sinc(, decliwlt',o',
of <'l't', )IllS
", IS
'particularly
.
'
a l' ,
11C'1!'
spontaneolls
activity
. l'Su lof
I
. their j,'t",""
. .- d I d e t"('t'llllllat
I
natura ph'enomena consisting essentially in the IllOV eness,

atoms and their coming tog('ther cannot be /ment of
accounted for if we
til('
t'
af equately
ca
(th'
I .
~
'c 1011 0 multip'
, IS t U'SIS receives sp('cial substanti
,e
5 leller to Pythocles). The multiplicity
11\
an.
of possible explanations of c
.brlngs. Epicurus to a conclusion that true
IS IIlcompalible
one-sidedness. "B 1I t W h en one accepts
ICe
one
th
.
d With
.
with t~~ry;n rejects ~n~ther, ~vhich harmonises just as well
the ath Potn~-:nen?n, I,t IS ?bvlOUS that he altogether leaves
PdP
s I~ntdlc lIululry and has recourse to myth"
yth. 8/).
(E p. a
Accordinghave
to Epicur us, bat h
'
phenomena
cei
('sllal
and terrestrial
laws thou h the tcommon nature and are based on natural
whereas tte form:/~rr le,nd them,selves to direct observation,
writes: "~ow w
e I.na~ce~slb.lc to the senses. Epicurus
from some of the car obtam Indications of what happens above
desert the app:a~~enomena in the sky, .. Yet we must never
further, as regards
jof
of
phenomena, a nd
those things whose
d s a~soc,l3tcd With It, must distingu ish
dicted by phenomen~~on ~~;If~, II~ ~everal ways is not contraogy, according to Ma.
, t) (Ibid., 88). Epicurus's cosmolof nature. It shows t~:l tlhc;eal,s the ~olll of his phi losophy
heaven that is b
d
re IS nothmg on the earth or in
eyon
the grasp
f tl
'
traml I\'t
d
.0
lC mind and can
d IsturlJ man's
.
UI I Y an hapPiness.
di~l'egal'd
l~ses
in~era
Ep~curus
~ilOn
accordn~gly,..,
~au~es
ph~nomena
:c~!~lal
II
I
:~:t
eac~
LI~es~
3. From
to Eth'ICS an d . Th('ology"
C PhYSICS
.
,anolllc and physics pia I

. ,
..
.'
rus 5 teaching. The ult.
y )ut an auxiliary PfH't In Ep lCu't.,
Imate purpose a r p h'l
I IS not to seek for the h.dd
I osop Ily as he sel'S
possibilities of the mi d' len truth or things 01' to explore the
.
.
n ,tlough the <>'
'r.
e
ullIverse
IS
absolutel
'd.
.,clenLIIIC
explanation of
th
yin Ispensable, but to contribute to
, ""
h" p lO t
a\ltt hrill~ that ri'!,I)S{' ,11111 ('HUh'lItl'd ill'qlll
t'~t'I'I,\t'{' whith fHIIStitlltf' ttlP tnll' Plld Hf lifl', Exaltiul.( philo.
SOphH' <I! knowlt'clgt'. E"i(~unls writt's; 'I.et 1111 one will'II
youn~ tll'lay to ~ttldy philosophy, nor wht'll Ill' is olt! ~row
wt'ary of his stuily. Fur no one ('an ('ome too NlrlV or ton
lalt' to Sl'('ure tht' tll'ulth of his sou\. And tllP Il~an who
says that Ih(' "Io!:i' for phi\o!'ophy has either not yf't ("Ollll' or
has ':t 0l \(' ~)y i!' likl' the man who says that till' <\~l' for
happllless l!i not Yl't cOllle to him, or has pas!'l'd away,.,'
(Ep. ad M'11 122), By providing scientific explaniltioll {or
natural phenomena in the world philosophy swe'ps asi(\{'
a\l fears that torment and degrade man's consciouslll'ss the
fears of gods, death, pUlltshment in another worlrl, etc. and
prevent him from being happy.
Happiness, according to Epicurus, is that which yields
. pleasure or~re.\ier from suffering. This ethical principl' deriv('s
\ from the Epicurean theory that Illan naturally strive:;, for
pleasure and avoids suffering ... And for thi!' cause we call
pleasure the beginning and end of the ble:;.sed life. For Wl'
recognise pleasure as the first good innate in U!', and from
pleasure we begin every act of choice and avoidance, and to
pleasure we return again. using the feeling as the standard by
which we judge every good" (ibid .. 128-t29). This ex.tract.
if considered out of its setting and irrespective of Epicurean
philosophy as a whole, might well give cau:;,e to reproach
Epicurus of on'-sidedness and advocacy of bas' instinct:;.,
particularly if we add to it another famous pas~age from his
treatise On the End of Life: "I know oat how 1 can conceive
the good, if I withdraw the pleasures of taste, and,withdraw
the pleasures of love, and withdraw the pleasures of hearing,
and withdraw the pleasurable emotions caused to sight by
beautiful form" (fr, to). This indeed looks like frank
advocacy of ordinary voluptuousness.
HowE'Vl'I', such reproach would be entirely undeserved
and not only because the statements quoted above may have
been made in the heat of an argument or intended to play up to
the tastes of the crowd. Far more important i~ the interpreta
tion of plea:sure, th' c{'ntral notion in tIll;' moral doctrin' of
Epicurean Garden, which has nothing io common with coan,(>'
ness and vulgarity not infrequently ascribed to it. According
to Epicurus, "it is not possible to live pleasantly without
~iving prudently and honourably and justly (oor again to live
a life of prudence, honour. and justice) without livin~
hUIlWIl
'"
pleasantly" (Sent. Y): Trul' pl('a~lIrt' whirh is tht' critt'rioll Clf

moral behaViour I!; IIlSC'p,lI'ahll' from rt'u:-;on <\Iul jll~ti"
"
t
1
I
(L
Though mall see k5 p IeasurE.'. , Wl'mlls ('onsl( PI' t I<Il of Ill-sir!.'s
some are natural. others valll, and of till' natural SQUIl' ure
1 necessary and others m('fel~
natural; anti of the lll'('('ssary

some are necessary for happiness, others for lht' I'l'pose of the
body. and others for very life. The right undl'fslanding of
these facts ruables us to rder all choice nnd 3voidancl' to the
health of the body and (the sours) frl.'edom from
disturbance, since this is the alill of the li[(' of bll'ssednl'ss"
(Ep. ad Mon. 128).
As a matter of fact. this conception of man's needs and
desires was roo led in ancient ethical tradition and shared
by both "immoral" Epicureanism and "moral" Stoic ism. Yet

in contrast with other ancient moralists, the approach of the
Garden Philosophers was frl"c from any traces of hypocrisy.
Aecording to Epicurus, dl"sires are to b(' controlled by the
mind for the simple reason that immoderate pleasure inevitably turns into suffering. Pleasure as the ultimate end of life
implies "freedom from pain in the body and from trouble
, in the mind. For it is not continuous drinkings and revC'lIings,
nor the satisfaction of lusts, nor the enjoyment of fish and
other luxuries of the wealthy table, which produce a pleasant
life, but sober reasoning, :o-t'a rching out the motives for all
choice and a,'oidance" (ibid., 131132). Indeed, questionable
delights of luxury and extravagance are bound to bring evils
in their wake ...
I nsistence on moderation in enjoyment was cha l'a!5te ristic
of all ancient ethics. Thl" distinguishing feature of the
Epicurean ethical thought was a re!-io lute break with religion
which was in Epicurus's eyes lhe bitterest enpmy of human
h<lppiness. Indeed, man's happiness is incompatible with the
"opinions to whieh are due the greatest disturbance of the
spiri.t" (ib i? , 132) -the diseased fancies of gods which
continually Interfere in men'~ liv('s, harass lhC' mortals on the
earth and torture thel1l aftf'l" thC'ir dl"<1th. The idC'a of immortality with its imp\ication~ of punishments and rewal'ds is
~Jttl'rly ha~wlt'ss. Man's ~olll perish('s with thE> body and death
1<'; thr end of everything so why should l1Ian fear it? It can
bring him no evil, bl'C,HIS(, wht'J'e'd('uth comes man is no more.
Inv,okin~ science, as an instrullIent for combating religion
and dlSpt'lllIlg man s fl'ars and vain hopC's. Epicllrll~ rC'asoned
along two lilll's.
ht' 81'1 hilllSl,jf a~aillsl l\lP Miflcation of h.(,~Vl'lIiy

llH'II Ult'll<I !Hl th'lradl'ristit' tlf <ludl'lIl pllllo:-ophy r,pH'llru~
t1
~nni II la i Ht'li 1 \1<\ t a II \1('(1 "('III Y ('V{,H Is ('f)lls('cral'tl. ~)~t n~yt~IOI(~~)'
(If{' at"\II,\lIy
hronghl al)t~ul ~)y lI.alnr<l1 call~l's . . \~I;l.C.hlll~
Il')IIrl<\lH'C 10 thl' !iCll'lltlfIC VieW of the \\orld, EPH uru.
cl.
ll
nl
t
'I
1 h . t al l'xpla
hid no spl,(ial
slrt'!'!:'> UI1 thc dl'lal!i?
IS on ur
.
<.lioilS. II' lipid that pht'1l0Illl'IH\ admitted .of st'H!ral 1111e.r
'~~et(\tiOIlS in vil-"" of thl' multiplicity .of their cau~e~ anti dl~
~\ot ~('l'!l1 to hI' wry parti(uiar over which of t.hell! .... a:; ad~)pte
lII
.0 \01\0' a:; it rulNI nut the !iupernalural. ThiS 'lew.llot. fr ,~
/"!
.
L'.
of lacking 10 t h e
lIelltly gavl' r,aUSl' (or acc\l~lIIg I;JPICUlliS
I
~cientifl(, iNver and being rather easy:goi.ng ab?ut the latl1~r
foundat.ion oi his ethical theory. ThiS \,lew~o\Ot. can la\.,~
be regarded as tenable. Far from underestllnal1.ng pOSI I~C
\I S(,leneC, Epirurtls was against. gr.oundless ciallHs to ~
knowledge of ab!"iolutc truth bordenng on myth and lendlOg
to turn into a dogma.
. .
d
d
Second, r3pieurll!"i r!.'jected the idea of ~1\'10~ 1;lfO'I en.~eu:ry
C
denied any influence of g,ods on Olen 5 sa a:lr~;s t;~~~ry of
Epicurus cOHceded the \;"'Xlstcoce of god. ["
Ie' belief
knowledge demanded an objecli,ve cause 0. peo~ fr~U\ real
First
~~J.~~~~n, yi~t. \~: l~~~~~. fl~I~c~~ln t~~I~~~~~sf~~I;~h'~e~

.wor~dc\:~~l
on nature or u1l1an;.;;0
"
denied them a...n~ III lIe~,~~ ble<:sed and immortal nature

According to Eplc.urus,
e <:..
ublc to an\' other, sO
knows no trouble Itsel~ nor cau.es tr~r favour. For all such
that. it i!"i .never co.nstra\ll~d, ~~ as;~~ I). On the c,-idenc{' o[
thi ngs e~(Ist only III the "c)ak ~
. argued the indiffel'ence
Laetantius ([\". 374 Us~ner , FjPICU~US e o[ evil in the world.
"a(CS from pre:;enc
1.'\"1
1
o[ gotl~ to Iluman alL<
.
.
.11
to
abolish
,
IS IS either WI lIlg
I
God , according to [ :.pleun.,.
..
tl." polen('\".' is. .not
d
sO or Ilaving'"
but is inrapabl c
oll~g. . 'inca able or both Willing
willing, 01' i:::; hoth unwilllllg ant ., ~owe;h'~s which rU!l~
and capa ble. In t.he rll'si e~de i:7 t\~e second, Itt' is ellv~ous
cou nter to the concept 0 ~ 'he third he is both en\'lOUS
which is equally a.hsurd'f III ~h his idleness is inexplicable.
and pOwl'r\ess, and III Ihe Ol~r 'to Epicuru~ j" nothing ('bl~
acrordlllg
d 1'1." 'g'od~ IN,din~ tht'
Oivin(' providence,
.
.
f tht' croW.
...
"
than 11 crudC' Invclltl?!l 0
,.
no ood reason to COIIC('J'H
life of hlC'!"is(-d hapPIIlC'SS,'.l<\\e bl gI[ thcy did, thl')' would
tl th - world !"i. trOu e s . .
I
themselves Will'
... , and re ose <l:'> tlH'Y oug It to.
not enjoy per~l'ct tra,nqu~I~I~~,:untro~blt'd and n-sidl' in.'hl'
The god~ arc Iml~lort<I:: t
made or fine atom~ o[ hery
intl'rnHlIlllia. lh{'lf hOlle5 (,lIlg
t ..
... ub~lanc('.
Itr is usC'lc ... s to Iu'ullilhl,' II II' g'ods , I
r
any b('1I('lIt5 .rom thrlll- V('I IIIt'lI 11111 'I '
,til 1'\1""'1
:.
s \1'11I'I'all'lI
'I '
tIe:.;
I
}('C'r IIlteliectual dt'lIght In Iht'I'I' , , II
1\ III
f
"'dbl'f'
(\(t't'IH'1',
I
f
II)
~n.
Oil',
(>'S,5
III happr.lle.-; ........ \1111 Yl'l 11I1's(' 'nds'
',"IlIl\~l rlal _
of bplcurus. They III ('\ISt. Tlll'll "'" ,,", "Irl, 110 IU'lio r,
r
I.
..,
h
.
~
/I P (/~l
vree,,' art ' t e archNYI)t'~ "f II",L"
. Ie J{nd .... 11/
b
I
'II
.
'
.-,(
1ll', ... !"I"
em O().. II
nowadays tllf' idl'al of llt'1.lu :.
PIPl'P," that
ac.s~h('tlc. e~sellc(, of the EpiclIn'un Rods wus li~;(' 110,\HI\'(,I'. tlw
th;'r religIOus ('58'11('(,.
.
lot.\1 dl'lIial of
fhe moral theory of EpiClII'U'" nol 01 I I .
ti," " YI , ('1I1('s 1"C'ligious

"Ill( tspl' lls abl
q\1rs~te or the attainment of happin('~~ i (' ti
"
e prcrc_
ethics, but asserts man's freedom" 'I"
.. f
<"
and Imperturbability in the fuce of the ~', : " 1('1 calm of mind
ill this sense is the master of hi' 0 VI(,I~d'Slll~{ e~ of life, Man
resol t
' .
s wn
estlJlY Hell
h
.u.e opposItion of Epicurus not only to LI ',' r ' ce, t e
of, d1\:me providence, but also to the fatu;~s Ie IglOUS Idea
SCientists hypostatising neccsgity A
d'
m of natUral
"witl
I"
I
'
,
CCOI' Ing to Ep'
1 us les t Ie chief power in deter
' ,
Jcurus,
which happen by necessity and so . J~Jnll~g ~v('nts, some of
(Ep. ad Men 133) WI'I
ale wllllln our control"
.
,
11 e llecesglty cannot b
II d
account, a wise man "sees that ch ~.,
e ca c to
which is in our control is subject ~nce IS IIlconstant, but that
naturally a.tt~~hed praise and blaJl~e~o (~~~~te) r, and to it are
The possibility of man's choice f
".
according to Epicurus from thO a c~l.lrS~?f actIOn derives,
b?th natural and sociai processe e I~~uh tlP"Clt~ .of causes of
hiS objections a ains h
s.
ereas Eplcurus raised
cists" (E~. ad rt~en, ~~4), I~~:ura/I explan~tions of the ."physilevelled hiS criticism dire tl
0 ~wer D.lOgenes of Olnoanda
lh.e belief in rigid necessit c a~dat emo~rlt~s c?n.tending that
With exhortation bl
y,
predestl~atlOn IS IIlcompat ible
(I. 39). Epicuru~ w:n~e 01 even pu.nlsh~nent of cl'iminals
In:
better to follow the y th 0 ~ake thiS statement: "It were

a slave to the destinym%r
a out the gods than to become
Men. 134),
Ie natural philosophers" (Ep, ad,
ti
"d As regards cllance the wise

'
oes not reD'ard ,'t a'
d
man, accoJ'dlflg Lo Ep icu l'u s
a t ~-~s a go as mo t
'
c. s tllere IS no d isorder)
,
s men do (foJ' in a god's
thlrlgs): for he does not b' II~or as an llhCert:rtn cause (of all
by eha nce to man for th er
leve
' that good an d evil' are given
.
e ramlng of a blessed life, but thp.
1'1 I Kilrl 'fux ,"1)"'
I {'renr{' Retwf'
I
I~' "~Iophy or \illllr(', ' ibid,. p. ;')1. t'll t If' DPIlIOt"rili;01l <lnc!
",
Epirl I
IIpportllJlilil'S fill" gl"l'al ~f'fJfI and grpat evil arp aftorcil'll hv

( ' il." (ihid,). 1I"lIrP" dlalH"f' i!l IIfJthillj{ l'1~t, than tlw opport.;
lilly for a fl"l'4' dlOU'P, It slooulll be lIoted, howpv('r, that thl'

Epirllrl'ang ('oulll I~nl di~('f'rll the 1)(J~~ihilili('~ f/)r explaining
tht' [n't'doll! of dlfllt'I' prl's('nt in D('III/)critus's systl'rll, thpr~
fon' thpir ('I'iti(~il'llI of thl' vipws of til(' founrll'r of at/)mism
was OIH'-~i"t'fl.
Till' divi~ion of all plH'nollll'ua into tllO~(, illdependl'nt of
and (\1..' P(,I1(\('1I1 Oil man's will is very characteristic o[
Hell~ni~m.1 EI?ie\1rlJ~ maintains that wisdom and happin('~s
consist In attaining c.omplete independence from everything
that. disturbs the soul's tranquillit.y--thc bustle of the world,
ambitions, frets, vain desires, This contented acquiescence and
inwud peace (ataraxia) is achieved through long training and
exercise (askesis) , The Epicurean askesis, however, is very x
different. from the mortiflcat.ion of the flesh advocated by
various I'eligious trends, and is understood as the education
of mall in preparation for a happy life free from the pain of
body and trouble of Rpirit.
The at.tainment of ataraxia calls for freedom from the fear
of death. Epicurus is convinced that the soul is mortal as it
consists of atoms: "The soul is a body of fine particle~
distributed throughout the whole structure, and !T10~t
resembling wind with a certain admixture of heat. and in some
respects like to one of these and in some to the other ... If the
whole structure is dissolved, the soul is dispersed and no
longer has the same powers nor performs its movements, so
that it does not possess sensation either" (Ep. ad Herod. 63,
65). That being so, "deat.h is nothing to us: for that which is
dissolved is without sensation; and that which lacks sensation
is nothing to us" (Sent. II), One of the principal objects of
philosophy waS, according to Epicurus, to free men froll1
ignorance and the [ear of death which are the sources of their
faith in goel,
EpicuJ'us's ethic~ is the foundation of his social tlll'ory.
SOCiety in his view i~ an aggregate of individuab who should
\ noL interfere with 0111..' another in their pursuit of pleasul't'.
EpicIIl'us exa1t~ friendship which is valued for thl:' safety and
I The liCllt<.>
:IWllrf'1H'~~
of the pOWl'r of rhance Ihat reigns slI!ln'ml' ,Inti
confounds tht' <lffair~ of IIH'II wa~ Illre<ldy rharacterbtic of \hl' litl'ratuf('

of l'arly I\l'lll'nism. For instanre, ill Mcnalldl'T'$ rOI1H.'di('s diann' b oilt'll
us('d as Ihe Ulainsprin!! or tht' plot IWtsonifying wilful and croldu'ly j;t'()(iftt'~~
Tychc.
,"
lrallquillily of the ~()lIl it affords. Jllstirt' ha:-;pd Oil II",.

'\l{rPt,
mt'llt of men uot to d() hilrlll In OIH' anotlll'r tipriVl's r.
.
..
I
"I'
. "lin till'
pl'Illclplf' of p e3::,ure:
n Its g('IH'ral il."lwrt jllsli('~' ',. I
..
k I r s t 1(>
""[lIIl(> for ie\ II ror It lS a 'In( 0 mutual ativtliltagl' in tJ
df'alings of Illen with one anot!H'r: btll with rdl'rC'Il('(' t Ull'
individual peculiarities
of a countrY
or an\.'J olht'r ".,
..',llln.
~ II:'
.
s~al.1C('s
the .s~me thlng doC's not turn oul to bC' just for all"
(,b,d., XXXI I ).
Ii. RomAn Epi('ureanbm
"
"
/
The spread of Epicureanism ill Rome in lht' Hepublican

and thcll in the Imperial period was the 1'(,51111 of its appeal t~
('erlain sections of Roman society and oftC'Il' went side by side
with the distortion of its doctrine in the spirit of crude Hedonism. Pseudo-Epicureanism of the upper strata of Homan society is of no ~pecial interest in terms of philosophy, being in
f,l{'t nothing else than the vulgarisalion of materialist views.
Yd Homan Epicureanism that dC'veloped further the teaching
of Epicurus was an important ideological fflctor. In the first
century B.C. it was represented by an Epicurean school set up
near ~aplrs and was headed by Syronu!' and Philodemus.
Special interest attaclwl'i to the' logical theory of PhilodC'mus
of Gadara (110-40 B.C.) expounded by him in a treatise under
the non-authentic name On Jlethods of Inference. l This
treatise much corrupted by time describes the controversy of
the Epicureans against the Stoic~ over the problems of inductiVE' logic and develops a conception of sign!' making it possibl(' tu reason from the obsC'rvablC' phenomena to what is beyond observation (e.g. scar is the ~ign of a healed wound, from
;rlloke \\:r infer to. firE', ~rom swpal to pores in thE' .skin, etc.).
rh(' basl~ of a rC'liable IIlfel'(:'llce is experience. Acco I'ding to
Philod~nu~l.. \~~_ho\lld not rely on chalice phe'nomena only.
By comparing numerous !"iiiIlllar and dissimHa l' ph-e n()fnena
<lnrI using our general experience we should reveal the
LJlhen.'nt properties of each phenome.non and infCl' fi'om t.hem
to th' others. POI' instance, if we find out that men differ in
all respects but onf;', there is no rE'Uson why we shou ld not
safely a:--sert, rE'caliing all men we have known personally
and those we have heard about, that all peoplE' are liable
to old age and death (Philod. XX, 34-XXI, 12).
A:-- L:-- ('vLdrnnd from tlw abovE', PhilodE'Jlllls does not
identify induction as a method for obtaining general authentic

conclusions with induction based on simple enumeration
true inductive r(~asf)ning mu~ deal with necessary and ,
stablC' properties of objects.
.. The high lev'\ of r;picurean logic is attested to by the fact
that the Epicureans were familiar with the method of sole
similarity, reduced induction to the inference from one particular to another (analogy) and came near to the recognition of
the uniform operation f)f natural laws as the foundation of
inductive inferences.
According to Philodemus, the empirical inductive metho~
is a characteristic feature of all arts and sciences based
on general prinCiples. It is also applicable to ethics in which
the definitions of good and evil are to be confirmed by
inductive conclusions. In his treatise On the Gods he inferred to the existence of the gods from men's experience and
maintained that the gods are similar to human beings in
appearance since only the human beings and the gods have
a capability for thought.
. '
Philodemus also occupies an important place In the history
of aesthetics and is known as a poet. Most of the poems t~at
came dOWl1 to us (their number exceeds 30) are love IYfles.
The next stage in the history of Epicureanism is con~ected
with Lucretius who made an important step forward .111 the
development qf its doctrine" \Ve have practical~)~ no eVlde.ll.ce
for his life story, but Cicero s letter of February ;,4 B.C. gnes
a hint on the date of his famous poem. He was born about 99
B.C. and is known to have committed. suicide at the age .of 43,
which puts his'death at approximately 51 B.C. Accordlllg to
other sources, he died in 55 B.C. The deplorable lack ?f data
on Lucretius'S pel'sonality and external circums~ances IS more
than offset by the magnificence and depth of ,hiS gre~t, boe~,
a true enc elopaedis of Epicureanism. It con51sts of SIX 00 s
. h Y k 1 .... d II deal with the fund,llIlentals of
o f whlc b00 s~
. ' . 'f
rer
E '
hysics in comparison \\'Ith the Vlt'\\:- 0 ear I
~~tureahn p book III expounds the views of Epicurus on the
p Iloso~ ,~rsproperties book IV outlines his "image" theory
s~~ an leld~e and physiology of man, book V treats of the ~od~
dnol w "n oll,ving beings man and society, whereas 00
an t 1e orlgl
' .
d h t
rings
VI d scribes climatic phcllomen~, .flyers an
0
s~. :
~
,
q lIake s , volcanic aclint)' and causes of "anous
e~plallls eardth d' in a description of the horrors of the 430
diseases. an .en
.entire
' poem IS
" pena ded with
. s Atl1cns HIS
B.C. E'pldemlc III
~,
273
the "pirit o~ atfwi."1lI and displa.~s HI (1)\ 10US th cal ji ~

ion. In POlRl of fact, f.ucr oil, ... s mor~1 theolY r s's
..
a solid rou~datjon of hi ... mat~r !. . t 811PISlic c n ... ct OOs a~~

the di:-:cut'."lon of opariy all "<'I,Pllllfic qu~stlon tack ('(] in the
pOE"m I!' intended to .. ub"tallliatl' Ill'" news,
One wo~ld. \'ainl)" ~r'y to p.rl'~l'rve tnt' rirhnes." .Inri Onour If
the poem 10 Ib rendltlOn~-lt mu"l he.read a ... a ph,lo"opllic J
treatise and ~s a masterpwce of poetical art. On the (orrn, 1
side. The .'ature of Th~nf(s expounds ~he. teaching r,f
Epicurus and re~rod~ces his ar~u.ments. wh,c.h IS in itspif all
ifi\'aluable contributIOn to the history or phdosophy a.. thE'
poem often serves as the only extant evidence for Ep ic uru!'11
authentic ... iews. Its true signilicance. however, is far greatr!r
Recent investigations of Soviet scholars have sho ..... n that the
"mechanistic" picture of the world in Democritus and
Epicurus ..... as transformed by Lucretius if.)to a poetical jmaRe
of Jiving natur~ which exerts a profound emotional and
aesthetic innuence on the reader Hen in Our days. In contra:'it
with Democritus and Epicurus who nf?eded only two factor"
to account for the nature of things. the atom!': with th('ir
properties and file void accommodating them, Lucretius "('to:the world rather as ever-living. colourful. generative nature
very much in the manner of earlier Greek thinkers. Thi~
exphins why he prefer:-- biomorphic an~Jogies, e.g. "birth"
and "growth" O\'er technomorphic, mechanistic ones, such a~
"sorting out" in Anaxagoras and Democritus. The ... arne
"biologicar' attitude is expressed in Lucretius's terminology:
having no Latin equivalent for Greek "atom" (indivisible).
he uses Anaxagoras's term "seeds" to denote the first causes or
primary bodies of the universe.
Expounding the fundamental prinCiple of atomism, Lucretius formulates it as follows: ":'\othing is ever gotten out of
nothing by divinE' power" (Luer. 1,251). The substantiati(Hl
thesis bv Lucretius shows that he undeorstands it. first.

of this
a~ an expression of d~!!!:rmini~m lnothing comes into being
wlth~ut a cause), .. econd, as an expressIon of substantialism
(a th~?g .can only ~e ~~':lerated from other things, in the end
from prlm~ry bodies. I.e. matter). and third. as a reflection
of a bl?JoglcaJ ~roces~; things are generated not through
meC~?Dlca! comblOation. but by birth. like living organisms.
The nothing ~~t of no~hing" (ex nihilo nihil) principle is
an ~ncompromlslOg deflJal ()f any divi/If> illtpdf'rerlC'e in the
affairs of nature.
I It'retius 8 c..JJlcppfion of the tom 18 hfte"'ent from that

(If Democritus and Epicurus. Of CQurse. for him it is also the
"Ii.nit of division" (redditia /inu). hut this limit, in ils
opinion. is a pure abstraction. and the "indivig;.)le, l!!iD~ the
tprm /Jf modern scienre. is an "ideal body Th(' relev'lnt
pas.sag~ fUllS thTJs: "That point [the atom) gure enough is
without parts aud consists of a least nature and nenr has
existNt apart by lis('1f and will uot he able in futun" so to
~xist. ~jnce it is in itsl'if a part of that fJther: and Sf) ~ flr'4 alld
single part and thE'n the otill'r ~imjlar parts Ifl .!!urc"~,,j/JIJ
fill up in close sE'rried mass the nature of the tirst body" (Lucr.
I. 601-6(6). As regards the real physical body. it is alway~
a part of a larger whole, of "nature creatrh~ of thing"" alld
even of 'begetting matter" (genitali$ materiel)
LUI
I. 627).
Lucretius is not explicit about the propertie_~ of matter
that account for il" generative power. In the PCl!S<lR'C referred
to he lists such properties as weight, movement and impact,.
"by means of which things severally 20 on" 'Luer. 1,6341.
These are Ute properties of atoms. quite- !'uffici(>nt, in
the opinion of Epicurus. to explain the eme,r~ence of thjn't~.
By contrast, his followe-r constantly underhnE'~ t.he t'reatl~e-.
generative power of matter and speak~ of the ~peCific mater~al
which "begets" things. Similarly to the ..;eed. thl" material
contains the cause and prinCiple of the thing. "'I)mething like
its "genetic code." In order to ex pre,." Lhi ... idea -?f ~eneratil)n.
Lucretius was constantly forced to resort to poetiC Imagf':o; and
buttre~s. as it were. abstract propol:'ition... by concrete picturf':-O
as the notions of classical ancient atomism were hardly
suitable for his purpose.
' . .
The poem abounds in passages where LucretIUs per... ofllfie:-o
Nature as life-giver and invokes it as Venu!'. ,\tothe~ of Gods
or Great Mother, describes the marriage of .\tother-Earth and
Father-Ether as the source of life in the world, speaks of the
loving embrace of \'enu!' and .\far .... etc. T.he... e pOdic adorn.
ments have sometimes been interpreted by commentator... a~
Lucretius's return to mythology. which appl'ar~ to u~ c.om
pletely untenabl>. Fir . . t. reference~ to mythological deltl':-are contained in not more than I~ per cellt of the poem ~
text and thE'se include openly athei~tic and anti mythological pa~!'ages. Second. Lucretiu~ strp":--ed that ht' .u .. e~
, thp .\fu!'(>s ('harm" only to elucidate hl:-o -'dark :--uhJcct
(Lucr .. IV, 8-22). like. ": physician ~'ho ofTer~ a ~i('k c.hjJd . )~he
benefiCial cup of mediCine edged \\Ith hone~ (:--ec 1\ /o\ __ J.
---,
Third, the mythological images art' clearly .\Ill'gorieal 'h"

is often confirmed by Lucretius hims('lf. Such is the ca W Ich
instance, with Great Mother which was traditionally ide s~~~or
with the Earth as the source of all life. Explaining his a~'~ ed
to such allegories, Lucretius says: .. And here if any One thi~te
proper to call the sea Neptune and corn Ceres and choosesS
rather to misuse the name of Bacchus than to utler the te
that belongs to that liquor, let us allow him to declare
earth is mother of the gods, if he only forbear in earnest ~
stain his mind with foul religion" (Lucr. II, 655-659, 680)
The obviouly allegorical interpretation of mytho!ogicai
deities in the poem attests to the fact that Lucretius subscribed
to the traditional attitude of Hellenistic science to religion,
His poem also reflects a popular literary tradition represent_
ed, for instance, by Callimachus who strove to expose the
lalsity 01 Greek mythology by s)dlfullY using the poetic
devices of old Ionian epos. Yet unlike Calli mach us seeking
after a new mythology, Lucretius focuses his attention on
natural philosophy, "physics" in the ancient sense, which
accounts for the major part of his poem.
In contrast with Epicurus whose physical theory was intended to provide the foundation for his ethics, Lucretius
treats physics as an entirely independent object of philosophical enquiry and seeks to develop a rational conception of
the world, His tendency towards the contemplation of nature,
as well as the epistemological differentiation between "open"
things with their sensual qualities and properties and "hidden" ones that can only be accessible to thought, causes
him to adopt the attitude of philosophical enlightenment
which demands a complete restructuring of human consciousness and self-consciousness. According to Lucreti us,
\ nature itself "by Its aspect and its law" must purge man's
soul from all surfTstitions and all fears brought by reli gion
, in its train (1,148; 11,61; VI, 41).
The traditional problems of ancient atomism are treated
by Lucreti.us in th? light of his biomorphic conception of
matter which subsl1tutes for the purely mechanistic theory.
w.e. hav~ ~Ire~dy, spoken about his interpretation of the ex
mhtlo ruhtl prInciple. Explaining !urther the atomistic struCture o.f m~t~er, the Roman th~nker uses two arguments .to
prove It. ~Irst. he asserts that thIngs consist of invisible partlc!~s addu~In~ the examples of wind, water, smells and sounds:
The drlpptng from the eaves hollows a stone the bent
ploughshare of iron imperceptibly decreases in th~ fields and
that:h
276
we behold a stone-paved street worn down by the ,fee~ of

multitude; the brass Rtatues too at the gates show their rIght
hands to be wasted by the wuch of numerous passer~ b~'t.w.h.o
greet them" (Lucr. I. 313-318), Then he argu.es the mVI.slbll,l'
ty of such particles from the rule of ~ontr~rles, rep~atm.g to
fact the reasoning of Zeno of Elea: If thmgs are IOnmte~y
divisible, "between the sum of things what diflerence WIll
there be?" (Lucr. 1,619)..
....
Arguing the existence .o~ :'~I~, Lucretlus Infers I,t, hke
Epicurus, from motion. dlVISlb~hty of compou~ds. dlHer~nt
densities of substance, etc. He links the conception of motIOn
with weight and distinguishes two kinds of movement of
atoms: downward fall as a result of weight a~d rebound due
to collisions. Speaking of the atom's s~erve LO the orthodo~ )
Epicurean tradition, Lucretius regards It, however. as a. mamfestation of the creative power of matter. At the sa~e time ~e
returns to a more consistent determinism of Democrltus. ag~1O
on the biomorphic basis, contending that "where each thtng
can grow and abide. is fixed and ordained" (Lucr. Ill. 787;
V.731).
..
hb db L
A similar reversion to Democntus 15 also ex I I~e y. ucretius in his understanding of society. Its progress IS described
essentially along the Democritean lines (~ook~, 926-1457),
but \here is a marked difference in to.ne, If not 10 substan~e.
The time of Lucretius was charactensed by .an, acute SOCial
and political crisis that plagued the Hellen!stlc. world an t
precipitated the creation of the Roman EmpIre; It c?uld hny
but affect the mood of the Roman philosop~er and. hiS woe
world outlook. Though Lucretius's poem ~s practiCally fre.e
from concrete social and political observations a~d c~nclusI
ons, it reflects this crisis by disclosing the cont~adldton~ess o~
social progress which can only be acllleve, t rou.g
back-breaking toil, wars and annihilation of ~ne s, own ~~nd
and goes side by side with increasing SOCial mequa It Yi
growing contrast between the rich and the poor, mo~~
degradation, crime, superstitions. f~ar of the gods ~nd l~e~ .
Ignorance and baseless fears that lie at the root 0 re Ig~O~S
beliefs are, according to Lucretius, the mo~t characy~ns IC
features of human existence. Man's only hope IS t~c EpIcure.an
philosophy of wisdom which alone caD sw~ep ~s~de the rehg~
ious chimeras that harass mankind. and brmg It Illward peac
-and happiness.
I
'f
"f I"
Lucretius is an implacable opponent of t Ie eXI~ tng ou
religion and traditional mythology which make a permanent
2'
object of his scathing sarca~m, condt'n~n8lion and ridicule

Born of ignorance and fear and. pr('ll'.n~mg to tilt' rolf' of th~
guardian of public morals~ offlcml ~('hg\On t'ugelllh'rs impiNy
and crime, being responsible, [or IIl SlnnCl', for such godle!-;
acts as the sacrifice of Aethegl'nus " that thus happy a~J
prosperous departure might b~ granted ~o ~he n('('l" (Lucr. I,
tDO). Interpreting the myths III natur~hstlc terms, LUC'Tetius
traces their origin to physical and social causes (V, 396-410
Ill,984-1023).
'
History shows that.anti - reli~ious views need nO.t necessarily
be equivalent to outright atheism, and that was Just the case
with Lucretius. The Greeks and Romans did regard him as
an atheist, because he came out against the gods of popular
religion, let alone the religion of the state. Yet despite his
vigorous attacks against the chimeras of popular beliefs produced by ignorance and superstitions, Lucretius, following
Epicurus, conceded the existence of gods in the interspaces,
completely unruffled and therefore abSOlutely passive, having
no concern for man 's life and exerting no influence aD nature
or human affairs. According to Lucretius, "the nne nature of
the gods far withdrawn from our senses is hardly seen by the )I,
thought of the mind " (Lucr. V, 148-149). These gods are very
different from the gods of the traditional religion and have
none of their functions: they do not create or order things,
do not exercise their power of predestination, do not respond
to prayer or gratitude, can neither punish the wrongdoers nor
reward_the virtuous. Useless.is the worship of su(h gods and
vain are all attempts to propitiate them. Consequently, "no act
is of piety to be often seen with veiled head to turn to a stone
and approach every altar and fall prostrate on the ground ...
but rather to be able to look on all the things with a mind in
peace" (Lucr. V, 1198-1199, 1203).
The gods of Lucretius are even more divorced from the
world than the gods of Epicurus and seem to serve no other
purpose than to embody the ideal of perfect life and provide
an object of aesthetic contemplation.
In ethics Lucretius mainly follows in the wake of Epicurus
except that the moral theory of the Roman philosopher is
!"arkedly more naturalistic and more deterministic. Accord~
109 to ~ucretius , the ultimate principle of man's behaviour is
the deSire for sensual pleasure which determines his actions
and i.s indep~ndent.o! his consciousness. In Lucretius's eyes
man IS the child of hVlDg and creative nature and embodies its
powers and abilities.
Chapter 2
Stoicism
5. History of Stoicism
The Stoics were another Hellenistic school of philosophy

that developed in parallel with Epicureanism. It was founded
at the end of the fourth century B.C. and existed till the
ea rl y part of the sixth century A.D. when it wag closed by
emp('ror JlIstinian'~ edict (529). The founder of the gchool
was Zeno of Citiu m, a haH-Greek aod half~Phoenician colony <'
in Cyprus. Sources put the dates of his life at about 336-264
B.C. He is sa id to have come from a merchant's family and was
a merchant himse lf, but went bankrupt after a shipwreck and
settled in Athens. After studying under Crates the Cynic,
Stilpo the Megarian and Xenocrates, in 300 B.C. he started
his own school that got its name from Stoa Poikile (Painted
Porch) where he gave his lectures. The porch was decorated
with Polygnotus's frescoes and favoured by poets.
On the evidence of Diogenes Laertius his death occurred
as a result of a minor incident that the philosopher construed
as an expression of God's will. While walk.ing hom~ after his
lessons, he tripped on the road and broke hiS toe. LYlOg there,
he struck the ground and quoted a line from Niobe (a poem of
Timotheus that has not survived): "I come, I come, why dost
thou call for me?" (Diog. L. VII, 28). Then he held' his br~ath
and died on the spot. According to other sources, he killed
himself by abstaining from food.
.
Among the works ascribed to him by Diogenes LaertlUs are
the Republic, written in the spirit of Cynic philosophy, Of Life
According to Nature, 0/ Impulse, or Huma.n Natur~,. Of
Emotions, Of Duty, 0/ Law, Of Greek EducatLOn, Of VlSton,
OJ the Whole World, OJ Signs (SVF, .1, p. 72-73). All
that has survived is a meagre selectIOn or Isolated fragments.
Zeno's successor Cleanthes of Assus (c. 331-232 B.C.)
a former pugilist, exhibited little originality a.nd followed
in the wake of his teacher. He came to Athens WIth only four
drachmas in his pocket (lud lll'CanH' Zt'IlU'S pupil, !it'

I"'
.. ... w 11"
. 1 1
Illig
odd jobs to earn IliS
1\"lng:
H t' uy I\I~ It U' \IsI',1 tn d
.
w3!er in ga;dens. by day: In' ('\..('rri~t'd himst'lf in nrIlUIllPI~~'~
(DlOg. L. , II. 168). He IS ('rt'dltl.'d with u numlwr of trtali~
including OJ Time. On Zello's Natur1 Philo~OI)hy, Iliterpr~;:~
lions of Heraclitus, Of Senses, OJ Duty, Of I\rloll'iedgt', On tI
Thesis that Virtue Is the Same irt Man and in ~roman
Pleasure, On Properties, 0" Insoluble Problems. VI
c/
Djale~ti/
and others. They also survived only in fragments" (s('(' SVF "
p. 137-139, indicating 57 titles of Cleanthes's works). "
The third and Illost prominent represcntative of the Early
Stoa was Cleanthes's successor ell rysippus [rom Soli in Cilicia
(c. 280-205 B.C.). Tradition says that he was originally an
athlete (runner) and credits him with 705 books, of which
more than 300 were devoted to logic. According to Diogenes
Laertius, "so renowned was he for dialectic that most people
thought, if the gods took to dialectic, they would adopt no
other system than that of Chrysippus" (Diog. L. VII, 180).
His importance for Stoic philosophy was acknowledged in the
saying "Had there been no Chrysippus, there would be no
Stoa." All that hao: survived of his original writings are
isolated fragments of 66 of his books (See SVF, III, pp.
\94-205) .
Other members of the Early Stoa were Zeno's pupils Ariston, Herillus, Persaeus, and others, as well as Zeno's and
Cleanthes's pupil Sphaerus of Bosporus. or Chrysippus's followers mention should be made of Diogenes the Babylonian of
Selucia and Antipater of Tarsus, who were known as the first
teachers of Stoicism in Rome.
. Already th: early Stoics divided their philosophical system
Int? three main parts: logic, physics and et.hics, They likened
phllo.sophy to an egg in which t.he yo lk is ethics, the white is
phYSICS and t.he. shell is logic, or to an animal's organism wit.h
the bones and sinews corresponding to logic, the flesh t.o et.h ics
a.nd the s?ul to physics. Unlike Zeno who sta lted the expositlO~ of hiS s~stem from logic and passed to physiCS and to
ethlc~, ChryslPPus proceeded from logic to ethics, and then to
p~~s~cs. Whatever the sequence, all the Stoics held that these
~Ivls;ons constit~ted an i~tegral whole, logic binding the sysem and protectmg phYSICS and ethics, physics revealing the
~truc~ure o~ the .unlverse, and ethics teaching true wisdom
Identlc~l .wIth virtue and based on the dictates of nature.
As ~lstInct from the original philosophy of the Early Stoa,
th(' Middle Stoa represented by Panaetius of Rhodes and
lHI
I'o:olillolli\l~ IS \; rgl-Iy eclectic
)f
displaying (ltrr:mg lnnUf'nce

of Ari!-\totl., ilnd partillJiarly Plato. In pOInt (,r fact, the
innUl'lIel' of Platoni'5ll1 in th~ lear:hing~ of PilJlaetiu5 aud
posir\ol\iu:-I i:i 110 eOlispicU0I1S that there 5 gt~ re "(m to
classify tllf'm tl~ Stoic Platrwism:'
The l..att. Stoa or HOlllan Stoici:olm which nourished in the
first and second ('l'llturi(-5 A.D. and i~ rf'presented by the
name~ of Epictel\ls. Sellcca aud \1arcus Aurelius, restrict:ol
philosophy to ethic!! and is mainly concerned with practical
problems. The declin(' of intNest in logic. theory of knowledgH
and physics in t.he later Stoicism of Roman times goes side by
side with t.he increasing tendency towards ideali~m and
religion.
Such is the external history of Stoicism as a philosophical
teaching. Speaking of it'! social nature, one cannot overlook \
the fact that the Early Stoa was founded by repre!'oentatives of
\
the declassed strata of Hellenistic society-an impoveri!'ohed
merchant, a day-labourer, a man disposses"ed of bis here- ,I
ditary property in favour of Emperor's treasury (this is
how Diogenes Laertius described Chrysippus's circumstan
ces). Roman Stoicism is represented by a slave, subsequent
Iy a freedman, Epictetus, a consul Seneca and an Emperor
Marcus Aurelius. Equally broad was the Stoics audiencefrom an Emperor to a beggar and a sla\"C ... Stoicism had
a strong appeal to all strata of Hellenistic society and to \"Cry
different, emotionally and intellectually, indiyiduals. and
therefore had to express the general mood of the epoch-thewidely spread feeling of uncert.ainty in the face of changeful
and hostile reality, worthlessne~ of mans life and omnipotence of unpredictable fate. In the early He-llenistic period
practically every individual, from king to labourer, li\"'d
under a constant threat to his we-H-being, freedom and life
itself. We already know the reaction of Epicurus to the
conditions of the epoch-his doctrine of th{' undisturbed peace
of mind (ataraxia) and enjoyment of pleasure-~ s{'emed to
offer freedom from fear and pain to the sage who ro~e to the
heights of spiritual emancipation. Yet this philosophy was
only suitabl(> for the {'lite, for thos-e who could aHord to
retire to the Epicurean garden. Stoicism had a much broader
appeal and addresse-d e-vcry class in Hellenistic society, its
ideal suited both a ~a~(' who had withdrawn from _the world,
and a pOliticial1 who was a plaything of forces beyonOlils-cont
ro!. The true- Stoic is (\ man who has resigned to fate with cou
)(
rage and dignity, \1nder~tanding the hope-Iessness of any resis- ;'
I
tance-uole'ltem ducunt lata. nolentem lrahunt (fat I

the willing and drags the unwilling).
e eads
The ethical ideal of St?ici~m is t~us ~er~ ~ontradictor __
on the one hand, the belief 10 the lOevltablhty of uni Yal
doom apparently leads to pessimism and passivity o:erslhe
other hand, the exaltation of man's dignity and heroic'indn
l
ence to fate raises the Stoic above circumstances and d
fate itself. turning submissiveness into inner freedom. ~h~s
so~u.tion. illusory as it. was, canpot be denied the nobleness ~~
Splflt and proud acquiescence til the face of tragic necessit
It accounts for a strong and lasting influence of Stoici/'
whic]l held )ts grip on the Hellenic mind for nve centuries:
from Zeno tlie Stoic till Marcus Aurelius.
fir-
6. Stoic Logic and Theory of Knowledge
. The logical teaching o~ Stoicis~ was shaped under a strong

mfluence of the Meganans-Dwdorus Cronus, Stilpo and
Philo of Megara. Yet in contrast with the Megarian "d ialectic"
which was hardly distinguishable from sophistics, the Stoics
pursued the Aristotelian line and aimed at developing a theory
of correct thinking. In point of fact, the logic of Aristotle
dominated the philosophical thought of the epoch and was
~ound to affect the evolution of the Stoic logical conceptions,
~ust as it afiected rhetori~ and th~ judicial proctlduU-_M
ILq sophlsticated methods of argumentation-'. The m.ost characteristic feature of Stoic logic is its special
I~t~rest III the language as a means of expressing thought.
1 hl.s h'.attl~e. reveals itself already in the structure of logic
WIHCh IS dlVld{'d by the Stoics into dialectic concerned with
the rule~ of c?nsistent reasoning, and rhetoric as a science of
talk, I.e. askmg and answering questions. The inclusion of
these two ~i~ciplines under the heading of logic is indicative
of the ~tOICS awareness of the inseparability of thought and
:-V0r~ -. mde~d, both .were known as logos. Dialectic, in turn,
~~ .d l~lded "mto 10glC proper dealing with thought or the
~~gDl~ed~ and gram!"ar dealing with word or the "sigo if),mg. Smce the StoiCS do not exclude the real object as
the. source of knowledge from the act of cognition, they
arrive at what. may. be called a "triangle:" a word signifies
a thought. which, m turn, is related to an object. 1
I The Sl.oiu. in fact anticipated th .. , I
h
root of lhe empirLfal the~r' f
. e rlang e of reference" lying at t e
) 0 .ml'8nLng of Charles Ogden and hor Richards.
Dialectic undt>r:;tood by the Stoic!! as a science of the

"signified" (thought) stuoie!\ both its contcnt and form. i.e.
caterogies. notions. propositions, syllogism. logical errors and
sophisms. whil~t as grammar it i~ concerned with the
linguistic means of exprt>~sing thought, i.e. with parts of
speech and grammatic-al forms. as well as with the physiology
of sound, theory of poetry and music.
Special importance in Stoic logic attaches to the conception
of lekton, i.e. the meaning of a linguistic sign. According to
Sextus Empiricu~. "the Stoics ... said that 'three things are
linked together, th{' thing signified and the thing signifying
and the thing existing'; and of thes> the thing signifying is the V
sound ('Dion,' for instance); and the thing signified is the "\
actual thing inoicated t.hereby and which we apprehend
as existing in depend('nce on our intellect. whereas the
barbarian~ although hearing the sound do not understand it;
and the thing existing is the ('xternal real object. such as Dion
himself. And of th{'~{', two are bodi{'s-that. is the sound and
the existing thing and one is incorporeal, namely the thing
~ignifled and {'xpr>ssible. and this too is true or false" (Sext.
Adv. math. VIII, tt-t:!). A"" i~ evidenced from the above,
leklon is understood as a v('fhal rxprrssion of thought, i.e.
as a thought represented by a linguistic sound or. sign. ~he
specific feature of lekton is that it does not eXIst out~lde
its form (sound and sign) just. 8S the word is a meaningles~
sound without the leklon .
The Stoic teaching of lekton is the flfst version of the
theory of meaning of words and expressions ~n a language. It
can be correctly interpreted. however, only lD the context of
the Stoic epistemology which regards sensations as the source
of all knowledge. The Stoics taught that the soul ~f a newborne child is like a clean papyrus ready to receive ever.y
thought, and the flrst method for reco~ding thou~hts .IS
through se nsation (SVF. I I. fro 83). Se n satl ~ns are r.etalDed ~n
consciousness by memory, the accumulatIOn of nnages III
memory gives experience. The material.pr?vided ~y.the ~enses
is processed, as it were, by the ~ss?ClatlOns eXlstmg I~ the
mind. Though the notion of assoclalion w~s not yet av~'I~ble
cl8li
to the Stoics. they already knew all the kmds of asso
?nS
the later philosophers were to concern themse:ves. With.
The Stoics taught that "General notions ... are gamed m the
In thi~ lriang\1' IIword ~.lmboli~I'i'.!, tho~gh~ a_nd d~nott'"s an object or
rent, when'll~ till' thougll\ rerer~- (0 lli{freTiirellr.-S-ee ---c K:"""Ogd{'n, I A. \1chards. The Meaning of :\feIHung. London. 1931.) p. t \.
f('":I"
following ways: some by dircct cOllta~~t.' SOIU(' by rt')o;emblance

some by analogy, some ~Y tran~p.osl~lOll, some by compo~i.'
tion, and some by contrariety. By IRcldencc or direct. COnta
have come our notions of srllsibl(' things; by reselllhian ct

notions who:e origin is somethi~g before u~, as the notion ~~
Socrates which we get from Ills bu.st; willie under notions
derived from analogy come t~ose which we get (1) by way of
enlargement, like that of Tityos or the Cyclops. or (2) by way
of diminution, like that of the Pygmy. And thus, too, the cent_
re of the earth was originally conceived on the analogy of
smaller spheres. Of notions obtained by transposition, creatures with eyes on the chest would be an instance, wh ile the
centaur exemplifies those reached by composition, and death
those due to contrariety" (Diog. L. VII, 52-53).
\
./
Zeno and Cleanthes took the view that an object imp resses
itself upon the soul as a signet ring is impressed into \':ax.
Chrysippus rejected this simile as. r~lisJeading, argu ing that if
the soul were like a piece oT wax it could not 'receive more
than one impression at a time and even tbat would be obliterated by new impressions which is not the case. He contended that the soul affected by an external object undergoes
a change or a modification and offered tbeir classification.
According to Chrysippus, first comes direct perception or
"phantasia" which is true as it is produced directly by an
object, then follows "phantastikon" or a mind picture produced by imagination and, finally, "phantasm" or wild fancy
arising in the mind in a state of insanity or frenzy (SVF, fr.
54) .
According to the Stoics, sensations and presentations or
impressions are common to both human beings and animals,
yet the former have also concerts which are defined as
presentations formed by the reasoning of a rational animal (fr.
~3). A .con~ept is thus an image of an object based on its
ImpressIOn. III the soul, or, according to Chrysippus, on the
correspond 109 modification of the soul. As is evidenced from
t1~e abode, th~ S.toics.con~eived cognition as an active process:
given fre~ re~n lmaglOatlOn may run wild. The objectivity of
a perceptIOn Implies the individual's "consent" and the act of
cognition including such "consent" or apprehension was
called by. them katal.epsi~. He.nce, kataleptic phantasia or
apprehenSive perceptIOn Identlfipd as such by its clarity
became for the Stoi_cs the criterioll.of truth: it derives from an
~xtern~J object causing a change in the individual's sou l and
I!> rf'addy accepted by him as authentic. Significantly, in the
~81
upiniDn of till' Stoics the prDcess If cognition requires an

active ",nort In till' part of the cognising individual and it i~
preci!'!",ly thi!'! m.ental effort th.at makes the concept (ennoia)
superior to a Simple perception and presentation. What if!
more. the formation of a concept gresupposes the apprehen
/
~ion of reality in logical terms, and this makes it possible to
pass in thought from what has been perceived to what has not
but can be perceived. As we see, the Stoics were more consistent empir icists than the Epicureans who regarded a logical
conclusion as an instrument for transcending the limits
of perceptibility and apprehending the imperceptible (e.g.
infinitesimal atoms). In contrast with the Epicureans, the
Stoics believed that knowledge starting from sense perception s and ascending to logical apprehension must return
to perceptions since what cannot be perceived is non-existent.
a sheer fancy.
According to the Stoics, concepts are formed by two different methods. Everyday concepts (koinai ennoiai) arise with~
out. a conscious mental effort, on the basis of elementary sense
perceptions. Functionally. they are anticipations of scientific
concepts (technikai ennoiai) and are called prolepses. However. whereas the Epicureans conceived prolepsis as the
integrating capacity of the mind. the Stoics identified it with
common notions preceding scientific knowledge. Their very
presence in man's mind attests to the existence of the
correspon ding external objects which are then subjected. to
scientific study. For instance, men's general consent regardmg
the existence of gods testifies to their reality and is a challenge
to philosophy.
scientific concepts are
As distinct from
,ion
verification. The
acquired
highest among
concepts. They are essentially
!rom .
.
ones both in conte nt and in status. U nhke Aristotle who did
not distinguish between the logical,. grammatical a nd
ontological aspects of categories, the St?ICS a re k~enly aware
of their differences. The first of the StO IC categories. subs~ra
tum (to hypokeirnenon) is a logical subject, a grammat ical
subject and the ontological substance . The second category~
quality or essential attribute (to pawn hypok~tmenon) I~
logically and grammatically a predICate. The tlurd categor~
is state or accidental condition, and the fourth the relatwn of
b t tum to its own quality (SVF 11, fr. 369, 371) ..
su :'s :fistinct from Aristotle's categories denoting ten highest
and independent genera of entities. the StOirH' (our ralegori .

are interconnected so that each of them restricts and contai~~
the preceding one.
.
..
.
.
The highest category In StOIC philosophy IS substance I
conceived as indetermi~ate su~stra~um: .Being modified by /
qualities, it divides, ~s It w~re . 1~lO IIldl~ldual substances Or
objects, each having Its own individual eXIstence and essential
attribute. Besides, each thing is related to other things which
modify its essential attribute and thus determine its accidental
qualities. For instance, in the Stoics' view, John's essential
attribute is being a man and accidental quality is being
a rather. His accidental quality implies Peter's accidental
quality of being his son, so that both John and Peter as
particular substances endow each other with accidental
qualities.
This example shows that the Stoics conceived categories
as logical and grammatical genera, i.e. as ..E~nera! t~.E{'s .~f
stat{'ments concernini external objects.. As regards the ontological status of their categorle-s, it has not been clearly
defined, though Plotinus's criticism of the Stoic teaching
(see Enn. VI, 1) suggests its essentially materialist character.
Viewed in the broader context of the Stoics' theory of knowledge their categories express the basic properties of things
that have no independent existence; they represent sleps or t)
degrees in the logical and grammatical, but not ontological de- U
termination of things. This conclusion is also borne out by the
physics of the Stoa.
7. Natural Philosophy (Physics) of Stoicism
As might be expected, the Stoics offered a rational account of the universe with a strong materialist tendency. They
maintained that all things are bodies and denied the independent existence of incorporeal entities. In their view, lekton
can only exist in relation to thought and word, place and tiPH'
in relation to matter and its states, whereas void is not-I.
ing. Categories therefore are applicable to bodies only. The
~atter of every individual body is a part of universal primordial matter or substance (substratum). Each particular substance or body has a peculiar quality which makes it what it is.
The maio qualities which give the body its specific nature are
ho.t and cold~ dry and mo~st. They are corporeal like every
thing that eXIsts and constitute breath or pneuma which uoi286
fies the whole matl'rial universe and qualifies or determines all

bodies giving them their form.
The Stoic~ recognise four basic elements out of which all
bodies are composed: fire, air, water, and earth. Their formation was the intermediate stage in the conversion of pri
mary unqualified substratum into the universe. The Stoics
adopted Heraclitus's view that the first cause of the universe . . ,
is fire. According to Chrysippus, fire is the basic element /"
out of which all things generate and into which they all dissolve (SVF, II, fr. 413). Yet in contrast with Heraclitus's
living, mutable and self-moving nature, the primordial matler
of the Stoics needs an external mover-it is the Logos or God.
On the evidence of Diogenes Laertius, "they hold that there
are two principles in the universe, the active principle and
the passi~e. The passive principle, th.en, .is a substance. without
quality, I.e. matter, whereas the acltve IS the reason mherent
in this substance, that is God. For he is everlasting and is
the artificer of each several thing throughout the whole extent
of matter" (Diog. L. VII, 134).
This passage has a clear Aristotelian ring, though the
contrast of matter and form does not by any means follow from
the Stoic logic. Indeed. the Stoic "God" is a changeful substance very different from man. It is creative fire (pyr technikon) present in primordial matter and mixed with it so
that it cannot be separated from it except only in thought.
The Stoics would have_~.een a~re consistent if the} .had taken
a firm pantheistic stand an rejected the oppO~ltlOn of thE'
passive (matter) and active (God) principles.
The monistic tendency of Stoicism clearly reveals itself
in their teaching of logos. God is not only creative fire,
but also the reason (logos) and semen (germ) of the world,
It is therefore "the seminal reason of the universe" (Diog. L.
VII, 136), i.e. the semen of the universe as a who~e, the
source of the semina of individual things and the universal
law.
I I
.
It appears that the bl{'nd of "physics" an.d t IE'O ogy. In
natur'al philosophy led the Stoics to a pectl.har conc.eptlOn
of the world genesis which is regarded, as I~ were, 10 two
aspects: physical and the?logical: In ~he phYSical aspect tht:'
generation of the cosmos IS explall1ed III terms of tl~e c~nden
sation and rarefaction of primordial matter resultlllg m the
formation of clements. Air and fire combine into wa.rm.thmaintaining pneuma which binds water and earth UOlfYlOg
the world and holding its parts together. As a result of the
')"
_ o.
interaction of the elements there appl'an; a kiud of tt'llsi

generated by t~e pneuma an~ p~r.\'ading .all malter. Th)t~
tension is the direct source ?f mdlv.ldual thlllgs manifestin g.
itseH as their property (ens), their nature and soul. Th
world ~evelopment is governed. by. necessit~ an.d stricti;
determmed by natural processes bmdmg all thmgs 10 a single
system of cause-effect relationships. Nothing in the World
occurs without a cause and, consequently, everything is
necessary. The Stoics are much more consistent than the
Epicureans in their determinism bringing it to fatalism.
The world is finite in time, having the beginning and the
end. More accurately, the universe changes periodically into
fiery ether which contains the seeds of another universe. It
is a doctrine of eternal return, ever recurring cycles of
conflagrations and regenerations.
The genesis of the universe viewed from the theological
angle looks very different. In creating the world, God turns a
part of its substance, the divine air-fire mixture, into air
and water. It stays in these elements as "seminal logos" and
causes a part of water to turn into earth. Another part remains
water and a third one becomes air. The rarefied air ignites
and becomes fire, this time as an element, but not as the first
cause. Pervading this "world body" as its pneuma or creative
fire, God is the world's soul (psyche), spirit or reason
(noys) , and simultaneously providence and fate.
Just as the ruling or governing part of the soul has its
seat (the heart) in the human body, so the world soul has its
residence in the centre of the universe or on the Sun whence
it spreads all over the world. The distinction of the world
soul fr9m the world body is not permanent: having arisen in
time, it disappears when Zeus accepts the world and dissolves
it in itself. (this is the theological equivalent of the world
conflagration) .
. Whether it is law or fate tha~~?~e~n~ the world, genera~
tlOn.s and conflagrations follow one another "in endless suc~
ceSSion of recurrent cycles. Since all events in the universe
are determined by ne:~e~~it~(1ate) and by the law (logos), the
world emerges as an endless succession of causes and conse~
quences and every new world is not a bit different from the
previous one. To this must be added that the Stoics adopted
Plato's view of the world as a rational animal: "Thus, then,
the whole world is a living being, endowed with soul and reason, and having ether for its ruling principle ... The world,
they say, is one and finite, having a spherical shape, such
lR8
a ~hape being the most suitable for motion Outside of the

world is di~used the infmite. void, which is incorporeal. By
Inc~rporealls me.ant that which, though capable of being oc ) '
("uplcd ~y ~o~y, IS not so occupied. The world has no empty
. . pace wlthlll It, but forms one united whole. This is a neces
~a:y re~ult of the sympathy and tension which binds together
Ihmgs III heaven and earth" (Diog. L. VII, 139, 140).
As we see, the Stoics' picture of the universe testines
10 their rich imagination, but can hardly be called scien
I inc. This was only to be expected as their cosmos represented
in fact a synthesis of the naive but essentially correct dialec~
tical world view of the early philosophers and the metaphysics
of Plato and Aristotle. To be sure, the problems raised in
classical Gr~t;lk philosophy could not be s~t!l~d bya simple
return to the pre~Socratics and the application of later and
more advanced concepts to early physics was bound to lead to
contradictions.
The natural philosophy of the Stoics also includes a teaching of soul and a theological doctrine which we shall now
consider in a brief survey.
The Stoics consider natural beings with their inner principle of existence as the manifestation of pneumatic tensions.
'l'on~organic bodies exist owing to their simple propertie~
or states (exis) , plant~-due to their capacity for birth
and growth, animals-owing to their animal soul, and human
beings-owing to a rational soul. Naturally, each of the principles of lower beings is present in higher beings, but the
specificity of one or another being is determined by its in~
dividuating quality. This individuating quality which distinguishes man from every other individual substance is the rational soul.
The starting point of the Stoic doctrine of soul is materialist. Soul is conceived as a special body, which is "warm
and fiery pneuma" (SVF, II, fro 773). According to Nemesius,
Zeno the Stoic distinguished eight parts of the soul, the
ruling part (hegemonikon) , the nve senses, the voice and the
power of procreation (spermatikon) (SVF, I. fro 143) .. The
ruling or governing part of the body possesse.s the .qualtttes of
presentation, ascent, impulse, and reason. ThiS ruhng element
of the soul directs the "pneuma" to the sense organs and receives from them the "reports" about external objects which
make "impressions" on the soul or produce in it the
corresponding "alterations" or "1~10difi~atio~7'" Expounding
the Stoics' views. Diogenes LaertlUs wfltes: They hold that
we see when the light between th~~ visual organ and the ohket
stretches in the form of a cone ... hl' apl'x of till' cont' in th(' air
is at the eye, the base at the o~J('ct ~('en. Th~lS tilt' thing sef'1l
is reported to us by the medtum of thl' sir stretching out
towards it, as if by a stick ... We hear when the air between the
sonant body and the organ of hearing sufi'fs concus~ion
a vibration which spreads spherically and th(,ll forms wave~
and strikes upon the ears, just as the water in a reservoir forms
wavy circles when a stone is thrown into it... They consider
that the passions are caused by the variations of the vital
breath" (Diog. L. VII, 157, 158).
Such views seem to suggest that the Stoics recognised the
mortality of the soul dispersing or evaporating after death.
Yet their conception of soul as a body led them to a different
conclusion. On the evidence of Diogenes Laertius, "the soul is
a nature capable of perception. And they regard it as the
breath of life, congenital with us; from which they infer first
that it isa body and secondly that it survives death. Yet it is
perishable, though the soul of the universe, of which the
individual souls of animals are parts, is indestructible ...
Cleanthes indeed holds that all souls continue to exist until
the general conflagration; but Chrysippus says that only the
souls of the wise do so" (Diog. L. VII, 156-157).
This passage gives us a glimpse of the contradictions the
Stoics vainly sought to reconcile in their doctrine of soul:
material by nature, the soul survives the death of the body;
though divine, the individual soul is mortal whereas, again,
the soul of the universe is indestructible ...
Equally great are the difficulties besetting Stoic theology.
Dissolved, after the pantheistic fashion, in the universe
and mixed with matter, God turns out to be alien to the world,
as it survives the 'fonfiagration. Being immortal and eternal,
God is at the same time mutable. Called Zeus, it is in fact
nothing but an allegory-like, for that matter, all other gods ...
On the evidence of Philodemus, Chrysippus maintained
that the gods are nothing else than allegorical characters,
yet the Stoics recognised the existence of gods adducing t~e
argument from general consent. Seeking to substantiate thiS
argument, Zeno discoursed thus: "One may reasonably
honour the Gods; but those who are nonexistent one may
not reasonably honour; therefore Gods exist" (Sext. Adv.
math. IX, 133). Cleanthes, for his part, argues the existence
of god from degrees of perfection: "If one nature is better
than another, there will be some best nature ... God therefore
exists" (Sext. Adv. math. IX, 88-91). This "proof' wai'\ to be

repeated later by Augll~line and Anselm of Canterbury
who anticipated Thomas Aquinas's fourth method of proving
the existf'nce of Cod.
The theoretical arguments are followed by Cleanthe.!!\; famous Hymn to Zeus contrasting God Creator and its creation.
This train of thought was later brought. t.o a logical condusian by Christian th<>o\ogists who used Stoicism as 0111' of th.p
~ourcei'\ of Chri~tiallity.
Stoicism was the originator of the t.eleological doctrine
of the world. According to Chrysippus, the gods have made
men for t.he sake of themselves and one another, and animals,
for the service of man: the horse to go to war with, the dog to
hunt with, ounces, bears and lions, to practise courage upon
(SVF II, fro 1152). This teleology is followed by theodicy or
vindication of the justice of God in permitting evil to exist.
To exonerate the gods from guilt for human suffering,
diseases and injuries, Chrysippus offered a number of explanations. His arguments boiled down to the contention that
all evils viewed from a broad perspective are beneficial for
the universe as a whole and for mankind (ibid., fr. 1184).
Evil thus turns into a part of divine providence which made
this world the best of all possible worlds. The religiOUS
doctrine of the Stoics provides the foundation for all sorts
of superstitions, including spiritualist practices, demonology,
magic, etc.
8. Stoic Ethical Theory
Like every ancient. philosopher, the Stoic asks himself a

question: what is the highest good? The answer, as befits.a
true sage, is, of course, happiness (ey~ai.m0l!ia). Yet what .IS
happiness fo r the Stoic? Is i~ the aSSimilation to ,god,. as In
Plato? The life of contemplatIOn of a man who a.vail~ .~lImsel;
of various corporea l and external benefits as III AlIsto.tle.
The enjoyment of the Cyrenaics or Epicureans? No, the lugh
a
nature gu
. .
. .
Now the "nature" of the Stoics, it may be recalled, IS governed by necessit.y or fate. If this is so and man's every
, See F. Copll'~ton, A Ilislory of Philosophy. Yol. II. part 2, Imaltl',
Garden City. 1962. p. 62.
action and every ev(>nt in his life U.C uclcrmin"d )V 16

ty, how is it possible to live contrary t.o, ttl(> ~ir.tat
f n~:
ture or, for. t.hat matter, to asst'.'iS n~an $ lrll~ns in moral
terms?l StOIcism finds the way out III tho nXlOlogicdl lp.
proach to social phenomena .. What i~ th~ law or nt'ceRsity 11
nature becomes the nor~l In ~orlt't.y, l.t'. the presrript )f
reason. Every natural bemg st.rIves. not for pleasuro, but lor
sarety and is guided, first and foremost, by th> instinct of srlf
preservation. The rational being is guided by reason which ig
prima-rily concerned with the good. The virtue of reason is
the knowledge or what is good and what is bad, its vice is
ignorance. Hence, virtuous life is life according to reason.
The good, according to the Stoics, consists of four basic
virtues: prudence, temperance, justice, and courage, whereas
evil is their opposites-imprudence, lack of restraint, injustice, and cowardice. Everything else-life and death, fame
and infamy, hard labour and enjoyment, wealth and poverty.
infirmity and good health are not for man to choose and therefore have nothing to do with ethics. are morally indifferent.
Virtue and vice alone come within the sphere of morality, as
they depend on man and are chosen by him of his own free
will.
Here lies the great paradox of the Stoic moral teaching.
How can one choose freely in the face of rigorous necessity
reigning in the Stoic world? Man can change neither things,
nor the course of events, nor even his own concepts of the external world-he can only change his attitude to them. Hence
freedo? in Stoicism does not extend to man's practical activity and IS confined exclusively to his theoretical and emotional
attitude to the world and to himself.
The Stoics starting from Zeno distinguished four groups
of negative emotions: grief. fear, desire, and enjoyment,
an~ three grollps of positive emotions-gladness or rational
excitement ~s opposed to enjoyment, discretion as opposed to
~ear, and will as opposed to desire. Each of the groups falls
Into several 'pecies (see Diog. L. VII, 110-116). Wisdom

consists III freedom from any emotions which is the
final E'nn of life. o~ happiness attainable only by a sage.
The early StOIC Ideal of the wise man turned out to be
too stern to! an ordinary man to follow as it made no allowance
A("rording.to Dlogene); Laertius (VII. 23), Z(>no "was once chastising
a.:ll
fOdr ~w<lltng, and wben the latter pleaded that it was his fate to steal,
I'S. an
0 be beaten too.' said Zeno."
I
'"
fo Ie. rd 'Ity o! Ii IOlan n.... un. ACC .:.ml 19!.O Clean,hes. there
is n I middle between v. tu~ and vice (_"VF I fr. 566)
Dc pile t If> n
rll ifiCHu on or t 11" 1 toWf!"~ t~f> good
the 'y rtuolls C ,. lound t41 remain virtuou~ ana 1e vicious ire
bound to remam vb jous. Th' Joctr:ne in fact re,ected the
po" I )ility of any gndual progre" towwl"l perf~ction and
divll.led all ppoplc Ill.o two c as-,e'5, the t'ew sagf><;. and the
vast majority of fools. It was aimed ag3l1s 1 the perlpe ctic~
who believed II a possiLllity ...r mao's gradual perfpc'ion or
degradation.
As time went OU, the StOICS had to modify he asperity of
their original attitut.le hecause the idea sage was no longer a
human being. Exaltiug his perfection, the Stoics in fact played
into their opponents' hands, since the failure of the average
Stoic to live up to the set standards became only two obvious,
and this ran counter to the practical purpose of any moral
theory which always aims at man's improvement or, at least,
at teaching him to differentiate between the good and the bad.
The rigorous adherence to the initial ethic principles threatened to undermine the influence of Stoicism (as well as
Cynicism) .
Having realised this danger, the Stoics made considerable
changes in their teaching. First of ali, they revised their
conception of the morally indifferent things (adiaphora)
by dividing them into those according with nature and those
running counter to its demands, i.e. into the "preferable"
and" not preferable." For instance, though wealth and poverty, good health and illness are indifferent in moral terms, it is
better to be wealthy and healthy than poor and sick. As a
result, the Stoics no longer condemned men's .interest in thl"
"preferables" provided their actions were gUided by moral
motives.
This explains why the later Stoics insisted on the assessment of man's motives and began to distinguish not only be"
tween virtuous and VICIOUS. but also between "proper" and
obligatory actions (kalhekonla). ~lan 's obligalions. E'1~SUy
from the law, but a proper action is \irluous only If Il I~
prompted by moral considerations. The assessment of an
action which has not been performed because of external
interference depends on the presence or abse,?-ce of a moral
motive. Hence, in the Stoics' opinion. the- ac.tlOns of a ,trulr,
wise man are always moral, whereas the actIOns of a fool
are merely "proper."
,,,
Finally. contrary to their teaching of tht' IIl1hridg l 'uhh'lo!ulr

b('I\\"(>('n virtue and "icC', the'
i\nd till' fool. tht' Stoil .. . ", II .
trod Heed
. I
J
\ariorr::o.;dt'gr(>('s
h'w "
. Por all the attempts of the Stoics to m~d erat(l th(>ir extreme
VICWS and ca ter to common sense, th ei r moral philo:sophy
abounds in contrad ictions. For instance, the know ledge of
virtue ('omes to man "by nature," but it can also be acq uired
from experience. Reason can generalise from particular instances to the good as a whole and profit by experience, yet
there is a gulf between the virtuous and the vicious. This gulf
is unbridgeable, yet the Stoics assert the equality of people
(including the equality of men and women) who have similar
virtues and vices. Contrary to Cleanthes who regard s virtue as
an inherent quality of man, Chrysippus asserts that it can be
lost through insanity or drunkenness ...
All these conflicting views cannot be reconciled but are
easily accountable for. They reflect the universal but hopeles~ pro~st of the lower. strata .of Hellenistic slave-owning
~oc~e~y iO the face of blind SOCIal forces threatening every
IDdlvldual and making his existence se nseless. This, incidentally, is one of the reasons why Stoic natural philosophy canno~ be reduced to the physics of the pre-Soc ratic thinkers de~plte..their obvious affinity. The impotence of logos, its
lfla~lhty to change the preordained destiny of man led the
~tOICS to the identification of logos with its opposite, the
Inscrutable fate, and was in fact nothing but the expression
of man's wretchedness and despondency. Yet the way out
proposed by the Stoics had little in common with the
Epicurean ataraxia or escape from the world. The Stoic
imperturbability of soul irrespective of what may happen to
~he body was based on a different conception of nature which,
In ~urn, led to a different understanding of man's place in
sOCiety. Contrary to commonly held views the Stoics did
not preach apathy in the face of blind for~es, but stressed
th e ne~d for.a m~n t.o fulnl his duty under any Cil'CuOlstall~'(>s
accepting with dignity whatever the fate has in s tore for hlln .
As ~istinct from the Epicureans who regarded the universe
as an Interplay o.! se~seless atoms and a man as a free agent
b~lUnd by no ?bhgatiOn~ to anyone and concerned only with
himself and hIS humble Ideal of pleasure the Stoics conceived
th.e world as an organic ~hole with its o~n logos and were inclllled, by reason of their pantheistic determinism, to view
~ociety
(lg a prndud of nallln' In the Stoics' eyes social in

stitutions WI'rf' tllt'rrfore a part of the universal scheme
sanctionl'd by logo" and man wag inseparably linked with sod
rty and til{' !'Itate by univprsallaw. In contrast with Epicuru~ \
who OIaintaiIH'd that the MR:" must not take part in politics \
unle:-s h(' is COOlp(llrd to, Chrysippu!' taught "that the wise .
man will take part in politics, if nothing hinders h'im ... since
thus he will restrain vice and promote virtue" (Diog. L. VII,
121). "Not yet will the wise man live in solitude; for he is
naturally made for society and action" (ibid., VII, 123) .
Hence the Stoic cosmopolitanism and the increasing tendency
to adopt the attitude of at least nominal acceptance of
existi ng customs and institutions and justify co nventional
morality and religion.
9. Roman Stoicism
Stoicism became the most influential philosophical trend

in the last period of the Roman Republic and its prestige grew
even hi gher in the Imperial times. The reason for it was the
obvious arti.n ity of the Stoic ideal of sage to the rigorous
image of Roman citizen. It is not accidental therefore that
the Scipios, Cato Uticensis, Brutus and other Romans regar~
ed by tradition as ideal citizens were adherents of StOIC
philosophy.
Stoicism was brought to Rome in the middle of the seco~d
century B.C. by Chrysippus's pupils Diogenes of Selucla
and Antipater of Tarsus and further developed on the .Roman
so il by the represe ntatives of the Middle St03 PanaetlUs ~~d
Posidonius. In Rom e, Panaetius's pupil and friend was SCIPIO
the Younger, whereas posidonius .w ho ope~ed his school on
the island of Rhodes taught PompelUs and Cicero. Both P3.naetius and Posidonills displayed a strong influence of PlaloHlsm
and Aristotelianism. For instance, Panaetius rejected t.he Stoic idea of world conflagration and asserted th~ eterOlt~ and
indestructibility of the universe. He also de~,led the \O,~er
connection of cosmic phenomena based on the sympathy of
all parts of the cosmos, gave no credence to a~trolo~y .on the
grounds that remote stars could not affect men s ?estlntes and
called in question the value of prophecy. PanaetlUs was clo.se
to Aristotle in his doctrine of soul. and both to Plato and Aflstotle in his teaching of innate distinction~ be~weell people. He
asserted the existence of individual traits 111 th.e. c~a~acter
of every man and showed special interest in the IOdlvldual.
po<:idoniu"'. for hi" pMt. r('lnrn('rl In !'!.onw idea!.. of til . .

Early Stoa. He atlempted to restore faith in prophecy. furtune.
telling and astrology which led him logically tn tllP rpvival
of the idea of cosmic "s~mpathy." In hi~ natural philosophy
Posidonius in fact subscflbed to the doctrull' of Plato l'xpound_
ed in the Timaeus but reshaped it within thl' franwwork of the
Stoic teaching of nery pneuma a5 the world's "material."
The views of Panaetius and Posidonius characteristic of
the transition from Greek to Roman Stoicism marked the be.
ginning of the Platonic and Aristotelian influence on the Roman Stoic tradition.
(1) Lucius Annaeus Seneca (6 B.C.-65 A.D.) was born into
the family of a prominent rhetor. He started as a lawyer, then
began to study philosophy and went in for politics. In 41 A.D.
he was exiled to Corsica. Returning to Rome 8 years later, he
became Nero's tutor and, when in 54 A.D. his pupil was proclaimed Emperor, became for a while the actual ruler of the
Empire. In 57 A.D. he became a consul and his personal
fortune, sizable as it was, increased to a fabulous sum of
300 million sesterces. In 65 A.D. Seneca was charged with
conspiracy against Nero. sentenced to death and committed
suicide by opening his veins.
Seneca is credited with a number of philosophical treatises
including the Moral Letters to Lucilium (Ad Lucilium
epistulae morales) and the Scientific Questions (Quaestionum
naturalium). He was also a well-known writer. the author of
10 tragedies, many epigrams and a satire ridiculing the
deification of Emperor Claudius.
Seneca's philosophy is mainly centred around ethical
issues. Following Posidonius, Seneca asserts that "free
sciences," important as they are for attainment of virtue,
cannot by themselves make man virtuous; "you cannot attain
virtue without food, either; and yet food has nothing to do
with virtue" (Ep. 88, 31). Nevertheless, he does not shUll
scientif~c problems and recognises, together with the Sto ics,
the active and passive principles of nature i.e. "cause" and
"~atter." In his Letters (65, 2-3) he w~ites: "Our Stoic
philosophers, as you know, declare that there are two things
In the universe which are the sources of everything, namely,
cause and matter. Matter lies sluggish, and substance ready
~or any u.se, but sure to remain unemployed if no one sets it
Into molton. Cause, however, by which we mean reason.
moulds matter and turns it in whatever direction it wiil,
producing herehy Yllri{)us ('(merete results... All ut i~

but imitatioll of n' t Jrl' t 11': ~fnre let me apply theSf'
statplJ\ents of general principiI's til the things which have to
be made by 1111111. A statue, for example. has afiord>d mattel
which was to undl'fgo treatment nf the hands of the artist, and
ha~ had an artist who was to give form to the malte1"
(Ep. 65, 23).
Seneca reproduced here the Arigtotf'iian conception of
causes reflecting the pattern of human activity. Yet in con
trast with the Stagirite who reduced all causes to matter and
form, the Stoic restricts thf'm to the material and efficient ) (
ones. He rejects the doctrine of four causes, not to spe~k of
the Platonic idea ("model") "because they 'embrace either
too much or too little. For if they regard as 'causes' of an
object that is to be made everything with?ut which the obj~ct
can be made, they have named too few. Time r;nust also be lfl
eluded among the causes ... They must also .Iflclude space.
And motion too ... Now, however, I am searchlRg for the nrst, ' \
the general cause ... It is surely Creative Reason-in other /
words. God. For those elements to which you refe.rred are not
a great series of independent c~uses; th~r ~11. hln~e on one
alone and that will be the crealive cause (Ibid . 60,11-12)
Expl~ining the nature of this God or cr~ative cause, .:,eneca
declares that one can rightfully call It Fate, Pro'<ldence.
Nature or the World (Sen. Nat. quaest. [Il, 13)..
.
This is nothing else than pantheism (Seneca. It "':11l ~i'
noted, is not consistent here. as the matter-cause ant~thesls
leads logically to the recognition of personal g?d. I.e. to
theism). The postulate of ungenerated and e\'erlast~ng matter
havin its own source of motion aligns Seneca 5 ~atural
hilos~phY with the "physics" of the early Greek thlDkers.
the naturalistic world outlook seems to leav.e ~o r~om .for .go~
and Seneca indeed rejects the traditional religIOn: In ~I~ vlew
d
the deities worshipped by the crow? are .mere sym h~ ant
allegorical images. Yet moral CotlslderatlOnS cause 1m 0
resort to theology. Attempting to account for the mo:~1
behaviour of man. Seneca adduces the theo~y 0 fI art fias th.:
imitation of nature and infers, by analogy w~th tie e e\
and material causes of a work of art. to man s moral re,a.on
from th(' reason (soul) of natur('. Le. god. As ~ re~ult. lllstead
of bolstering up his. moral theory, Seneca gives an antropo
morphic interpretation of the world.
.
Utterly inconsistent, but prompted by the same ethical
('onsideration~, i~ Sl'ON'Il'!'i ll'arhinK of soul Lorrow d
.I
liill
from Plato. :\umero\l~ pa:-<."agt' ... in Ad 1.IlCllif4m f"P:~t

morales. De ,consolatiollt' ad Jla:cill!'1 /lnd ."\1'11 ;11 Q/J.:e~~i:~
nUn! natura[wn.' le.stlfy. to his (1~lth III th~' Illlmnrtniity uf tht,
soul. In Seneca S View, It IS Il\iUl ... l)t'~t, ,lIvll'" part. .. ',\1\ tl
'
I
years, , says th e SO~I,Iar'
nun,'; no t'po(' II I ... ('ost'll
to ~r "
minds; all Time is open to thl' progrcl's of thought Wlu'll ~I~I~
day COlUes to separate the' h('<wenly from its NHthly bl('nd [
shall le~'".e the body hl'I'I'. WhNI' [ fOllnd it. and shall of [{IV
own volitIOn b(>takf' mys(>H to til(' god .... I am not ap,lI't frQ\il
them now, but am merely detained in a heavy and earthl
prison.' This sluggish mortal age is only a pl'ologue" to th~
bette.r ,and prol.onge,~ life, .. A different beginning. a dilTerent
condition, await us (Ep, 102, 22-23).
Yet Seneca is again tormented by doubt and sometimes even

~eem~ to be inclined to accept th(> Epicun>an yi(>w that dE'ath
IS "(1 r p '
all suffprin ,a boundary, I~ond whirh our
in" cannot pass" (Spn. (, arClUm, El, S), At th(' ""l-d of the
h~th Iptler to Lucilium Seneca writes: "And what is death?
[t ~s ei,th,er the end. or a transition, I have no fear of ceasing 10
eXist: It IS the same as not having begun, ;'\'or do I shrink from
lran!'=ition into another state, because I shall, under no condi~
tions, be as c~ampled as I am now." In both cases, according
to Seneca. hiS freedom of ~pirit will remain unaffected .. ,
The conception of spiritual freedom is central to Seneca's
moral philosophy. In the face of iron necessity or fate governin~ t~~ world sllch freedom can be nothing else than the recognition of and submis<;,[on to il. To be sure, necessitv and fate
must b(> understood in that case not as the blind anc(inhuman
law of i~er~ matter, but as the rational, beneficienl, omnisci(>lll
an? Ub1qUlto~s cosmic force inherent also in every human
being: Seneca s freedom thus pl'esupposes necessity as the expressIOn of reason, otherwise it turns into outright s lavery.
Sinc,e moral behaviour consists in the submission to divine
nec~s.slty or fate, special. importance attaches to ~he imperturbabd,lty of the soul. ThiS typically Stoic imperative is modin~d In Seneca by a doctrine of conscience which rewards
virtues and punishes vices, As distinct from the Cynic!:! who
exe~t~d a strong innuence on the ethical theory of Greek
StOICl~~, ,Seneca asserts the "natural" character of justice.
PolemlclslOg
this
.
.
"I ,E' t
' point \\'tl
I I E PL('\ll'liS
SPnt'ca Wrtt(':->:
. on .
liS agree With hiS on the other [point] . that bad Ii(,(,(i:-; ,tn'
lashed by the conscience, and that. conscience is tortured to
,..
thl' ~r <ltE'st !It'grel' bet UII!H wending Bnxle1y fln"p, Bnd

whip:'J it OIL. Fnr thi~. Epiell;" IS, is the ve.y off,f)f I.hat w If
by naturc rt,lui'lllnt tl) I'Ollllllit crimi' beoouse even in
dr{'um:->tall('i'S of safl'ly tilt'n: jg rtf) one whl) doeg not feel fear'
(Ep. !l7. If. III aerorLlanrc with this \'iew, Seneca climes out
as a champion of I'xistilll{ cllstoms and !'thieal norms thl'r'by
departing from tiLe I'arlil'r Stnie conceptions.
Adherenc.(' to I,thical Ilorm!; had always bet-n an important
feature of t.he Homan rt'pllblican tradition. It stemmed from
the recognition of civil society and the state as the C;Cllt of
moral valll('s. TIlL' ahsolutE' <Illtl Ilpspotic rule of till' EllIp(-rtJr~
lIntiermim'd lhi~ tlnity or till' dprlLartds flf !h(' statl' 1I11l11llorai
imperatives, and St'nct'a turns to universal human values. In
his view, it is not the state a~ such, but fellowship that "hac;
given to him Iman) dominion o\"er all creatures; fellowship, though he was begotten upon the land, has extended his
sovereignty to an element not his own, and has bidden him to
be lord upon the !-'iea ... Take away this fellowship, and you
will Sl'\"N th!' unily of tltt' human race on which ib pXI~II;'IIl'e
depends" (S!'Il, f){' Iwnl;'f. I\". 18.3).
Hence, human SOeil'ty is a single whole. The motherland of
a human soul cannot be "pitiful Ephesus or cramped Alex.andria." This whole is sustained by mutual love and compas~lOn,
therefore even the slaves should be treated as human bpinj.!~.
"They are slaves, people declare. :\ay. rather th(>)" ar' men
'Slaves!' No, comrades, 'Slaves.' :\0, they are our fellow
slaves, if one reflects that Fortune has (>qual rights over slav('s
and free men alike" (Ep, 47. t). Though we are unable to
change the existing pattern of human relations, the ~e,~t way
to put t.hem in order is to adhere to th(> golden rule. ~re~,~
your inferiors as you would be treated by your superlor~
(ibid., 47,11).
I
As we see, Se neca's "spiritual" abolition of s avery consists in the discovery that ('very man,.on t.he ~ne han~: Is.a
s lave of [ate and on th(' other, lhat IllS m\ll~ ,lS free: I.t l~
a mistakE' fo t' eVNyone to belic\'e that condllton of sla\er~
enetrates into the whole being of a man, The betl~r pa~t, of
~im is exempt. Only the bo~y !s at th(' mercy and d~~P?Sltlon
of a master; bill the mind 15 Its own master, and 1~ ~o f~('e
and unshack l'd that nol c\:cn .lhi.s prison .of th.e .bod~, In W~lC~l
'1'
dined, ran ['{'stnlln II from u"tng It!; 0\\.1\ po\\er.,
roll~\\~i~;gmighty ,liillS, ,lIld l'~C<lpin~ into ,the infinite to ~.('l'P
th(' cOlllllany with Ih' ~t<lf~ ... All that I~sues lrum thiS I"
free" (Sen. De benef. III.' 20,1) YN,mlln Cl.lunof lUi: COl\te~t

with such freedom. GrIlUIOE' frl.'edom IS the frf>>dom 01 actio
implying the freedom of spirit. ~ut not Ii.mitl'd to it.
1\
In contrast with Seneca who viewed socH~ly from the pOsi.
tion of a wealthy man denying him~elf nothillg (and then losing everything together with his life). Epictl'tus had no good
thing~ of life at all. Whereas Seneca comforted others,
Epictetus, comforting others, was also comforting himself.
This accounts for a much greatrf warmth, human(>ness and
intimate kindness of the philosopher's consolations, us well
as for his absolute resignation to fate.
(2) Epictetus (c. 50-138 A.D.) was brought to Rome as
a slave and, while still a slave, attended philosophical lessons of Roman Stoic Musonius H.uftls. Sources do not tell us
how he got freedom from his cruel master who himself was a
freedman and Nero's bodygual'd, but it is known that he
devoted himself to philosophy. In 89 A.D. when the
philosophical schools in Rome were closed by Emperor
Domitian's edict. Epictetus moved to Nicopoli~ in Epirus and
started giving oral lessons in a school. His talks were recorded
by Flavius Arrian and survived in the form of the Manual
(Encheiridion) , four of the eight books of the Dissertationes
and fragments of the Discourses of Epicletus. We also possess
some doxographic material.
Epictetus brought to a logical conclusion the tendency of
Homan Stoicism to reduce philosophy to ethics. The division
of philosophy into ethics, logic and physics is for Epictetus a
purely formal delimitation. "The first and most necessary divi~ion in philosophy is that which has to do with the application of the principles, as, for example, Do not lie. The se
cond deals with the demonstration, as, for example, How came
it that. we ought. 1101. to lie? The third conFirms and discl'lminates between these processes, as, for example, How does it.
come that this is a proof? For what is it a proof, what is
logical consequence, what contradiction, what truth, what
falsehood? Therefore the third division is necessary because
of the second, and the second because of the first; while the
most necessary of all, and the one in which we ought to rest,
is the first. But we do the opposite; for we spend our time
in th.e t.hird division and utterly neglect the first. Therefore,
we he, mdeed, but are ready with the arguments which prove
that one ought not to lie" (Epict. Ench. 52),
Proceeding from this view, Epictetus does not concern
ther oglj or )h~ H exr pt t~~1 11 Ire"!'; e

lattf'l i$ a do lOe)f toe:tr. Cilllse .c -;)(1 He shar
he
old Stoic thesis looul t.he al anal nature of l' world lind
contends that it ,! a singh' c )Smi4 s' te c nsisting of a singh,
substance and that things constantly :omc into being and
perish, decomposing into their elements. HI also !'.llb:>trib~s
to the doctrine of crf'ation: "r.orl has made all the thl[lgs m
t.he universe and the universe itself completely [rpe from
hindrance and perfert, and 'the parts of it for the use of the
whole" (Diss. IV, 7, 6). This whole, in turn, is not o~ly the
cosmos, but god which is both Creator. and PrOVidence.
God in Epictetus (the philosopher sometimes speaks of the
gods) is not modelled on man and can hardly b~ regarded as
personal. Yet the m?ral. behaviour is deter~lIled by ~od
(or the gods) since "Ill ~Iety. to the gods; I wou.ld. have )OU
know. the chief eleml'nt IS thiS, to have nght .oplillOns about
them as existing and as administering the universe well an.d
justly-and to have set yourself to obey them .and to sub~l.t
to everything that happens, and to follow It volun~arJl),
in the belief that it is being fulfilled by the h~ghest
intelligence" (Eneh, 31). God also possesses the ~Ighest
knowledge so that" it is not possible to c~?cea.l,,- from ~~m l~)r
acts or even our intentions and thoughts (DI_s~l 'h .
This apparently leave!'. but one function to P I ~sop
to induce man to adopt the right mdorals~ttitu~ei!ob~,:~\~O~h~
Le. to submit to the will of the go s. lIlee I
.
power of. man to
the
h m~~l
Will
\d"
.
U der our control are conception,
are not under our .
. n , rd everything what is our
choice, .desire, averSion, and. I~ ~t:re ~ur body, our pro"perly,
own dOing; not under o~r con r d everything that is not our
reputation, office, and, III ~ Wt~ 'gs under our control are by
own doing. Furth~rmor~l t ned u'~impeded: while the things
nature free, unhillderr a k ~ef\'ilc subject to hindrance,
not under our co~~r(k are w~) ';" man \hould thererore rely
h
and not our ow,:,
... ne.
~Indt'r hi"- control. "then no onl'
only on those tl1ungs tha\ a:~mpul"ion upon you, no one wil\
will evN be ah e to exer
.
..1\ [i~d fault with no
.
au will blame no one, \\1
.
.'11
hlOder.you, Y
I I nothing against your will, you .... '.
one, will do ah~lo ute Y. no onl' will harm you. [or nl'ith('r IS
hav(> no persona I'nrlO) ,
I ' " ('h'd)
there any harm that can toue I ) OU
I I , .
The conduct based on this prineiplt, dpllt'nds, ~cC)l(ii

to Epicteh,ls. on man's a b,iIity. to act of his own fH'e Wi~r
TIlt' capacity for free ('hOl('(> IS granted us hy god for OUr
hal)pine~s.
The idea of free will ~hus introduced by ~:pirtPlllS was If)

pia .... an important role In the suhs('(fm.'nt history of ethical
theories. As we see. thE' pos<.;ihility of fret' choice derive"
from god's will to ensure th(' hal~pil.\('ss of mall. '~hi:-i ('I)ncep',
lion is extremely narrow and IS In fart f('stnCled to thl'
.. rreed om .. to su ffer and end u r('. E picletu S 1I n('q II ivoea lIy
1'I11e~
out thl:' possibility of rrai freedom, i.e. til(> fl'(>('dom of action
particularly that based on th(> knowl('tige of natural 31Ui sO('ial

n<'cl'ssity. If we be allowed to flr;)w a par<ll1ei bNweC'1l EpiCl('.
tus's moral theory and the t1H'ory of games. Epic.t('tus exhorts
us to playa lire drama writt('11 without our participatioll. til(>
rol('s and thl' rules of acling bl'ing thrust upon us ... On(' can
hardly imagine a more alienated and alirnating view of man
and his place in society. What is morl', Epictl'tus ew'n
deprivt's the believers--and it. is only a belipvl'r that can /
ac('('pl his teac.hing-of lhe last hopl" th;.\I of tiH' immortality
of til(' soul and a rl'ward in the othl'r world ... Exprel'sing tilt'
lH'iIJlessIH'l'S of the individllal in 1Il<' fan of so('ial e\'iI.
Epir\t'lus at lhe saml' time !janctielt's and Pt'rpplllaljlS t1u~
IH'ipll'ssllrss. His last word is l1on -rl's istaflCt' to p\"il whirh
ali,ll;ns Homan stoicism with Christianity.
(:~) Marcus Aurelius Antonilws. Homan Emperor \1arclis
\\lrp!ius (121-180 A.D.) wa~ brought lip in lh(' spirit of Stni<'
philosophy adopting in his youth lhl' basi<" principl('", of
Io:pil"ll'tlls's teaching. Ilis only work wriUt'n in (;reek in a
mililar~' campaign (c. 171 A.D.) is ('<.lIh'd the lfedilalions. It
f'on!Oists of 12 hooks and is kPynott'd by thl' f('pling of sad
III'SS and weariness of lift'.
Th~' author says nothing about logic hut ",('ts a Illlrnlwr (lr
tu",ks before "physics," First and r01"(>ll1o;';;l, it 1llU~t h{'lp mall
to tnk!' a sober view of slll'I'ollntiing thing;.;;. by ",trippillg' a\\"n~
111('lr f<llst, ornament~. Ind('('(1. "thi,,,, Fall'l'nian [willt'\ i", onl~
a littll;' _grape juice. and this Illll'ph' robe sonw ;.;;11t'l'PS wOlil
tiyt'd wIth the blood of ;, slwllf'I",h ... s11eh tlll'l1 ;lre thr:<l'
imprt'~",itlllS and they r('arh IhC' things thE'lllsl'hes and
1)f'~lt'tr~lt' til.C'Ill. and so Wl' s('(' what kind of things they are"
(\ 1. l.H Knowing the trl1(' \'3111(' of things. we shall not
ulta('h to ttWIll thl' lIuportan('l' Iht'\" do not d('s(-'1"\'e. The ",pcond
t.a~k of physics is to ghow the l~niversal changefulness and
iluidity of being, .constit.utlllg at the same time a si~gle whole

Through the uOlv.ersal s~bstaoce a~ through a furiOUS torrent
all bodie)' are earned, being by their nature united with and
coOperating ,~it~ the whole. as. th.e parts o.f our body with
ne another (\ II, 19). All thiS IS Hl'rachtean nux. What
~ttitude should be adopted to it? Thb is the main problem.
Expounding his ~iews, Marcus Aurelius ~sserts that chang'
is necessary: nothtng can be generated Without change and
all useful things come about by way of change: "And canst
thou be nourished, unle~s thl:' food undergoes the change?"
(VII, 18). Yet he is more attrarted by the idea of univer~al
destruction than that of eternal life, "Of human life the time
is a point. and the substance is in a nux, and the perception
dull, and thC' composition of the whole body subject to putriflcation, and the soul a whirl, and fortune hard to divine. and
fame a thlllg devoid of judgement. And. to say all in a word,
everything which belongs to til(> body is a stream. and what.
belongs to the )'0111 is a dream. a vapour .. and I.if~ is,,a warfarf'
and a strangcr'~ sojourn. and after-fame IS oblmon (II, 17)
The soul's only rl'fuge and consolation is philosophy.
The third task of physirs is to provide a basis for such
a consolation. i,l'. to show that the world is raHonal and
purpose-oriC'nted. It ha!'>. ac.cording to. the ?hilosopherEmperor, matter. caust' and purpose forml1lg a sl.ugle whole.
Man is a part of this wholt' or, more accurately. Its member.
The unity. rationality nnd Jlur~osefu.ln~ss of the, world ~roces~
are not derated by imperfectIOn -It IS unavoldahle JI.I~t as
chips and shaving!'> in the carpC'uter's workshop. The universe
as a whole i", divine and governed by reason, ,
Whatever we may think of the worl.d at large.ls. how{:~N:
but of lit.t1e coO!~(>qu('nce for our practIcal purpose -to ddint
the right attitude to it. "EithN there is fatal ne~essl~! an~l
invinciblC' order, or a kind Providence. or a conrus.l~n w~th~\lt
ithout a director If then there IS an IIIVIII '
d
a purpose an w
. . ? B 'f th
.
Provi
cible necessity. why dost. tlH'n resist
.u~ I
ere IS a I
If
dence, which allow!'! itsrlf to be propl~lated, ~ake t ly~e
orthy of the help of the divinity. But If there IS confu"'l lOlI
W
b
tent that.-in such a tempest. t.hou last
without. governor., e C?ll.
II
" (XII 14) Of cours(',
in th self a certam ruling IIlte Igence.
.
'
'.'
Y, . her accl'plS divine PrOVIdence and thl:' 11Ie\l~~ilrt~l~ofSf~te- thl'former call~ for moral perfection, the lnt
ler for submis~ivel1e~s.
Marcus Aureliu~'s teaching
man, as
well as his ethics,
is not marked by originality. His slarting point i:i thl' falllil"

dualism of the soul and the body rlaborall'd ill till' doclril~r
of man's three components: the body, th(' soul (Prlt'umat
and the ruling principle (hegemonikon) or ~pirit. The bod'
is characterised by sensations, the soul by aspirations an~
the spirit by dogmata (see Ill, 17). Man 's spirit represen~
his divine component so that god may contemplate man irres_
pective of his body. After the death of the body man 's Spirit
disperses and reunifies wilh god. Thef(' b one feature in
t
I
Marcus Aurelius's leachi,ng of th~ ~nd of man's lire that sets

him apart from other StOICS. A poiltl(:ai figure of ex ailed rank.
h~ insists Ol~ a high moral mis,sion of n~an lha~ of fulfliling
IllS duty: 'The end of ratIOnal allimalR IS to follow
the reason and the law of the most ancient city and
polity" (II, 16). However, man can always retire from the
world, withdraw into himself and rest content with the sense
of duty fulfilled.
Stoicism in the Roman Empire was not only an expression
of the universal public sentiment of the epoch, but also served
as an instrument for shaping a peculiar ideological theory,
rather unusual for the ancient world. According to this
theory, neither noble birth, nor exalted position, nor wealth
can guarantee blessful existences in the other world (if one
believes in it). On the contrary, these external advantages
militate aga!nst it. The blessed, rather. are those who are
pure. kind. ingenuous and gentle, i.e. predominantly the
lower strata of Roman society. Historical studies of their
ideology show that such views were widely spread in the Imperial period and attest to the powerful impact of contemporary moral philosophy on their formation-however, nol
through abstract treatises with their logical subtleties. The
ethical theories of the Stoics and later Cynics, not
infrequently indistinguishable, were given currency by
itinerant philosophers who wandered from city to city, from
one province to another,-advocating various moral principles
and simultaneously working "miracles" by way of
demonstrating their rightness and favours they enjoyed with
the gods. These theories, vulgarised and reduced to the
int~l~ectual le,,:el of the massf'~, gradually degenerated into
r~I.lglo~s teachmgs and merged in the religious tide that was
rising 10 the Roman Empire .. The general transition of later
Stoicism from an ethical to a religious basis could not
but affect Hellenistic philosophy as a whole.
Clwp!rr .1
Scepticism
10. Early
Pyrrhoni~m
and "A('ademje" Scepticism
Scepticism as a trend of thought in Hellenistic Roman

philosophy denied the possibility of objecthe knowledge of
nature and social proce:-;:-;es. This general attitude manife-steU
itself in a demand to "suspend judgement"" (epoche) in theor
etical matters and to strive for serenity and peacI of mind
(ataraxia) in practical life. The school 201 its name from
Greek skeptikos or zititikos, and in philo~')rhy tlu we :l
"scepticism" gradually caliI!' to (\('nClte- thl O?po: t( of
dogmatism as uncritical acceptance and application of
principles.
.
Generally speaking, scepticism in the onglnal .sen~e of
the Greek term is characteristic of all
' m so 'ar
in qUI
- veals th~
i
involved in the process of cogni~ion. ~IDl11'els
puzzles and solves the my:-;teries of. bei.~g. An m .... es~lgl t~ I"
bound to be inquisiti .... e or "sceptical when he (om{'" up
against an insoluble problem within the framE'wo~k (l.r ~
system claiming absolute knowledgf:'. In otht'f wor.d~, ('\er)
philosophical theory is of necess.ity Iioubtful and crlhcal and
therefore includes scepticism as It:-; mOl~en\ He-g('l h.ad eVE'h'Y
( "thinkin<Y o,;ceptll'l"m and as~ert t at
reason to spea k O
PI'
_.'
t elf
"positive philosophy ha:-; the lH'glltlW to ~~{'ptJclsm I~ ~.5 .s
thus it does not oppose, 1I0r i:-; it oubld(' of It, for sceptlcl,.,m I:..
.
;1 "I
a ~~~e::e~~ical moml'lIt i:-; bound to be neg~t(>d, dialect.ically "sublated," a:-; it were, if phllo:-;ophy strl .... E's to attalD
d~" PlliluC')lIte. Band_ 11
, ,,:: ,
r('sl knowll"dge and i!' nut coull'lIl 10 hll!.:' .10\\ II III 101;11 S('P .
cism. i.e. H it is "positive" and doC's lIot turll Iht "IIIO'IH/I~:
into its. principle and conclu~ion a:-; was tilt' C<l!'(, \\~~h
Pyrrhonlsm.
(1) Pyrrho of Elis (c. 360-270 B.C.) i.s known to ha'
been. a mediocre painter who .went in ror philosophy ah:~
hearmg the lectures of Megarlsn Bryson and l)l'moCfitll!l'
follower A~axarc~us ..Traditio~ tE'lls us that h(> travelll'c! wi'th
Alexander s armies mto India where he was influenced
by the ascetic "Gymnosophists" (naked philosophers). According to Diogenes Laertius, "this led him to adopt a most
noble philosophy ... taking the form of agnosticism, and
suspension of judgement. He denied that anything was
honourable or dishonourable, just or unjust. And so, univer.
sally, he held that there is nothing really existent. but custom
and convention govern human action; for no single thing is in
itself any more this than that" (Diog. L. IX. 61). On the same
evidence, Pyrrho was entirely heedless of his surroundings
to the extent that he would not look where he was going and
it was only due to his friends' care that he did not get killed or
maimed in an accident. According to other sources, however,
heroic indifference to external circumstances preached by
Pyrrho in theory was not his standard in practical life.
Pyrrho appears to have written nothing and we owe our
knowledge of his views to Timon of Phlius, Pyrrho's pupil.
\ On his evidence, Pyrrho taught that a man wishing to be hap
" py should know the answers to three questions: first, how
things are constituted; second, what attitude we should adopt
to them; and third, how we can profit by such attitude.
Regarding the first question, he held that things are
inexpressible, indistinguishable, and unstable. Ollr sensations
of things are mutually contradictory and we cannot know the
true from the false ones. We know but the appearances of
things, and opinions are not to be trusted. The answer to the
second question ensues from the answer to the first one. A wise
ma.R should refrain from judgements. since all knowledge
claims are equally probable. As a result of such silence or
aphula he will be no longer frustrah>d over insoluble
probl.eDl8 and ~t~in the state of complete imperturbability or
happiness. ThiS IS the answer to the third qll(>~tion (Vog. III,
10878) .
Hence. the goal of life is ataraxia, serene contentnH'nt. and
the means is the suspension of any judgement and aphasia.
'fl',
pyrrho offers no positive ethical doctrine and limits himself

to the denial of all moral judgements as dogmatic.
Diogpnes I~aerti.lIs (,!X, 74) ascribes two famous sayings
to t~~ ,early S('~PtICS: .Not more [on~ thing than another],'
and Every saymg has Its correspondmg opposite." They are
clearly .t~aceable. to Democ.rituss principle of isonomy or equal
probability (eVidently via Metrodorus of Chios or Anaxarchus) and to Protagoras
who asserted, it will be recalled '
.
that every questIOn may be argued equally well on either
side. Yet in contrast with Democritus who drew delinite
conclusions from isonomy (e.g. about the infinite number of
atoms) and Protagoras who believed man to be the measure of
all things. the Sceptics rejected the possibility of any judgement whatsoever.
It is not known for ~lIre if Pyrrho and his direct followers specified the relationship between sensation and thinking
and. in particular, if they believed in the absolute authenticity of sen~atiom\. Most likely they did not. as Sextus Empiricus
~<lyS: "Pyrrho forces til\' thing~ we have already perceived
clearly to rl"verl into obscurity" (Ad\'. math. I. 305). On thE'
theoretical side, this attitude is tantamount to a complete denial of man's cognitive abilities. whereas on the practical side
it leads to the rejection of any moral standards. Quoting Posidonius, Diogenes Laertius tells us this story of Pyrrho:
"\Vhen his fellow-Ilassengers on board a ship WE're all unnerved by a storm. he kept calm and confident. pointing to a
little pig in the ship that went on eating. aDd telling them that
such was the unperturbed state in which the wise man should
keep himself" (Diog. L. IX, 68) . This
is
tradition as
to Pyrrho's view
is the
says
that Pyrrho once passed. br . .
Anaxa!c.hus who ft"11
into a slough without gl vl~g . ,~ny.help (1~,ld.).
.
If we carry Scepticism With Its IDdlf(erenc~ t~ a logical
conclusion and deny the possibility of any obJective. know~
d e we are bound also to throw overboard Socratic et~lc
:n~ ~re to choose between the "I.Iatu~al" behaviour r~d~~mg
maD to an animal, I and the behaViour ID accordance With law
and custom."
I F I
tely a man in his right mind cannot be a consistenl sceptic:
un the o~v~~:nc' 'of the SlIme Diogenes Laprtius "one' he (PyrJ'ho) got
SourCl~. it
may be reca~le~L attt':4 ttl hoth jltl:-;:-;ihilili,,:! T

real thrllst of the S('(>ptl(,~ argullll'llls. hOWl'wr , .~t 1'11\'0< hiI
have been in favour of the latter alternative, and this (')' 1(1
reveals the conformist nature of their doctrine and C\:id~a~lY
accou~ts ior its relative unpopularity ov('r til(' next ~wy
C',
cpn'llfles.
(2) Academic Scepticism. The Academy repreSent.s a difte _

ent trend of sceptical thought. Arcesilaus (c. 315-c. 240 B.C.)
its first representative, developed his doctrine in the polelni~
against the StOiC,S. Seeking t? ref,ute t~leir aq~\Iments, he
resorted to Socralic and Megarlan dIalectiC cornbming it wilh
Platonism. It is not accidental that Diogenes Laertius speaks
of him as Platonic at the front, pyrrhonean from behind and
Diodorean in the middle (VI, 33).
Arcesilaus's views marked a turning point in the history
of the Academy, since his retrogression to the "dialectic" of
Socrates and the Megarians was tantamount to the absolutisa
tion of the criticial fervour of Plato's dialogues and the denial,
of the positive content of Platonism. However, Arcesilaus was
not an orthodox Pyrrhonist, because he did not regard atara- )
xia as the goal and suspension of judgement as the instrument
On the contrary. "he ... says that the end is suspension--which
is accompanied. as we have said, by 'lJuietude.' He declares.
too, that suspension regarding particular objects is good, but
assent regarding particulars bad" (Sext. Pyrrh. 1,232-233).
In other words, in Arcesilaus's opinion, suspension of judge
ment, though accompanied by imperturbability, is important
in itself.
As we see, "academic" Scepticism is primarily epistemol?gical and its extension to ethics is secondary. It was born In
lhe polemic against Stoicism.. particularly its doctrine of
kataleptic representations and "assent" as the criterion of
truth. The Stoics, we recall, taught that there arc lhrC'E' sources of knowledge: science. opinion, and the mediating appn"
hension. Science is the infallible apprehension by reaSon.
opinion is false assent, and apprehension results from true
presen.tation, i.e. kataleptic phantasia. Science is only
acceSSible to the wise, opinion is the lot of the fools, and
ap,Prehens.ion is common to both. Directing his attacks agai~st
thiS doctrine, Arcesilaus pointed out that the apprehenSion
enraged in his sister'. cause ... and he told the man who blamed bim tha.~
It was not over a weak woman lhal one ~holiid di~play inrlinrrl'nrl'
(ibid., IX. 66)
to wi~p W'II :")d fools 1:301l0t produce botb SClencl'!

and opinion, and contl'lItil'd that there i~ no criterion for
distingui:-;hing lH'twt'en vaglLe and clear fir kawleptic presen
tations and th{'refore between falsehood and truth. Hence. the
wise man should abstain from judgement. As regards the wise
man's behaviour, he should be guided, aCCl)rding to
Arcesilaus. not by the Stoic dual criterion of "acceptability'
and moral justifiability, hut only by the principle of "reasonableness" (to eulogon). Those who abide by this principle
are prosperous, therefore
reasonable behaviour is hoth
acceptable and morally justifiable.
According to Arcesilaus, an act is "reasonable" if it is
based on understanding or sound judgement (phronesis)
which, in turn, is expressed in the achievement of the desired
end. This is an important statement since Arcesilaus oversteps
here the bounds of a purely logical concept of understanding
and turns to an outside cr~tetiQn.of truth; He finds it in the
success of practical activity.
Carneades of Cyrene (c. 214-c. 129 B.C.) who represented the Third or New Academy is said to have sbown remarkable zeal for philosophy. Tradition bolds that his absorption in
theoretical studies was so great that he had no time to cut
his fingernails or hair. In theory he professed .contempt ?f
death and used to say: "Nature which framed thiS whole Will
also destroy it" (Diog. L. IV, 64). Yet.in pract~ce his attitud.e
appears to have been different. According to DI~gene~ Laertlus "when he learnt that Antipater (Carneades s StOIC oppone'nt} committed suicide by drinking a potion, he was greatly
moved by the constancy with which he met the end, and e.xclaimed 'Give it then to me also.' And when those about hl.m
asked 'What?' 'A honeyed draught,' said he" .(i~id.). ThiS.
however, may have been nothing but a sardollic loke of the
convinced sceptic...
. I
.
. .iOn to
In 155 B.C. Carneades went Oil a ?IP omatlc mlss.
Rome with two other philosophers. DiOgel~e: the Sto~c al~d
Critolaus PeripatetiC, and delivered a brllhant oratiOn In
defence of justice, thereby winning a hdearJY ar~~;::i~: c;l~~
M .
champion of old Roman stan ar s o . ..
al~~aay however he delivered another oratory against .ll~s
nex,
' .
d cng its concept to mere uti Ity
COlIllll(l1l
~i~~, d~~~~:t:a~~~~at~~;~~~~C~U~CYdOf all ~o~n~~~~ b:~~efG!~~
d single-hearted Homan eman e

.
..
. h
en~age h
b
xpelled from Home as their trifling Wit
phllosop ers e e
I"
. truth constituu:d gra~e dan~~r to the Roman youth a

{he Hepublic In generaT.
nd 141
Like Arcesilaus, Carnead>s criticised the Stoic d
.
of kataicptic phantasia, co ntending that every percepo,.ctrLn!'
.
h
It may appear. can be COUnt
IOn Ot
presentation.
owever true
with its opposite, no less clear and persuasive. In hi s opi ~red
we are deceived both by our senses, s ince we mistake mon,
.
' ones as .III a d ream or hallucinarnOn_
eXistent
t ,.
lings f
or rea
and by our reason which geLs lost in va rious aporias. U;~n,
extensively the doctrines of the Sophists and the Megaria~g
and advancing numerous argumer:-~_~ainst thIU.LoS s ibilit.y 01
~rue knQw:l.fdh~e :. _C~ r~~ade_s defendS nls non -committa
attitude. On t e eviOence of Dioge nes Laertiu s, he "studied
carefully the writings of the Stoics and parti cularly those of
Chrysippus, and by combating these successfully he became
so famous that he would often say: Without Chl'ysippus
where should I have been? " (Diog. L. IV, 62).
It should be noted that Carneades's scepticism is somewhat
mitigated as compared with that of the Pyrrhonis ts and even
Arcesilaus. Defending academic Scepticism against the
attacks of the Stoics who accused the Aca~edY or~~aralysing
)\ men 's practical and moral action ,Carneades rewa demarca' tion between Judgements perlaming to practical matters and
those dogmatically asserting " the absolute truth." The
demand to refrain from judgement should apply, according
to Carneades, only to this latter kind. and a wise man need
not w.ithhold his views in everyday life provided they appear
plausible to him.
This probabilistic approach is in fact a further elaboration of Arcesilaus's doctrine of "reasonableness" since Greek
eylogon ah;o denotes a reasonable probability. Carn~a.des
complements this doctrine by bringiQg in thlL. C_lllj)l.!}~l
.c rit~ri9n for distinguishing between probaDl~__ and fa.lse
presentations. tre- aenies- the eXIstence' 6rkataleptic, I.e.
apprehending, presentations recognised by the Stoics ao.d
I eontends, following the Cyrenaics, that all our knowledge. 15
'" rcstrietcd to sensations and that we do not know what lies
.hehinrl them. Yet some presentations may be probable. others
Lluprohahh; .'An d respecting the probable impf('~~inu~ I~ll'~
[Ltw Academlcsj make db;;tinctions: some the\' regard a~ Just
~imply probable, others as probable and tested . others (I~
probablf', tested and irreversible" (Sext. Pyrrh. I, 227).
Thll~ a man in a darkened room can mistake a rope [or il
~nakfo; having checked his pre~entation (impre:-sion) hy rdilt
109 it to otht'r prr!'('ntation!'. i.e. ha"ing satisfied himself that

the object dot'S not move, makes no noise, etc .. he obtains
a probahl(> and t(>:-;t(>d pre~ll'ntation. It will b(>come probable,
tested and 'irreVl'r!'ihll.''' only after the man makes sure that
he is in his right mind, not s\(>eping or hallucinating. not
deceived by an optical illu!-\ion, etc. InJ!acticallife_w~.prefer (
the highest passihlf' df'grl'l' of probability, yet it mus~ never be
forgotten that we deal with prohabilities only, but not with I:
objective truth.
Here lies the main difference between the Pyrrhonists and
the academic Sceptics: whereas the former recommend
compliance with customs and tr~dition s, the latter insi~t.on
the 0
il it of tiH' highest atta~l)able de ree as the
.g
nnciple of mans uThaviour.= Sig~li Ic~nt y, t e Aca~em.'cs
understood prohability (pithanotes) III purely quahtatlve
terms as exprf'!'sing the degree of our subjective confidence ~
of the autlll'nticity of the know ll.'(igt' WI.' po,,;<tssed. The objl'c- \
lin' basis for lh(' doctri nt' or probahh' knowledge could O!ili:..b.e
provided by the qU3nti{ati,e e~pr~ssion of probability, and , ,
that was n..Qt ..Y~t knQwn to antICHllty.,
By introducing the (leg-rel's of probabilit.y, .,Carnead~s
smoothed down the contrast between t.he ~tOIC k.atal,~pllc
presentation" and the Sceptic "irreversible ImpreSSI?n. yet
he could not bri~gt' the gulf between ~hu.henOTpenahst tr~nd
of the Sceplic~ and the objectivism orthe Sto~cs: the. [a~ter
seek for truth, wh('feas the former ~~e .content With C?nVlctlO~.
Carneades also levelled hi s cntlCla\ shafts. against Stodc
theolo g y. He seems to have recognise? the ex,stenc~.of go s
within the framework of hi s co nceptIOn of hpr~~abl.htydi~!
~,oncedin~ ,~haCr ~~~~n~~ ~~I~rsa~p~~~e~~~Sthe eSt~~::s~~ereby
u~~~~;~~~ng i~ fac.t ~,ileh~)~~n~h~i~~ \~~I~v~~:il~~~:~iOtl~a~eG~~:

~~ttl~;~Ut~ ;~~~Sblt;:h tl~ir th~sis by fOl~rn~i~dd~s~:;~~'d;':' ~r~:
iy , from the universal agreel~ee~J'o~~;'se; thirdly, from tite abthe orderly arrangen~~nt\~: ~enial of the existence of deity.:
s urd consequences
dermining the opposing arguments
fourthly and last~,) b~~::e of these arguments seems convincI d d there are atheists and there are
(Adv. math. IX,
iog to Carneades. n .l.'e 'about Besides we cannot prove
. in a thing
,
. tence.
tribes we k n ow .not hf109 a belief
to its e:os
anything by arguing. rr:;l to the reason and divinity of the
. ooe cannot 10
\ galll,
11
c(}~mos from the recognition of its ordt'r1y arrangernen

ft'gards the regularity of processes adduct'd as a prooF of t. ~s
divine nature, why don"t we qualify, for instaner, rnalar~~elr

divine for its recurrent fits? The last two arguments ceh hS
(Iominant motif of the sceptical doctrine: both the denialo t ~
tht' assertion of the existence of god are equally senseless and
the agruments for the existence of god arc just as con"fo' and
.
.
a bl e as t I1e arguments agamst
It.
un .
The Carneadean criticism of Stoic theology and religious

beliefs in general is based on a logical analysis of arguments
for the existence of god (gods). Here is one example: "If
however, God exists, he is an animal. If he is an animal h~
has sensation, for the animal differs from the not-ani~al
by nothing else than by sensation. But if he has sensation, he
hears and sees and smells and touches. And if so, there are
certain things in connection with each sense which are congenial or repellent to him ... But if so there 8,'e certain
things vexatious to God; and if there are certain thing~ vexatious to God, God is subject to change for the worse, and thus
al~o to decay. Therefore God is perishable. But this is contrary to the general conception of him. Therefore the Divine
does not exist" (Sext. Adv. math. IX, 142-143). Proceeding in
a similar manner. Carneades reveals contradictions in the
Stoic teaching of the corporeality of god, god's blissful
life. etc.
Carneades also rejects the Stoic (and all other) notions
of oracle, prophetic dreams and miracles on the ground that
all of them can be explained by natural causes, coincidence,
etc.
In sociology and ethics, Carneades shared the view that

all laws and norms come about by convention as the notions of
justice and injustice, good and evil are formed by people in
accordance with their interests. On the evidence of Christian
writer Lactantius, Carneades held that men had established
the law for their own benefit which is proved by difference
in the existing customs and by the fact that laws are liable
to change with time. He also said that all conquerors including
the Romans themselves who had seized power over the whole
world w?uld have ~o ret~rn to shacks and live in poverty if
they decIded to be Just, I.e. to part with what did not belong
10 them (Vog. Ill, 1126).
It appears impossible to reconstruct Carneades's own ethi'al teaching, yet he is known to have recognised free will as
an indeppndl'nt factor !II the chain of {' u al relation!' and

critici!'f'd Stoir fatali!mt.
Carneades like Arcesilaus. left no written works and
all we know about him comes from the pen of his pupil
Clitomachus (Hasdrubal) of Carthage (c. 175-c. ltO B.C.).
He expounded his predecessor's views in great detail and
wrote more than -'tOO books of which we possess only minor
isolated fragment!'! incorporated in doxographers' writings.
I t. Later Pyrrholli"m
According to Diogenes Laertius, the Sceptical school

fell into decay after the death of Pyrrho's stud~nt Timon a?d
regained its fame in the. first century B.~ .. I~ Alexandria,
attracting numerous pupils from ~II t~e cl\'l~lsed countrl~s
of the Mediterranean area. Its revival IS credited to Aenesldemus of Cnossus, the compiler of eight books of P.tlrrhon~an
Discourses that came down to us. in .the. rendition or ~~otlU:
the patriarch. Other evidences for lllS news a!e the ~\ rltln~.
of Diogenes Laertius who expounded Aenesldemus s ar~~
ments in a special book on the Sceptics. and of Sextus Empmcus. His life is practically unknown ~o us.
.
h'
Aenesidernus owes his place in phlloso~hy roalOly .to IS
ten "tropes" or modes of sceptical reasonlDg. Accordmg Ito
E ..
"they are these: the first, based on tIe
Sex.~~s i~n~~~~~f;. the second, on the differences in human
~:~~g:; the third, ~n t~e d!fferen\:~~~:lt~~~d~:i~~:; ~~~a~~t~~
sense; t.h~ fourth, o~ t e clrcu:~ locations; the sixth, on

on pOSitIOns and IIItervals th
lantities and formations
intermixtures;. the s~ven~h'l on i :t~\on the fact of relativity;
of the underlYlllg objects, tIe e g
'rity of occurrence; the
the ninth. on the frequency or ra \d law,", Ihe legendary
tenth on the disciplines and cyS.lom~, al'S,xt P~rrh. L 36-:n).
,
d
t' onnetlOlle;;
"beliefs and Lhe ogm~ .IC C
ther enumeration of the
This brief exposltlo~
ra d'to suspend judgement
"tropes." each ill uslra tlllg i: f~r:~e:r disc ussed in more detai.l.
about claims to knowledge:
I'
differentlv: "e;;eawater IS
.
b'
perceive I lings
.
fi h d . ,
Thus, livlllg elllgs '.
. lion roJ' men. but s. r1ll"
a disagreeable and pOlson~)tI~ ~~lIowing in the IIlO"t stlnklllg
<lnd enjoy it. Pigs .. too, enJo~n~ clean water" (ibid .. 55-56);
roire rather than Ill. cI~ar a a 1... 0 different as attested to by th~
men's senses and not\On~ ~re - nd judg<'ments about the 5amt
difference of their pe.rc.ep.li,OI~~;erent presentations of the sam<'
things; different senses g l \ e \ :\
0\
objects, e.g. honey appears pleasant to tastp but unplea

to the eye; a picture is smooth to touch, but not to the sa.11
men's perceptions change with their state and df'Pf'ndC)l,
whether a man is as~eep or awake. hu.ngry or satis~ed, dru~k
or sober, etc.: agalR, the same objects ~ecm different
dtlTerent distances, etc. The tenth trope, directly related ~t
social and ethical problems emphasises the subjectl\.()
character of man's judgements: "since by means of this :Mod:
also so much divergency is shown to exist in objects, we shall
not be able to state what character belongs to the object in
respect of its real essence, but only what belongs to it in
respect of this particular rule of conduct, or law, or habit, and
sO on with each of the rest" (ibid., I, 163).
As is evidenced from the above, all Aenesidemus's argumenL"l against claims to o.bjecLiye t~uth _i,n,vpkt: ~h~iclativjty
of human knowledge. His scepticism is therefore essentially
relativistic.
Besides the sceptical argumentation, the Pyrrhonean
Discourses deals with a number of other problems. For
instance, the first book shows thC' difference between the
academic Sceptics and the Pyrrhoni~ts by comparing their
criteria of probability and conventionality, the second reveals
internal contradictions in the notions of movement and
change, genesis and destruction. the third sets forth the
aporias of thinking and sense perceptions, as well as the
doctrines of signs and inferences. The fourth book challenges
claims to the knowledge of nature and god~, the fifth presents
a logical analysis of the conception of causality, and the last
thre(' investigate the contradictions of basic logical concepts,
The arguments of Aenesidemus as expounded by Sextus
Empiricus reveal a certain affinity of his views with those of
Heraclitus. Sextus, for one, traces common points in their
conceptions of soul and the criterion of truth understood as
grneral consent, in the treatment of the part-whole problem,
etc. Yet the irregularity of the author's references to
Aenesidemus's views and the identity of their argument.s
makes it impossible to deflne clearly the bounds of consensus
between Heraclitus and Aenesidemlls. In all likelihood, the
latt('r .makes but occasIOnal .Q9!rowings frQ01 l:teraclitean
reasolllllg to substantiate his own stand.
Take, for inslance, the relationship between the part and
thfl "',hole. ~n the eviden?e o~ Sextus Empiricus, "Aenesidemus. accordmg to Heraclitus, says that the part is both other
than the whole and the Mme; (or substance is both whole and
part, whole i~ th~, Universe, but part in the nature of th.is
particular allimal (Sext. Ad\,. math, IX, 337). Yet m
contrast with Heraclitus who focused his attention on the
dialectical contradiction and then reasoned upward to Logos
as the law of all being, Aenesidemus draws from this statement an entirely different conclusion in [ull accord with
Sceptical tradition as is seen from the next few lines obviously
reproducing his own words: "And if so, we must declare that
no whole exists. From which it follows that no part, either,
exists. For each of these is a relative, an~ when ?ne of a pair.o.~
r('\atiws is abolislw(\, th(' othrr also IS abohshrd wllh It
(Sex1. Ad\'. math. IX. 357.)
.
.
.
Sceptic Agrippa known only (rom a mentIOn In DlOgenes
Laertius (Sextus Empiricus speaks impersonally of the "~a
test Sceptics"') introduced ftve more tropes (modes) cast~ng
doubt on the possibility of knowledg~ and ':resu.ltmg
respectively froRl disagrrement, e.xtenslOn "ad .lIlfinltum,
relativity, hypothesis and reciprocallllference (DlOg. L. IX,
88). Th(' first trope rrfers to dissent am.oog philosophers,
the second invokl's inflOite r('gress of ~remlses and proofs (to
prove a conclusion we nt'ed prf'mISeS, the~e ~hemselves
require proofs, and so on ad inflllitum). The third IS b~sed ~n
the assertion that every object can only ~e per~el\('d I~
conjunction with others and is therefore tncogn.lsable b:y
'ts If tbe trope "from hypothesis" is directed agalllst those
~heO 'wish to avoid inftnite regress an? "take the most
elementary of things as of themselves ent1ltled ~oll creddepntceth~
.
.
I
b
e some one e se WI a 0
willch IS use eS5,. }C~U~
IX 89) The last trope "from
contrary hypotheSIS" (Ibld.-,
'ar uill in a circle as 'lIhen,
reciprocal inferen~e pertalll~ tOexi:tenc~ of channels in the
for instance, one IIlfers ~f~u~lIces allegedly coming from
sense organ.s from Ithe
the effluences are argued from
external objects, w \ereas
the existence of channel.s I hows that Agrippa's troprs
Even this ~horL. reci ta s nal sed by Aenesidemus. The
partially COi~lcl~e wltl~ those a ch~racter, since the last ftve
distinction hes In theIr
.
deal not so
The
are
'
dE'mollstrated.
connected with
last staj;!;e of anciE'lIt Scepticism is
315
the activities of Menodotus, Sextus Empiricll~ and Saturnin

all medical doctors, who attempted to combin(> theoreti~si
Scepticism with the methodology of an~ient empiriC:l
medicine. It may be recalled that the la,tter ~ rh(\ractt>riSlic
feature was to avoid abstract SIH>Ctdatlon~ I't'garding Lhe
cause of disea;;s and to concentrate on ~heir actual. manifesta_
tions. As distinct from the early perIOd of anCient Greek
medicine when it had to resist the encroachments of natural
philosophy, the conflicting tend~nc.ies in the la~er period were
represented by two schools WlthlU the medical profession
itself: the "empiricists" and the "logicians." According to
Galen. a famous Greek physician and philosopher, the empirical school started from Philonos of Cos (second century B.C.)
and Sera pion of Alexandria who were followed by Menodotus
and Sextus Empiricus. Available to us are only two works of
Sextus Empiricus which have already been mentioned: one
Against the Logicians (Adversus Mathemattcos) , consisting
of t 1 books, and the other Outlines 0/ Pyrrhonism (Pyrrhoniarum Hypotyposes) , consisting of 3 books.
Both these works present a detailed exposition of the
doctrines of earlier philosophical schools and subject them
to scrupulous analysis and criticism from the Sc~ptical
position. The arguments of Sextus may not have been his own,
in fact there is good reason to think that he merely summarised and systematised the practice of his predecessors .. He
always speaks on behalf of the Sceptics and often gives
interesting descriptions of the empirical views in contemporary science contrasting them with the doctrines of the
"dogmatists." Characterising the general method of
empiricism in book VIII of the Against the Logicians, Sextus
writes: "while there is no rule of the art concerned with other
cases, of the art which deals with things apparent there is a
special rule; for [this art) aHects the framing of its rules by
means of things frequently observed or investigated; and the
things frequently observed and investigated are peculiar to
those who have made the most frequent observations, and
are not the common property of all" (Sext. Adv. math.
VIII , 291),
Viewing the empirical method with obvious sympathy,
Sextus nevertheless stresses that it does not give us the
knowledge of the real nature of things, but only of their
appearance: "although 1 shall be able to say what the nature
of each of the underlYing objects appears to me to be, J shaH
II.
.ll d for the rCil~on!! stated above. to su::>pend jlldg~

be cOlllpt ~t'
al naturf'" (Sext. Pyrrh. I, 78). The Sceptic
"
men t as to I . s re henomena nor with hoI d 5 h'IS opmlOn
a bou t
neithct;, d~~,e8. p then. to 'appearances we live in accordance
them: A ertn1g;ules of life' undogmatically, seeing that we
with the nor~a holly inactive. And it would seem that this
cannot .re::t~if~ is fourfold, and that one part of it lies i~ the
another in the constraint of the paSSIOns,
regulatlo N t
guidance. of a ur~'-ron of laws and customs, another in the
another tn the tra I tl" ('bid 1 23) And further: "Nature's
ins.tructio~ of thebar ~hiC~ w~' a;e nat.urally c~pable of sensa
gUidance IS that. Yconstraint of the passions IS that ,,:,~ereby
lion and t~ought,
f d and thirst to drink; traditIOn of
hunger dflves us to o~ whereby we regard piety in the
customs an~ laws. t~\ t impiety as evil; instruction of the
conduct of hfe as goo, u .
rve in such arts as we adopt.
arts, that whereby we are not mac.~ ndogmatically" (ibid ..
But we make all these statemen u
p. 17).
.
P ho's advice to adhere to appe
Hence Sextus reiterates yrr
-Lth sense perceptIOns,
,
I'
'n accordance WI
d' ,
arances, i.e. to IVe I .
ntr .'s laws and tra ltions
physical needs and o.ne s c~u 'e~.er he insists on the need
without further dogmatic ado ov.:piric~l knowledge. thereby
to rely on common seI"l:se an d e~ of our knowledge based
underscoring the pracltcal. certallD?r to the probabilism of
.
nd drawmg c os
)
h' a10:ch001s
on expeflence a
.
Carnead~~.
t,h!ire~e~g~r~e!'.a~t~p:h~':~h:~O:P:r~\ll~fn~';;-'~O~1
;.t~h~e
Scepticism W as one of the
h that
arose on _
of the Hellenistic epoc
nse of judgement in th~~ry
~~d:~:e~~~~:~;~o~~~t~~i;':":!p~f;~~~e~~:~eth~
~~:!~~}~~i
and reasonableness pr.
. Hellenistic states on I G k
III
' 1 onditlo ns lD
. 1 period 0
ree
influence of SOCia c
t
In the class lca
d'ngly
.
.
Gre ek charac cr.
d act accor I
harmoniOUS G k's ideal was to knoW an lairoed the motto
history, the re~
the Epicurean proc
d
uiesce:'
In the Hell enistlc a~~nd t
ic " 0 knowi~~ conclusion.
"to know a~d ev~de'in this tren to a 10!itS his ignorance
Th? SceptiC,. b~l;ogobfective knowledgeh~dcan by suspend.jng
waives all claim.
. d to live as best as
ense or practical
and makes up lll~~~~ing to cu:;toro. common s
judgement and a
1 however, could meel
experience.
hilosophi cal school~' Roman Empire. Th('
None of these P . I demands 0 tie
, I and ideologic a
the SOCia
hegen~oni.Slic aJllbi~ions I\I,HI sInh' IIl1i\'t'r:-lllli~1U flf thi:i
orgalllsallOJl comhlll('d with a highly dt'wIOpt'd

: ~"Itl~al
, d' 'd I"
' I
pnll, 'pl,. ,
In In
ua Ity In socia and cultural Sllht'fl'S ('all, ,
"
, Id -View
' synt I
'
I t t IIr
\\or
. ''\ lIt'w
.l('SI~ alH a IlI'W ('tHu'pption of ,II I' rl' ,allon-hkll
b('tween
,
Athe ulllversal and tht' individll"ll
t,O
\ \ ( ',"( " I ' S Ip
actIOn.
n attempt at such a broad "'-'n,I,' ,", I ... aurl
'l
h' I'
',1
IS'!'; )as('d
a p h 1 o~op lea IIlJeJ..1!retation of myth wn~ und' I' k '. On
Hellenistic philosophy.
r ,\
I'll III
lute
Chllp/t'r 4
Decline 01 Ancient Philosophy

12. from I'hilo!lophkal
F:tI{'dit'i~tn
to Phil(ll!oOphi .. o.R('Ii~iou~
S)rl('r('ti~nl
Th(' last et'ntury of the pn,-Christian era was notable in

philosophy for the ('m{rg('nc.~ of ('clecticism l by which is understood the practice of selecting solutions from different
philosophical systems believed to be the "best" or, preferably,
common to connicting theories, Lacking a single principle,
eclecticism is essrntially incoherent, as different svstems
based on diller'nt premises cannol be mechanically integrated
into a single whole. Pure eclecticism, or eclecticism "as such"
is therefore impossible; eHry concrete eclectic system centres
around some pivotal doctrine which serves for the phito~opher
as a criterion for his "selection."
Eclecticism is an ob"ious sign of decline in philosophical
thought. It usually comes on the scene when the leading
schools and trends have exhausted their possibilities. bogged
down in insoluble contradictions and lost their grip on m'n'!<,
minds. The first century B.C. was just such a pe-riod of phil
osophical twilight. I t bore a certain resemblance to th' cri~is
in early Greek philosophy when numerous "phY5ical" systems
had entered into a c.onflict ",ith one another and comph'tt>ly
discredited themselves. P,hilosophy in that period had openl'd
up new vistas and turned to man, to the problems of ~thics ~nd
principles of knowledge. The epoch under consideratIOn,
however offered no such possibilities-the only way out
proved to be SCl'pticism. Yet its n~gati\'e ~,ns\\:er to :hf'
problem of knowledge cOl~ld not .satlsfy the. pilliosoplllcai
hunger" that arises each tllne SOCIety embarks on a road of
reat changes-- and those were the tim.e~ of the col~ap~e of
g
Id
hll' an institution!'; and tram"tlOJl to the prlnclpate
age-o repu
("
.
' of t h
e'
A temporary
l'stahlislulleut
e Dmplre.
b tIll'
d
rsolution
II
ooweY
I " lll
was found in ('c pctlels ,
_ _-,-_--:-, ('
Frmll til' ,n"
.k
"/('f!!)
'
J11t'~nill~ 'to ,,,llOC
'"
The eclectic theories that arose in that p('riod Were ba

on various sy~tems ~r ('.Iassieal .a~d H('llp~~btic ph!lo~OPh;ed
Platonism. Aflstotehantsm, StoIcism and acad(>JlIlc Scept'
ism." They could find no sustcnance only in the COIlSist:\
n
materialism of the Epicureans and in the hopcll'sS sCepticis
of the Pyrrhonists. Particularly important was the pa~
played by Platonic and Pythag.orean irl.cas whi~h greatly
contributed to the final degeneratIon of philosophy Into philosophico-religious syncretism.
Varying degrees of eclecticism were already in evidence
in the teachings of the Middle Sloa. For instance, Boethus
I
I
of Sidon (middle of the second century B.C.) combined

Stoicism with Aristotelianism, separating god from the world
and lodging him, in the Aristotelian manner, in the region of
fixed stars. Panaetius and Poseidonius, whose teachings, as we
have seen, exhibited strong Platonic and Aristotelian inDuen- )
ces are also traditionally ranked among the eclectics. The
emergence of eclectic systems within the Stoic tradition may
have been the result of the criticism levelled by the Academy,
particularly Carneades, against the Stoics. Yet the later Academics themselves began to revise their sceptical views
looking back to Plato for positive doctrines.
The return of the Academy to the Platonic tradition which
looked like the revival of its founder's views was accompanied
by gradual departure from the scepticism of the second and
third Academies. According to Sextus Empiricus, the head of
the "Fourth Academy" Philo of Larissa (c. 150-c. 79 B.C.)
accentuated in his teaching the positive elements in the doctrine of the early academic Sceptics: "Philo asserts that
objects are inapprf:'hensible so far as concerns the Stoic criterion, that is to --a.\ -apprehensive impression,' but are apprehensible so far as concerns the real nature of the objects
themselves" (Sex!. Pyrrh. I, 235). This is already a much
"stronger" thesis than Carneades's principle of probability:
Philo unequivocally states that the absolute denial of the
possibility of knowing things runs counter to the obvious fact
of the existence of true knowledge. The same idea has been
advocated, even with greater persistence, by Antiochus of
Ascalon (died about 68 B.C.) who succeeded Philo as head
of the Academy.
In contrast with the Sceptics, Antiochus held that prob~
bility is inconceivable without truth, as its very notion logl~
cally implies a reference which is nothing but authenticity.
(>xi!-ltt'I1cl' of truth is Hw nec:e!'sary condition of proba

b':~ty not to !oIppak of eertainty, According to Antiochus. in
I,'ctice Scppti('islII is refilled by the fact that succ.ess in .Iife
prad
mplianct> with ttll' ,Iidatl-s of fl'aSOIl art' Irnpo~'ilhlt,
an co
\,.
,. 1 .
. h t auth(-'ntic: knowi+'llgl'. J t 1 w samt' tmlf' liS (oetrllH'
Wit
ou
-.
"s'. 0
f erception
is not fr('c from t 1Ie traces 0 f S
,ceptlclsm:
p J.ust as light shows both itself and all lhin~s within
t len,
.
. h
.
f
. 1
t 0 also presentation, which IS t e pnmary actor m lie
I , ~ilion of the living creature, must, like Jight. both reveal
~~glf and be indicative of the evident object which prod~cf'd
:t~e But since it docs not ~Iways indicate the tru~. O~)JCCl,
but often deceives. and, Itke bad mes.sengers, ffilsrcports
those who dispatched it, it has neces~arl~y resulted that w.e
nnot admit every presentation as a criterIOn of truth, but -If
~~ - only that which is true" (Sext. ~dv. math, ~11..163),
TtJs reasoning lands us in a logic.a! circle: the cntenon of
t uth appears to be true presentatIOn".
r The Stoic elements of Antiochus's teaching ,are represen~e.d
by the conception of the active (fire and air) :"dd ~aS~I\.~
(water and earth) principles and by the ort 0 o~r 01 f
TI
0,
doctrine of the WOrld, R,e,ason :~~~~~:t:i~fu~~i~~~~ ~~r~fy

matter as the potentia I Y an "
rooted in the .A~istoteliar trtd':~~~icism is pseudo---AristoteliA characteristic exam p eo ec
t . B C) ba~ed 0"
.
0
J Wo Ld (first cen ury
..
an treatise
n t ~e
r p.
MOYf:'r which is detached
Aristotle's conception of t,he r1~I: efficient and fmal causes
from the world and conslItut:Sth I treatise also subscrih(':; to
e , ' ,nlerprctatioll of tht'
of the cosmos, The author 0
.
n rng a , pecu,IlarStoic conception of the
Stoic pantheism re ec I
.
1larm.on Y of OppOSites,
lE'
.'
Heraclltean
God and
the PlatoOlc
Idca 0 f t 11e
identity of necessity, [at~ and d "the beginning. the end and
Demiurge holding in hl.s han
the middle" of everythlllg.,. . t d'tion also rates famou~
Under the heading of eelec~lcs h~tos~pher Marcus Tullius
Roman orator, statesman an ttc most prominent represent
Cicero (106-43 B.C.) who was
d whose major work~ hav('
ative of this trend of thoug~~ a;hief contribution to philo~o
come down to us COl.llpl?tean~ls transmission of Gref:'k tho~lg~l
h Y was the popularls~tlOn knowledge of IHlIlll'rOll!' phlio~'
P R ome. We owe to hun
I,"h arC' r('pl'odu(,t'd
to
. our
t GreC'CC' w '
.
hical ideas of ancIen
e Nature of Gods (De j\ alllra
~~d dicussed ill hi:-:; W~~k}~~{h Tusculan Talks (Tusculallu.e
Deorum), On Fate (
21
:! I
'
Disputaliones).
Discollnw (:1f'ld,-mica) 811tl HallY
.
Academic
?t I1('rs..C:Irero ~ alln wa~ to {'xlrHct [nun Itwlll t Ii' 'bC~I,"
1.(', th",
truth. He shows d~r("rl'H(,t: ('Wil to thllsr 11'.ldling.
h(, does not approve '.g. EPH'UfN\l\lsm) 'Ullt ill his 'l'ntlitio I
prcs('r\'('s both their idt'lls and arguII\rub. lIowt'vt'f. t"POIlIUI
ing the "i('w5 of Gr('('k lhink('rs. Cirt'ro tIm's not (,Ollt.tll'
hims('.1f to their repr~du('tion in Latin in fart Ill' intt'rprcts
them 111 accordance with the world outlook of n Homan riti7:cn.
Thus he gives !:1operial prominen('~ to the Stoic COIH't'ption of
"
the "proper" which is by no mean~ crurial for Stoic philo:;ophy-and turns it into "duty" (officium) ronl.~il\g his attention
on the duties and norms of behaviour of a "worthy cilizl'Il,"
Cicero regarded philosophical studies as "the food of Ihe
young, the diversion of the old, an adornment to success,
a refuge for consolationin adversity," In his opinion, philoso
phy achieves these ends by different methods and it is
important that we know the ways proposed by different
thinkers and schools, For instance, consolation can be
achieved by showing that evil does not exist. as claimed by
Cleanthes, or that it is not considerable as contended by the
peripatetics; the Epicureans propose to turD attention to the
good and disregard evil, the Cyrenaics teach to take pain as
a matter of course, whereas Chrysippus believes that grief can
be relieved by persuading its victims that indulgence in it
does not accord with man's dignity and fulfilment of his
proper duties. Still others seek to combine variou~ methods
since different people respond to different therapies--and so,
Cicero concludes. he also offers a single consolation joining
together all methods (Cic. Tusc. Ill, 31),
Similar attitude is adopted by Cicero towards other philosophical problems, as he believes together with the peripatetics and academics that "all things should be viewed from
opposite sides" (ibid., 11,3). Naturally, with this approach
he could not but fall in with the probability principle of the
academic Sceptics combining it, however, with the Stoic
conceptions of nature and with rather dogmatic ethical
principles-traceable, again, to the innuence of Stoicism. In
Cicero's eyes nature is a great harmonious whole purposefully
arranged and pervaded with reason. He subscribes to Plato's
doc-trine of immortal soul on the grounds that a self-moving
cause cannot cease to exist: "Since the soul is always active
and has no source of motion bpcause it is itsl'Ir sl'lf-tnoving.
its motion will have no (,Ild" (Cic. D(' Sl'IH-'(,t. XXI, 78), To
<l,lIJ1porl Ihis "IPW, hI! 1t~I~hH'cS PI~to'

~l{u.mf'I~t.'4 . .
Ci('Ppl i: w"lIl1wan' t lilt Ihl' ~tOlC: motifs In hi!! philo. uphy,
_.. wplI as till' hllrrowillf,(s frllm I'latfJllif~, Aristotl'iian and
alilwr clodrilH's dn Hot {'(lIlsurl with thf" views of ttw :"i'w
'Acadl'OlY whic'h <11'1'1'111('11 to him till' IIIOSI. tlu'rpffJrl' IH' wat"r~
down tht' callsti(' ~('I'plif'is/llilf IIH' A('adf'IIIY ami (' ... PrJ jokilll{ly
heg s it to hI' II'nil'nt "for if it ehould attark what W(~ think
we have construttp(1 and arrangl'd so beautifully, it would
play too great havof with it; at the !lame time I s,hou.ld likl'
to win over this school. and so do not. dare to banl~h It. fr~m
the discussion" (Cic, IA'gg, I, XIII, 38, 39), 10 hIS treatlSI'
On Duties (II, 78) he frankly ranks himself with th?se
"whose mind wanders in darkness and, never know: whIch
doctrine to follow," Finally he SIdes .up With the
Academy preferring probability as the gUide, for. sound
judgement and justifying in his way the contradlclonness of
his views,
,
C""
For space considerations we shall ~ot ~ISCUSS Ice.r~ s
philosophy in greater detail, th~>ugh thiS brief sur~ey gl~es
but a very general outline of hiS world outlook, CI~ero y,~s
not an original thinker, yet even a cursory analYSIS of h~s
views shows inadequacy of the one-sided .asse~ment. o~ ecl~~~'d
cism as a purely negative phenomenon tn. ph'losop~), a
of hopeless mixture of heteroge~eo?s a~d mcomp~t.lble sc~ap:
y
of d i fferen t theories. On the su bjectlVe Side. eclectiCIsm aly, a _,
a~~~~i~~tOs~l:ht:~~~~r
testifies to a need. for an .integrated

h
towards a synthetiC doctrme, thour ~ J "the :esC-the very
ne can seldom be develo~ed by '~~~~et~0:gain5t the successful
principle of such sel~ct,on rol I
accomplishment of t\IIS tad,kft"
, when an eclectic system
" ,"
lUay be I eren
..
Th e sltua
Ion.,
.
hical rinciple, e.g. a religIOUS
is pivoted on a ngld pl~J!os~P eo_tythagorean and Platonic
idea, as was the case.w ' th t. e ~I e first century B.C, to the
doctrines in the pen~h f~~'~oc~rines gradually turned into
second century .A:D,
e h'
that paved the way for neophiiosophico-rehg,olls teac lngs
Platonism,
t 'es from Aristoxenus of Tarentum
For more t.han h".'O c~n ~~I th~ first century B.C., neo-Pyth~
till at least the begllllllng . philosophical literature, and It
cyoreanism did not shO\~P "~iod that the first pseudo-Pytha
;'as only at the end of t II~ i~ The earliest evidence for the
gorean works came to. Ig ~ 'Alexander Polyhistor's acc-ount
" I r pylhagorean,sm IS
.
rev Iva 0
L"
of the Pythagorean Memoirs preserved by ()i'lgE'nE'~ Laertiu

The account starts with a statelllC'nt of tht' "ardHj' or Pvth:~
goreao credo: "Th e principle of all things i~ tilt' monad ()
unit; arising from the monad the undefllled dyad or two serve:
as material s ubs tratum to the monad, which is cause; from the
monad and the undefined dyad sp ring numbers; from numbers
points, from points, lines; from lines, plane figures; (rom plane
figures, solid figure s; from solid figures, sensible bodies, the
elements of which are (our, fire, water, ea rth and air; these
e lements interchange and turn into o ne another completely,
and combine to produce a universe animate, intelligen t,
spherical, with the earth at its ce ntre, the ea rth itself too being
spherical and inhabited round about. There arc also antipodes,
and ou r 'down' is thei r ' u p' ... " (Diog. L. V III, 25) . A II rea lily
is based on the relation of opposites: light and dark , co ld and
hot, dry and moist. The pre dominance of one of them determines the season: the hot gives s umm e r, the cold-winter, the
dry -spring and the moist autumn. In turn, s prin g bri ngs
health, autumn-illness, morning leads to fl owe rin g , evening
to decay, etc.
As is evidenced (rom the very first lines o( this passage,
neo-Pythagoreanism differs from the ancient Pythagorean
doctrine with its table o( opposites by a strong monistic
tendency. Proclaiming the monad or unit to be the primary
cause, the neo-Pythagoreans exhib it an obvious innuence of
later Plato, as well as of Stoic "Heracl iteanism" and the idea
of the balance of opposites which t hey may have learned from
Alcmaeon by way of Plato. The. n eo-Py th ago reans understood
life as heat, yet not all living organisms, in their opinion, are
endowed with the sou l: "So ul is di stin c t from life; it is
immortal , since that from which it is de tache d rihe e ther} is
immortal" (Diog. L. VIII , 28). " The soul of man , ... is divided
into three parts, intelligence, reason, and passion . Inte llige nce
and pass ion are possessed by other animals as well, but reason
by man alone" (Diog. L. VIII, p. 30). Expounding fu rther
the neo- Pythagorean doctrinl' of the so ul , Alexander Polyhislor says: "The so ul draws nouri s hment from the blood; the
faculties of the soul are winds, for they as well as the sou l are
invisible, just as the aeth('J' is invisible ... When cast o ut upon
the E'arth, it wanders in the air like the body . Hermes is the
steward of sou ls ... it is h(> who brings in the so uls from their
hodies both by land and sea; and th e pure are taken into the
uPP('J'most region, but the impure are not permitted to a pI.
h thE' pun' or each other. but are bound by the Furies in

pro<ld'
breakable Th' whole air is (ull of souls which ar(l
bon ~ u n ,
d
!led enil or heroes; these are they who send me~ re.~ms
cn d si:ns of futurp ... and it is to them that pur.if'tcatlOns
a:nd lustratlons. all di.vin3tion: OIll('IlS and the ilkt-. hit"p
c" (Diog_ L_ \ 111.31-.12)

re ;ren~lentive reader will have traced here the influences of
~ :iverse philosophical doctrines: both ~ntecedent to a~d
mos
sry with neo-Pythagorealllsm. It IS arrant eclechc~onte~r~~e religiOUS idea moulds it i.nto a single wh~~e. The
IS01, ~ thagoreanisls link the div in e With heat and the uppe rneo- y. " (ether): "the uppermost air is ever-moved and pure
roo:t:lrlthy and all within it is immortal and consequen tl y
a~l. eaThe'sun the moon and the other sta rs are god:;
1~v~~:~, there is a preponderance of ~ea~, and ~~a~sls ~a~
-
Gods and me n are akm. masmu "
.
cause 0 1I c...
k
h
ht for man (DlOg
artakes of heat: the refore G~d ta es t oug
a whole i~
VIlL 26-27). The orderliness of the world as
[0;'
t.
attributed to [ate.
.
of gods a nd their
Thus the nco_Pythagorean cOnllce,po'nlOnof Stoic pantheism.
. a clea r re ec I
relations to man I S
tI e world and men are possessm
God does not stan~ apart froh . I artaking of the divine subelr p. "
cd O f reason by virtue."0 t "ether
stan ce-'uppermost air or
about 90 \"arioug ncoWe know la r gely by na.me on Y,' - -n the main idrntical
,
.
I Their con ten IS I
h ,
P ythagorea n treatises.
I xander Polyhistor. except t a
with what we ha ve f.rom A: e e llt combinations of v l ew~
different authors give. differ For inslanrc. Ocelli Ll1ctw.,
borrowed [rom the sa me sO ll;~e~i the Universe (De /l/lIl'erst
in hi s treati se On the Natu ristotelian idea of the ungen?natura) co ncentra~es on th~
close ly foll ows Aristotle III
rated and everlasting worl
of genesiS and decay, concl ~d
describing particular processe~rom Aristotle's On Gene~atLO~
in~ his work with a passa g ,\Ii
Lucani,
1)('
unlvel'SI
and Corruption
(see 38(j~~06). Frolll Xeno('\'C\lcJo; al~d tl\('
natura, 11,3-6. Mull , ~f .
Ocelli borroWS the doctnne ~f
S toics (evidently pose! OIlIU"':' the heaven , the earth. and t. e
ree pa-rlS of the lInlVe rS~ ) and divide:;, acconlingly, ,\11
'h
,
above-earth space (metarsLOIl
d demons
( d
\1)1 ., III . 3)
'.
.
.
ds men , an
be lOgs IDtO go,
.
. der Griuhel1. Band lit. 2. Tt'il.
:nd
I , " Zl'lilr. Dir Phi/os,'Pbh.I;IUllf1{'hu!': Fraf(fllt'lltfl phllMophufufII

:5ee D.'
'pwdu{'('() .
?9
A IIU llIbe r of text ... flrl' r~l8..1 .575, \'01. II , Jlp. 9t_ .
"
grat'corllfll, Vol. I. JlP
, ':
.; :rhe understanding ~r the ~ivine caus(> a~ the creator (De,

Illiurge) and the moving prmciple of the cosmos (ern ,.
ts II I II .
. .
..-a IOU
Ie?
ow mg a prc-exlstlng form) rep;(>!;cnt:-;, as it were,
a ~tep~lOg sto ne to the DcmlUrge of Plato s Timaeus, AriSlQt_
Ie s Pnr:ne Mover and the One of the neo-Platonies . The first
co nce ptIOn was expounded in detail in the treatise On the Soul
of the Wurld an~ on Nature (De anima mundi) ascribed to
TlInae us of LOCfI , whereas the third one was d('lineated by
Moderatus of Gades, Nero's con tempo rary_ His views arc
known to us from fragments preserved by Stobay and Simpli_
c ius and from Porphyry 'S desc ription in The Life of Pythagoras. According to Porph yry, Moderatus gave the following
account of the Pythagorean teaching: t he prototypes and
primary cau~ef' canna! be expressed in words and are
therefore denoted by numbe rs. The "u nity" (henotes) or
" unit" "'tands for unity, identity, equality, the cause of unanimity , etc., i.e. all that mak es things what they arc. It is
present in everv whole that co nsist.s of parts and joins them
together as it sha res in the primary cause (Porph. V. Pyth.
49). By con trast, difference, inequality, divisibilit.y, e tc. arc
produced by the dyad. So, the Ullit. (monad) is the symbol of
unity, the dyad, of diversity. The ullity is the principle of
eve rything.
Numerous investigators have repeatedly called in question
the authent.icit.y of Moderat.us's rendit.ion as reproduced by
Porphyry suspecting the latter of having read into Modera tus
his own neo-Platonic conce ption s. Even more dubious appears
the evidence of Simplicills who ascribed to Moderatus the
following exposition of Plato's teaching: the High est Unity is
the primary cause which is above all being. The second stage
is ideas; the third, the soul; the fourth , the world of na tllre
open to sense perceptions (see Vag. III. h . 1285b). This
doctrine already has an unmistakable neo-Plato nic rin g about
it -yet why ca nnot it be at the same time a genuine conception
of Moderatus foreshadowing , howe ver in a c rud e for m, the
nco- Platonic system and rt'const ructed by neo-P laton ic S implicius in accordance with his views?
The ethical theory of neo- Pythagorea nislll is expounded by
Alexander Polyhistor (Diog. L. VIII, 32-35), In his opinion.
"the most momentous th ing in human life is th e 3rt of winning
the ~oul to good or to eviL Blessed are the me n who acq uire
a good ~o ul... Virtue is harmony, and so are health a nd a ll
goorl and God himself." The rnai,i prescriptions are to venerate
h.'roe , till' 1,larl'lIls ami rI'l, tIV.S to Jb:<ta.ill f~'otll

ohihittlli (oDd. to purrfy une!lelf by washmg and sprmklL,ng,
~~c. Thl' fulfiluH'lIl of all prt'!I('riptio~~ brings immortalLt~,
divinity whirh i:< thl.' rl'ward of \'Irtuous man. The relr1.~~U'i If('nd of lI('o-l'ylhagon'3nism culminate!; in the teaching
g~ A'pollonius of TY;Ul8 (first cl'ntury A.D.). The li~e of this
~aH-legendary "saint" adorm'd with numerous stOries of al!
>;()rt..<; of myrades Ill' work('d not by magic, but throu~h gods
favours <lnd divine wisdom was colo~rful1y descrrbed by
Philostratlls in his novel Ufe of Apotl.onws of T~ana .. A~cor~.
ing to Philostralus, Apolloniu!! conSidered It ~IS miSSiOn In
life to worship tht' gods and comprehc~~ their natu re. He
idrntifred philosophy with a trur relLglOn a~ld rega~ded
philosopher as 3 prophet, a god's servant an4 a~ lI~t~r~nedlary
betw~en man and god. The trut'st religion, in hiS opllllon. was
the one that recognises one God.
I
d' tl t
Yet it was mainly to Philo Judaeus of A exan na .Ia
Hellenistic philo!lophy owed the real impact of monotheism.
hI }!Otb.
13.
Judai~m
and
Gr~k
\ 01 \le..:. ndri.
PhilOlOOp h y. Ph .0
I h i t ndency towards the in

It wa!l not a~'cidl'nt~ ~ at.t ~~refi ious systems displayed
tegration. ~r varIOUS phdos~plllc iCU~US form at Alexandria.
in eclectu'I"1ll took. the Illost consp olitica\ centre of the Near
the large"t econOlillC, cultll~a~ and p
resented by Judai!'1ll
East, where tht' Oriental ;n. ~~nce 1:1~~onislll and Pythago
filet with (;rNoBom3n StloIH'I~:~lr~ad economic, politiral and
TI ). )'cc tI V (' IIt'C( or u
.
d tl e
rea lllsm. It' l II
I.l
the Jewish colonists an
1
cultural contaell! et~ee~l, "cclarian views of the Diu;:.pora
gentiles tend!'.(ltQJJlOdrfy wb~~niLs of their traditional world
and to expa ud the .na~ro d cies resulted in the inev itablt'
outlook. The H('lle lllstl~ te n en which gradually replaced
spread of the Gret'k. an~~~~gt'in turn induced the Jews to
Hebrew in everyday lrfe'
I... Script~res of the Pentatt'uch
. t G rt'l'k the Mosalc
I
pris
translate In 0 1
b ew Scri ptures and apocryp 13 co n~ .and then the other He r
t nslation that was accomplrshed
Ti
,og thr Old Testament. 11.' ra, . 'S Be is known as thl'
. d
second ('en urh::
.'
.'
by
in the thlr or
d f
the legend of its ComPOSlt10 1l
Septuagint (!(o name r~~pired by divine providence to u!'e
72 translators allege dl Y
. n )
identical words. and. exr{e:~~k~d' an important Changl' ~n
The translation Itse
Yahweh was rendert'd 11\
Judaism. For one, the proper Dame
Greek by the. c~mmon noun Lord (kyrio~) which strl.'ngthl.'ned

thl.' monotheistic trend of the Judaic religion that had not
prl.'vailed by the third ~enlury B:C. The later books of r~!
Old Test-ament that survived on Iy In Greek bear unmistakabl
signs of the innuence of Greek philosophy. For instance, tn~
Wisdom at Solomon contains a statement that the world was
cr('ated by God from formless matter (II, 18) and expounds
th(' doctrine of the immortality of soul and of it being
handicapped by the body (see 8,13; 9,14-15). Th(' assertion
of man's ignorance (9, 16) bears a strong resemblance to the
argument of Socrates and the Cynics, wh('reas the reFerence to
God who "arranged everything by measure, number and
w('ight" (11, 21) may well have been borrowed from
a Pythagorean treatise.
The impact of Greek cu l ture on the Hebrew tmditions of
the Diaspora is atlcsted to by Aristobulus's commentary on.
the Pentateuch dedicated to Ptolemy Philometor (181-145).
As is evidenced from the fragments of this work
preserved by Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius, AristobuIus insisted on a close aFfinity of ancient Greek philosophy to
th(' Jewish Law and add uced the ('xampl('s of Pythagorean and
Platonic doctrines, as well as sham po('ms of Orpheus, Linos,
Homer and lIesiod in support of his view. At the same time he
substituted allegoric illterpretations in the spirit of Stoic
"natural explanations" for anthropomorphic conceptions of
th(' Old Testament. For inMance, thl' "light" which comes
first in the sequence of God's crNllions was int('rprN('d by
him as divine wisdom (sophia), th.., s('\'('n days of cr(',Hion
W('r(' associated with mysterious number seven d('ifled by
th(' Pythagorean!'!, ('lc.
Thf" most systo>matir attempt to integrate Grcek philosophical cOllc('ptions with Jewish doctrilws W<l!':l made by Philo
(c. 20 B.C.-c. 40 A.D.), a man of great l;reck and Jewiflh
l('arning anrl the most prominent of all the Jewish philosophers of the Alexandrian school. In his numerous works
writtl'n in classical Greek he strove to combine the Old
Tl'stamf'nt with the ideas of Greek philosophy, particularly
Plalollism and Stoicism, displaying originality of thought and
grl'at ingenllity. His system, though ('dectic and abounding in
incoll!->istl'ncies i1' centred around a religious idea which
giv('s relative unity to his vi('ws.
The inher('nt and insoluble contradiction of Philo's systl'lIl is b('lween the idea of absolute personal god or "Lord"
the Jewish Scriptures (the Septuagint) concei~e~ as

?f
ofl'al (\lId I'Xll'rnClI to the worid. and the traditIOnal
IIlCOr!pt s of 1I(,l\enistic philosophy whereby Philo seeks
conC~''pH"'"
.
h y, even '"
I{oc\'s nature. ""h'IS p,11"
osop
IS mos l
'n0, ('a'I'IS ..~\"t.ms
-...-..
., is..,,0 flflnly rootE'd in the general "corpoof 'thl'
rNI I"',,
Y
. Gr{'l'k world outlook lhat his attempt could not
but' end in faliurl'.
,.'
.
The starting point of Philo s teac~lIlg IS the ~onceptlon ~r
d Being defuH.'tI in accordance WIth the SCriptures, he IS
~I~e 'Existent, the only true being. Therefore "th~se who have
entered into comradc!'.hip with k.nowledgc to deSIre to see the
Existent if t.hey may, (ought), If they cannot, to se~atda~IY
rate his image, the most holy Word. and after the or I~S
most perrect. work of all that our senses know, eve~ thIS
world" (Philo Conf. ling. 97). In other words. the aim of
l'losophv appears to he the contemplation and knowle~lge
Pt o'd N~w the Scripturt's assert that I?od is .u~kl~owad ::
~ec~us'e man has no sp('cial organ for hiS cogllltlOn. Go IS
suprasensual and has no qualities. he can o.llly be apprehend~d
through rev('lation. This scriptur.al doctrine run~ COt~l~t~os~
all philo"ophical trudition of ancwnt Greece-e,edll d R
mystical'tH'nds in Greek philosophy alcwayds regar Cd Be:a:~yn
d
'F'
't th Truth
.00 ness an
.
as di"ine I entl ylng I
better ~'ith the old Testament:
Things do not seem to lC
'Iwa s revered itas a prodin contrast with the J:ws w~o lcrv~ ~s e~en ill their religious
uct of god's insPlnltlO~I' I e a ~~~g'l~ indisputable authority.
teachings, have ne,'er , I\OW.~ ~pparentlY insuperable difflculIn order to ovcrco ml : IC5
'n fact nothil1!Lbut a triSk:
ties, Philo resorts to w la\ was 1 of the Greek term "Logos"
taking advantagc of the po lSlemYdentifies the rational princimeaning both law an~1 w~r , :i:h the revelatory thought of
pie of the unive rse, ItS aW~lul'e becomes God's Word enablGod. As a result, th~ la': o~tb
a ic the Scr iptures and Heling Philo ~o reconcil c, as. ~ re~e~atron' and inquisitive thought.
lenistic pll1loso phr' l~lystlC t d bv Philo in terms o[ both
I ndeed, logos IS lnte r pre ~ Greek philosophical doctrines.
the Hebrew Old 'I'cstamentrn Word therefore his wisdom or
God crl'all'd the world dbY I del of c'reation or, according to
logos is the caUS(' an (~026), the rencction of eternal. li~ht,
the Wisdom of SolO~~O~ct 'and the image of his .b~l1IgIHlY.
the mirror of God.,
d b God's wisdom, the dl\'lll.e I<;,gos
a
crc
Since all thingS are d . , tCIf !onslitulCS a creali\"(' PrlIlCIIlll'.
IS a'lI1
k ' '0 God an I se
,,'c'
'\1
:1:.."1
At the sa~l(> time,lt is God's "r.r~1 horn son, supretll\ aft'han

gel, God 5 pontiff.
etc. All tlH'st'
IlI"t'Jicalt
,S ."",k"
1I)~o~
.
.
'
a personal deity. created ilnd crealrVl'. and thenfon IlI'rf

,
II
r
' 0 r an .1Il\C'rmt'dial'Y Ill'tw('t'll t:nrl '1111OfUlIIlg l' unction
I'lis
<
(
creatIOn. 1.(' . the world and man. I
.
However . in line with th' Stoic tradition , Philo also describes lo~os as the inherent law and th e "~old" of the world,
as the Ulliversal reason that gover ns the cosmos in the sa me
way as man' s mind controls the movement of the body. The
world and mall are respectively the macrocosmos and microcosmos. ~Y hi s ration,a l :!;oul man assimilates to divine logos,
and by IllS body consisting of elements, to the cosmos as the
abode or body of logos. Borrow ing libe rall y from Stoicism
Philo asse rts that every man carries a particle of the divin~
!ogos ~see Philo De of. m. VI. 146) and that the logos moves
to a circle called fate by most peop le (Quod deus immut.
XXVI, 1(6). I n his desc ription Philo does not omit even such
S toic c haracteristics of logos as "seminal and generative." Selecti ng freely from H e ll en istic philosophy whatever concepts
he deemed reasonable, Philo,however.showed great caution
when it came to the conception of God, central to the sc riptural tradition. For instance, in opposition to the Stoics who identified the world with God. Philo adheres to the idea of creation
and turns for support to Platonism. In hi s opinion, god knew
that a good world coul d not be created without an archetype.
therefore he first produced the intelligib le world of Ideas
incorporeal and divine. The Idea s ex isted from eternity as
thoughts of god and occupied no space -ve ry much like the
image of a city to be built that the arc hitect first sees with li s
mind's eye. So, god models the sensible world upon the wo rld
of Ideas in accordance with Plato, yet contrary to Plato the
world of Ideas is created by god too - this time in accordance
with the Scriptures,
Another big problem that faced Philo was how to accou nt
for the generation o[ the corporeal from the divine , the imperfect a~d tempor~1 from the perfect and eternal. Seeking to
reconcile the sCflptural dogma of creation from nothing with
th e deep- rooted Greek conception of pre-existin g matter (even
. J)" .. rrihin~
t"Io!?~' Phil(} now identifH',~ it wilh wi~dom, now C311~
'ovl'J,if!m It", "mothrf__which nalurally ~ugli:e~15 God as it~ lalher. I,.(Jgo~ i~

,11\1111' (Iileos), y~~ It,lS, n~~ a Rod (ho thto,). e t(' , All tht'~e incon!<islencirs
n'''ull from till' _ Omd.ly o f the mon()lI.('i~li{' duclrilu' \lndNgoin~ lhE'
pr,,"','''s of f',rmalHln.
,,'
the f.'y('~ or "ctiviIlP" Pla.t" god wa~ but a DeliliurJ;(e givillg

~llllapl' to fOl'lnl,es~ suhstr~tllm), Philo is compel~ed ,to ascribe
to Mos('s th(' Slolc dO<"Lrille or the two world prlnclplp~, 0 11(>
active. ici ('ntiiied with the, (>frlcien~ cause and t~(> ulllwr"al
('asO n , and the oLiler passive. the Incrt and motllmi('ss mass
~nimated anel shap('ci by th<' Reason into perfection, i.e, our
sensible world,
,
In order to int<'grah' these doctrmes, as well as other
biblica l dogmas and myths with philosophy and common
sense, Philo resorts to the tefoted method of alleg,o~ ical, inter
pretation r ely in g on the ,age-o l~ ,Hebrew . tradlt~o,n m the
exegeSis of the Bible, ThiS tradition (hat bad artsen long
before Philo was born of the need to distinguish. b~tw~~n th~
direct, literal sense of words in the Bible and their' spiritual
sense By Philo's time this need had become absolutel,Y
impe;ative as the Scriptures cou ld no longer be taken at thel,r
[ace value. The literal sense had to be ex~luded, Ilrst, whe-n I~
was detrime ntal to God's dignity (as Ifl th~ cas;s of <;,~:I)
limitation of God's power, ascription to him 0 se-n~bl "e
,
l)
0 ld when an allegory was 0 \ 1properties, paSSIOns, e c, ,sec I
{k-o\\=TedgeT a-n-d,
ous (as in the case of the prover la, tr~e 0
n '0:; re anc' or
finally, when it waS necessary to eh~OInate a d~_~ a~d b;in
a contradiction. Following
I
firmly co nvince d , together ,Wit, ad b God and are there-fore
the Scriptures have been In s~lre ,y
,
Philo treats all J
f om any IIIconslstencles,
r
d f
infallible an
ree, r
' I' I t ts as having a symbo Ir
dubious passages III the blb_ I~ _ eX _'4
meaning,
"
-,
f 0 n twO sources-the Judaic
Philo's allegOries. de r.'ve ,;d ' the Stoic rationalisation ~f
exegesis of the SC rlplt lles ~ ,
ination of the Alexandrl'
Greek myth, What with, the rlct~ IInagased on far-fetcbe-d ,a nd
an philosophe-r , their I,ilt~gratl~~v~ produced very ,curlO ll s
often phantastie aSSOCIatiOns
f II is the arbitrarill es:-:. of
'k one most 0 a d d
results. What strl, cs
nlS to be always incline to rea
Philo's interpretatlOn~, Hf 'S~:en meaning behind every ~rop(>r
between lines suspec~lIIg 11( nd even plain error. In ,View ~r
name imag(', inconslst~n c,y
d rilles of translatIOn tim;
the absence of any prlnc~~Jrt1; pjlllo's-w,<!rship of t~ ~?~Y
sub!ective approach couple . ~t results III waywaNhJ('ss. <lnd
'Scri pit. re~ a nd. evcrYt~;tl:l~ i ;~s~'pher 's i magi na tion re-st rtrlcd
free relll to
'deration s,
g ives
1 by hig doctrinal conSI
Olle of the chief :-:.ource:-:. of
on y
"
of Philo became
orlSlll
The aileg
1"1
b-- I -
tI~ehe,sltf~!~~se: c~~~~Cntators, tha~
the medi?val _pr?c~~s of (,.\l'gl'~is falling il.lto Ilin'I' slal{ll~.

etymological analysIs, analogy Hnd ~YlllhollSIlI.
.
Philo's doctrine of the univer~C' basl'rl on Stoic and p
thagorean conceptions and complemC'nted hy the bibli/t
image of God as creator and providence leads to a trinomi:l
structure of being. Supreme God ('volvps both tilt' idl'al world
(kosmos noetos) rationalised in divine logos and consisting of
ideas-numbers and the sensible world, which relate to one
another as model and image, cause and consequence. Whereas
the conception of transcendent God-creator and his Son Logos
was a way to Christianity (Philo, according to Engels, being
its "father"), I the idea of a three-element being led straig ht to
neo-Platonism, the more so as Philo complemented the triadic
structure by a doctrine of "ent husiasm" or "sober intoxication" that overwhelms man's sou I d uri ng direct contemplation
of God. This latter doctrine substituting "enthusiasm" or
mystical feeling for rational thought turns the former into
a mediator between the members of the trinity on the one
hand. and between,god and man on the other. However, it
was only two centuries later that Hellenistic philosophy
represented by neo-Platonism finally surrendered to
mysticism.
lIi_ Neo-Platonism; Alexandrian-Roman &:hool
II
The two centuries that separated Philo from the neo-Platonics were marked by the increasing influence of Platonism as
the leading trend in the eclectic philosophy of the peri~d.
A typical representative of such philosophy based on StOIC,
neo-Pythagorean and peripatetic elements was Plutarch of
Chaeronea (c. 46-c. 127 A.D.) known also as a biographer a nd
a moralist who violently denounced Epicureanism an.d
attacked, somewhat less bitterly, the Stoics. Offering hiS
interpretation of the Platonic doctrine of the World Soul, he
contended that God did not make the body impermeable, nor
the soul capable of perceiving and thinking. Both the~e
principles existed from eternity but were in a chaotic state III
darkness and disorderliness, devoid of perfection and measure.
God put them in order and harmonised in accordance
With. numerical relationships, thereby creating the living and
movlDg cosmos, the most perfect of all creations.
Friedrich Engels. "Bruno Baut'r und da~ Urchrislonlum" in: Karl
\1arx, Frit'drich Engels, Werke, Blind 10, Dietl V(lflag. Berlin. 1062, S. 298.
I
Ts2
' hier probletn was the origin of evil. it cuuld

Plutarc II S
...
r
1.\.
,
.<;{' from r()rml(ls~ mattf'r devoid 0
any qua lies, nor
not ar~'t h{' traced to God by virtue of il') concept. The only
couldt accon n t r(,r I t Wa"" to a<.;,cribe
evil to that part of the.
way 0 'I that did not accept divine reason and. harmo~y.
world sou I dcy. God is not responsible for eVil plagumg
Hence the tleo I .
S I
't,s
urcc is the World ou.
Id
the wor I so.
.,
h was not the conception of the
Yet central to llis phi osop Y I and God but their religiousuniversal 'prin~iples, mat~er, Sf~ accordan~e with the geogr~
mythological Inte~pretatlon..
"true" religion, he gives hiS
g Z s Osiris and Ormazd.
hy
of
the
worship
expressm
P
..
the names 0 r eu.
p .
d
supreme eltles
. I f r Egyptian religion, ene los
Matter in his system IS ~IS 0 th (see Symp. 203b-e) or
'poverty) for the PlatoOl~h m~vil World Soul is Egyptian
divine mothe~ in gen.er~l.
~ades of Greek mylholo.gy .. ln
Typ hon Persillfi Ahnman or.
,
S . alleg onsm base d 00 the rationailsatlonI
other words. the tOIC I . I deities in terms of natura
of the names of my tho ?gIC\utarcb by its opposite-the
philosophy is repl~ced ~~
concepts into the langua...&e of
"translation" of phllosop Ica
mylh-and retigion.
d the world, Plutarch borTo form a link betweend Go.d aXoenocrates) the idea of goold
rows (evidentIy rr maca
o . . emlc "sub-lunar wor Id" an d deve
_. ~
and bad demons abidtng In thedOWing demons with quah~le:
ops a detailed demono~ogy ~~ ascribe to the supreme de,~~;
or
men punishing themI . "
he ob viously does not arlo.
. the Ives
. to "exp atn
demons interfere I~ crimes. This ~~ablesbh;I? fs including
various offences an
f superstitIOUS e Ie ,
.
f
all sorts 0
.
I
l
and Just y.
0 hedes and mlrac es.
ic pythagorean,
fortune-telling 'l prt"~ combination of Plato". tc of Maximus
A similar e~ ee \c elements is char?ctefl:h~ well known
Stoic and pen~atetA uleius who, bes1de;rote On Plato and
0/ Tyrus, Luctu~
Golden ss , als~Wle), On the World
Metamorp/~ose( ~e Plalone et. elUS ~~~ell as of AlbiTltt$ llnd
His Teachmg 0 Irlterpretal torl , aC
l"us Celsus (second
(De Mundo), . It Platonist Au!uS tr::~ons in his attacks
Atticus. Eclecttc d tile doctrine 0
.
'nfiucnce of the
D) use
.
the growing I
bT
century A" . tyattributlng
d
ns' names and a I I
,nst Christlanl
ledge of the emo
aga
I ir knOW
Christians to t le. theurgy.
r A.D.), one of th('
em
ty to usc .th ! I~pamea ~secon~te~~~~ Zo assimilate PlatonNurnentuS ~ nco. Platonism, a
.iXl
forcrunn('fS 0
The
:t
1~1ll to Judaism and, ..presu mabl y t~king h.is.~~ue ,from Philo

declares Plato to be Moses sp('akll~g Altlc lit' clt'Wlops ~
hierarchy of three gods (the first sundar tu Plato's Irlpa of tI '
Good, the second identical with his Demiurg(' and th\{
third-the sensible world) which anticipates to a certa.e
extent the Plotinian scale of being, and borrows certa:n

co nce ptions from Persian, Egyptian and Hindu (Brahmanj
religious teachings. In the third century A.D. these concep_
tions, duly rationalised along Platoni c lin es, were developed
into the neo-Platonic system.
The foundation of neD- Platonism is traditionally attributed
to Ammonius Saccas (died c. 242 A.D .) It is known that he
was brought up in Christian faith but thell returned to
paganism and that he earn'ed his livin g as time-labourer
(Sakkas means sack carrier). Ammoniu s left no writings,
but Hierocles and Nemesius (fifth century A.D.) c red it him
with developing the basic principles of neo-Platonism,
namely , the idea of integration of Platonic philosophy a nd
Aristoteiianism, the criticism of the Stoic doctrine of corporeal
soul, and the doctrine of unity of intelligence wh ic h divides
only by descending into mortal bodies without, however,
diminishing or losing its identity.
Yet, the first mature system of neo- Platoni sm is universally
ascribed to Plotinus.
(1) Plotinus was born about 204 A.D. in Lykopoli s, Upper
Egypt, and was a pupil of Ammonius in Alexandria for 11
years. He left. his teacher to take part in an exped ition of
Emperor Gordianus against Persia where he hoped to acquire
firs thand knowledge of the magi 's philosophy. After the death
of Gordianus in Persia in 244 he moved to Rome and founded
there a school of philosophy. At first. he taught his pupi ls
orally and then began writing. He gave no names t.o his
treatises, but t.radition classifies them under such t.itles as On
the Beautiful, On Immortality of Soul, On Intelligence, Ideas

Being, On the Good and the One, etc. Plotinus died in
and A_D_
270
All ~he heritage of Plotinus was divided by his pupil
and (>dltor Porphyry into six sections, each of nine treati ses
(hence their name Enneads, groups of nine),1
Plotinus's philosophical system is very complex and its
1 III our
hl'
{flfll',HI
'Jrnl'ral~.
rf'fI'rl'n('f',~
Plotinu~'s
worb WI' !!hall indicatv l hl' Ilu mhrr of

hy Boman nUIrH'ral. lht> lrl'aliS{' and thl' chajlh>r, by arabli
If)
dptailcd analYSIS '111<1115 COlls,idera~I,e ~~ffieulti(>~, ~ot th,~

h'a5t h('illg HII' oh:;nlflty of hiS wntmgs, ~he phdo~pher s
eyesight and handwritin~ were bad an~ he dl~ n?t corre~,t nor
a parl'ntly re-rl'ad :lnythwg h(> had wrltt(>n, .~ev~rtheless, the
~neral pattern of hig sy~tem (>JDerg~s froI? ~IS n~merou~
g, ks with sufficient c1artty to permit an 1R~lght Into the
;~rlo~OPI~er's mind and make possible the general exegeses of
his doctrlllc,
h'
h
f three
"Rcality is conceived by Plotinus as a lerare y ~
suhstallr,es or hypostases:, t.he On~, the ~ou.s (Intel;lg~nce~
Ill.! the Sou\. The One IS the h~ghest: It IS a per :c, .an
a omplete entity, withont any limits, forms and qualltlle,- II'
c
f
th'
nd is therefore comp ete y
:~d~~:r::,,;,~~::~cn~ u~~r~:re~
~~I~~di i~il~'i I~~:~~~,'~~~. s~d;~
rn
fr(d" d )'" bn.cau~(> e\:ery inte ll igellce goe,,,;

ya, "
b- ,_
h- h
W IC
I,
'11' 'ble knowledge as the su Jec IS
together With an IOt(' Igl,
' t h b'ect The one
impossible withoul~he ~~owled~~~~il:~ Ip~~SU~;O~I'S the dualiis above all knowle g~, ~ IOce co ne is ignorant even of itsl'l,
ty of object and subject, ('he D d- ar,' kind' there is noth"
e is not
0 t he or III
'
. h _ _
yet Its Ignoranc
,
'.
and nothing of whlc It IS
ing of which the One Is.cogl~~s::t~rminations, the One cannot
ignorant (VI, 9, 6). Havldn g -b -, we in fact negate what it
e I , We may somet '
h sa re
be expre!oise d ' Trying to es("rlt 't'
imes
is not rather than asscrt. w a I r~s~ it-this is the case with
in it but we are unahle to exp elves the presence of ~ome
peop'le in ecstasy who fee l i~~etht~n~ive a coherent aceo,unt of
higher power hut are, una
V 3, 14), The Onl' IS, th,e
their mystical expe~len,ce ( It needs nothing, other\~lse It
Good the highest prlllclpl\. 't.<; If in the sense that It. and
would not be th e first. It rna e~ 18 e13 ), Producing all,things,
)
its willing of iHlelf. are one (~e'nc'e, it is neither q~laht.y, Jl~r
the One is not any or thel~:t It is neither in motIOn, no at /
ny nOl' soul. nor S pl~I , (VI 9 3). Nor does the ne
not in space
after generating
, I' sit produccs. I I
,
e rfect by not se(' ' mg
need tung 5 12) "T hc One, belllg,p
'hi ng overflows
as before (V, "
'any thing or needlllg anyt
.: (V ? I)
h'
or havlIlg
'
lakes ano t her
.~,
'
anyt IIl g,
d its supe rab undan ce n t ' t get.., flilrd with it
,byT'II H' ,Otl:lf'{'
the !\JOllS, the
I
lates It.
IUS
and conte mp
:
't ,b\tWl'l' ll
IS
nd
hvpostas
.
,
d
true
knowledge,
a
um
~ l
seco
- ' , t llt' bClng an
The NOlls IS r
that it
I~5 entirely
a two
i:s~n i~ i~
~~Ii~~~:epr~~u('ed
Or'tll'~~he sa'm~
tO~II~S g:n~~ates'
l~l,em
ud
tbabowled...
&helmowv-1mowD.
_he&he .. meu
&he Inlellitlble.
be. DO Iru&b" (V,
&he NoUl ..nerates &be
"I(8l101', &be I18nsible world
. .H8Dee, the NOllI is
muy, i.e. u the one-many (V,
&be NoUl roughly corresponds
of Idua. However, in
&hem u I18U-sufftcient
... Inlelligibles &het do
(V
5), i.e. u &bouahIB
1Itr.88 on &be hi.....,.,y of
prominent among which an' Platonic l'at(,~4'rll'S

bring, motion, fcst, idl'ntity and dilll'ft'lin'. Tht'.-,, nft"tllP
flrst genera" (pro.ta gene) which prOd\ll:l' all IIth,'rs. Ht-llllty,
knowledgf.' and VIrtue are called l'Ill'r~H'S or 1ll0vt'lIIf'nls of
lu..'ing. GoodnC'ss is derw('d as activity dirt'rlt',1 towards tilt'
One. Proceeding from his conception or till' sl'n!'ihll' world a~
an image of thE' intelligible world. as its flnl'ctinn, Plotilllls
('ensures Aristotle for failing to include with his ratrgoriC's lhf'
sensual and the intelligible. In Plotinus's system t.he fivE'
"first genera" of the intelligible world have tlll'ir counterparts
in the sensible world which are Aristotelian substance, i.e.
matler, form and their unity in existing things, relation, e.g.
cause or clement, accident, e.g. quality and quantity, space
and time as the receptacles of substance and, fmally, action
and passion as the movements of substance (see VI, 3, 3). In
contrast with Aristotle's essentially formal theory of
categories understood as different modes of being, Plotinus
viewed them as logically deducible from one another in a
process of dialectical development. This process, however, was'
conceived by him not as a reflection of the sensible world by
the mind, but as a spontaneous evolution of self-sufficie nt .
thought, i.e. on a purely idealistic basis.
In physical terms, the hypostases and their determinations
are characterised by the notion of "overflowing" which was
repeatedly used by Plotinus in relation of the One and the
Nous and gave cause to interpret his teaching as the doctrine
of emanation from the One. The idea of emanation bringing to
mind the image of the Sun as the source of light is frequently
used by Plotinus to explain generation of things (Plotinlls
believed that the Sun did not diminish due to the ('mission as
he identified generation with contemp lati on invo lving no
change in what contemplates). The investigations carried out
over the past few decades have shown that Plotinus's emanation shou ld not be construed as only material, corporeal
ernu~nce. Being applicable both to the intelligible and
senSible worlds, the concept of emanation is centl'al to the \
interaction of hypostases and very aptly conveys the nature of \
lh~ ex~reme idealism of t~e Plotinian doctrine dissolving all
bemg m the One. ParadOXically, it is precisely because of this
idealism that the One representing purl' indl'tl'rminate
thought turns out to be logically bound up with its opposite,
matter: every determination of the One leading to the
plurality of the Universe is conceived as the descent of the
idl'3S.
HIt.al tn tIll' materia\. ,IS IL~ IIb)Cdilil-.illiou and degradation

intu ""wtlRr" COllvNsf'ly, ttl" rleQliJef"lifwatioll' of thf'
ifkal i~ IIluhrslood us it:i IISf'f'lIt to Ow OUf'. Ih.r,. lies the basie
fallary of allY idl'alist philosophy ..... hich turns things upside
down. transforming rl'al pr{)rP''3Sf>~. both in Daturf' and SOCilty.
into [adt'ci cflpil's of iil('al pf{)('es~f's anll passing for progress
what is ill fad thl' rPlrilt:ill~ of the so-(:alll'll dlgradation.
On thl' irh~ol(}~i{:al sidl', the concept flf emanation provides
a basis for ciisparag('fIIf'lIt of Illan\ creative genius.-in the
eyes of lh(' neo Platon;1" all human endeavours ~o .not am.01.lIlt
to anything more than a pitiable attempt to Imitate dIVIne
creation. No wonder, the One of Plotinus was in fact a_II ideological reflection of till' omnipotenllnonarehieal stall' p{'rs(~I~i
fled in the image of Oil' divim' Homan Emperor. nil' concept (~f
the One transforms princeps (rull''-) into principium (pfl IlCIple). The abstract, ideal worthle:-;:-;II~s~ of Ill~n ill thl' fac' .u~
the One expressed in terms of Plotllilan phllo:,ophy rrON Is
his real worthlessness in the face of the deified Empire
and the divine Emperor.
.'
The rest of Plotinus's system is relatl\:ely sImple .. Th~
philosopher in fact shows little inter~st i~ t~e "ph~':;lcal
aspect of the interaction of hypostases If!1phed In the Idea of
overflowing. The sensual world is concelve~ as the real~ of
multiplicity and separation, as a distorted plcture?f the ~de~1
mixture of the ~ous and necessIty an , In

I
d t IS a d ' d ,.,\ The good result:, frolll
worl.
ethical terms, of the goo ,lIl ( \ I .
.
"
the Nous and the bad conH':, from (ormles:, mailer. The SOlln.1
f
'1'
. 'ther God nor man. It antidates the latter ~nd IS
o eVI IS nel
(I 8 7) It is the lack of being (me on),
therefore eternal
~"
. dl:'void of any determirelative not- being: Just ~s lll.aHer I~eing (me einai) , so evil
f
nations. even the ~ete~lll~nal1o~d it is pure want and insuffiis completely d.evOid 0 . t . e ~~ ~orld as something opposed
ciency. There IS no. ev~ J III ~nd erfect, and a thing is evil Iv
to t he good; all r(Jah.tYhl\g~01s to gartake of reality, to par- .I'
to the extent to ,,:,hlC fo/'l 81 t-S control of a man against hi:,
ticipate in perfe.ctJOn. ~\ 1. ge d hv the immatl'ri'l\ principle
ere
good will and IS overpo"k
.\ dge and truth. Yet it is only
h
b
. h'm reason. no" ('
inherent III 1 . - I the incorporeal ones, w 0 can ('
the godS. particular ~I The visible gods possessing matter
entirely free from eVI .
_ ______
.
I' r (;.'rman id.>a1i~n1 i~ al~() applirHbh'
in th.' ilhdn~"p l~
USI' d .
10 (hI' Plolini(lll d"dnl lt'.
1
This
(Nm
tl
dominate over evil, wh('feas the incorport'ul nnt's im"'e Ilothill

in common with it. Such is Plotinus's tht'otlic:'f.
g
The Ploti~ian theory of knowl~d~~ i.s .ha~~tI on thl' t~Oltcep

tion of man s dual nature. Man s dlvllle soul, bt'ing tht,
opposite of his "animal" body, would he una hit' to perc('ive
other bodies if there were no mediator between them, i.('.
the animated organ of sense perceptions. In virtue of its
corporeality this organ can be acted upon by external bOdies
and, being animated, can perceive thelll. PNception consists
in the assimilation of the sense organs to an ohj('ct ralh(,t,
than in receiving its impression in the Aristotelian manner.
In Plotinus's opinion, the eye would not see the sun if it did
not become sunlike, and would not admire light if it could not
become similar to it. Arguing against Aristotle, he contends
that the soul cannot be affected by an external object and
therefore cannot receive its shape like wax.
Plotinus, this time together with Aristotle, distinguishes
between the five external senses and the internal sense likening them respectively to the radii and the centre of a circle.
The middle position between the senses and reason is occupied
by memory which is related to time. It represents the Soul's
permanence in contrast with the body's movement, changefulness and fluidity, i.e. with what the po(>ts call Lethe or oblivion. Memory is divided by Plotinus into sensuous and intellectual and described as the sours tension that slackens with
time but can be braced up by the effort of will. Combining
Plato and Aristotle, Plotinus describes intellectual memory as
the Soul's facultv of retaining the intelligibles and "recalling"
them by turning potentiality into actuality.
Intellectual knowledge is the result of man's afflnity with
the Nous: the hi~her part of his Soul abides in the intelligible
world in close and inseparable unity with intelligence (NOllS),
whereas the lower part represents the body and nature.
Hence, the So~1 is like a man standing knee-deep in water.
The Nous enlightens the Soul by filling it with ideas, the
higher pa~t of the Soul transfers them to the lower part whicl~,
10 turn, gives matter thl' corresponding form. Consisting, as It
were, of thre~ pa~ts, with ooe of ~hem pr~vailing and sharing
~t the same time 10 the. One, man s 80ul18 capable of asce~d
109 from sense perceptIOns to discursive thought, then to Intdl(>rt (~ous, reason) and further to tlw One. \Vhen thc
~'radius,or ~he SOI!I" retur~s to the central point and identifies
It!'l.pif wIth It tlH' Soul attalOs absolute simplicity and mystical
)-10
unity with the Olle. .'his illlllletiiatl' tOlltat.l or union of

int('lIl,~t with il!'ll'lf, also dl'sniued by Plotillu~ as sf!if
surrl'fulcr of till' Suul aile! IIII' goal of till' Soul's ascent can
only be altairll,d ill a slate of I'l"slasy .
In terms of the theory of knClwlecigf' It RI('ans, first, that
rational knowlerig(l relatl's not to things. hut ideas. Af"corJing to Plotinu":i, we at.tain truE' k.nowh:Jge only ~hen ~e.pass
beyond sense perrq1tlOIl:-i alld (ltscurs~Vt' reasOIll.ng ~estrlctPd
to the sphere of multiplicity and ~OIte dete~ml~atlOlI:;, and
rise to the realm of absolute intelligence whIch IS true r~al
it ,i.e. when Ollr r('(lson discovers that t~e tru~h of, all ~elOg
i/intellcct. or, put it anoth('r way, ,:",hen It redl~co\ers Itself.
Humao reason Plotinus tells us, IS only an IOterpreter of
the high(>st, sjJ~aking, as it w('n'. to. rlis{'t'rn the .lrac('~ of
Nous and conform to Ihl'lll. B{'.('OIllIl~~ thus an. Ima(~~ (~f ~)~
N
it must alwavs look to It ;lS Its arciH't)pc
':' ..
ous'd . Plotinu~'s view, rational knowledge, passive. I.n
S econ
,\0
.
.
rt'ht'nds is active and formatl\e
relation. to the Ide~:-i It C~~!orld_.that is why Plotinus calls
in relatIOn to the cxterna
.
throu h the agency of the
it practical reason. Apprel~end\Og, t"cal r~ason combines and
c of bodu's prac I
I h
senses, t h e Imag s
:' them with ideas, it r('\"ea s t e
differenti~tes them. ~~lllpa~III~lst as the One reveals itsE'if
general III the mdlvldual. .J
r the ~ous which then
t"
in the Hlt'a" 0
'
through emana 10,n .
he Wo~ld Soul's logos. so human
manifest thems('hcs. III t.
ber of individual concepL'!.
In anum
..
, d
r id s.the Idea
thou~htuno
. fthinkingconsists~n.-'.Itls.a(:o~)("'This IS what the dHllect~c.O
defme each tiling m logos: 1.('.
ing to Plotinus, t~(' ability to stating what it is and indlea.t
both verbally and III thought,
things anti what it has III
"
by what it differs from ot ler h"" 'roces s how('v('r, th('
mg
(I 3 /1) In I IS P . . ,
.
common with thl'~l
':
. 'IINi.d and this ('nables reason
ndividllal rcvcais Itself"as tldl(, ~. from thr particular to the
,
"t. "dcscrnt an rlS'
to retrace I S '
.
cneral.
. d rofOllnd idea: the prlll~~ry con
g This is an illlPortant al: .PH. for its logical partltlOli and
1 tion of the gCIIN<l (".a s. orMr to permit it:; subse
tl:
br
~~:~:~~;:0~1~~
tii~::(';S
s~
~:'II\~~,I:~~~~[~~II~[;;~~:S~I~1
:C~:ll~~t~f
t~::
qu
I I ('wa scos
way
to know
C(
, Ih~lr;ld
[\I Ihl' ('llllert'[I'
~.;\~ h~~
. , ';IIi~1 b,,~i~. hy "t,ln. ~\t

Thl' doctrl,",' ",
[h.'n. <111 lIn,'. Withltt1 ()~.f)/lUmj .. (Bullt'nlwud),
el;(I'
'
.,. "
I)" ItlU ,/1
('xpnlln( ,'(
I<'r hrcf.
, \1
. Gru/I(lrcsu (
K . an.
. .. , )'1
Bl'rlin, \H71. ~. - ~..
'II'
, 'b,'
. ,
r a~n'"1 !r,,111 tIll I
,,;,\1
'.r
idl.'alism, The aSCl.'llt frolll tht' i.,dividuill to III(' part ic ular and
fllrthl.'r to thl.' IIni\'('r.-;aI wa S- for him flot thl' path o f " s uLla
lion," i.e, simultaneous negation and pr('sl.'rvation of the
individual in the univer~al. bllt a path of its dissolution and
oblivion. Plato's dialectic became for 1.)lot.jn~ s a. s tepPing
stone to mysticism: the final goal for hun IS IrratIonal (he
believes it to be suprarational) ecstasy in whi c h all thought
disappears and man's soul loses its identity melting into the
One. Porphyry tells us in his Life of Plotinus that the
philosopher attained to such ecstasy four times and regarded
Lh(' mystical union with the Absolute to be the climax of
man's life. Yet mystical intuition is the opposite of rational
thought. Insisting, according to Hegel, on the need to discard
reason in ord~r to attain to truth ! and claiming irrationality
to be the highest form of cognition, myslicism is till' death of
any philosophy,
...__
(2) Porphyry, Plotinus's pupil and follower, was born

c. 232 and died c, 304 A,D, He is said to have written 77
treatises of which only 18 survived. Their philosophical value
is considerable and Porphyry is traditionally ranked among
the founders of neo-Platonism, In the so- called Sententiae ad
intelligibilia ducenles (Aids to the Study of the Intelligibles) he presents a summary of the Plotinian teaching strengthening its monistic tendency and emphaSising, in particular,
the absolute reality of the One at the expense of the reality of
individuals, Concentrating On the ethical consequences of the
doctrine of the One and regarding the health of the soul as
the goal of ethical activity, Porphyry divides all virtues
into four groups: (1) civic, which curb passions; (2) purificatory, whereby the soul rids itself of everything earthly
and attains tranquillity; (3) contemplative, which induce the
soul to revert to the primary cause thus complementing its
purification; (4) paradigmatic, which provide the model or
paradigm of all virtues, The first two groups are called by
Porphyry the virtues of the soul, the last two, the virtues
of the intellect. All the groups make a hierarchy corresponding to the
in the soul's aScent to the intelligible world,
Porphyry IS also known as the author of logical treatisesth(' Introduction to Aristotle's Categories (Isagoge) and a
commentary on the same work which left, perhaps, the deepest
st~ps
tran' ill ttl(' histflr)' of ~hi, l()sophY and were the obj('ct of mu('h
(I('hat' in lat'r f l'llturlt's ,
. I statu~ of genera
Hai"iing t)I(' rllH'stlOn of th(' ontol0f'ca . I ' otion~ and
.. , s l'xllrt'SsP(1 in the form 0 genera n
.
and "iPl.CU "
I. e inrip endent existenc' or ar' pres{'nt
wondcrHlg If th('(Yp ItIV h I. ria) Porphyry in fact (or{'shad.
only in thought
orp , s,'
,
lIliversals that divided
owe d th' I1l'dipval cOlltr()ver~y r~~ lnd realists (the former
the philosophers into till' nobmlOa IS sa~es whereas the latt('r
believed th(' universals to .c mere n
,
bJ'ectivc 'xistencc).
,
b l
d I asst:!rte t wlr 0
.
th ontological questIOn, U
'-- Porphyry do('s not, answer, C f cate ories rejected by
restores thl.' Aristot('ila~ doctrl~: 0 on thge logical relation
Plotinus and focuses hiS ~tten lOllI _ g the terms ("five
.
Ie'5
between genera an(I ,species
. . ana
d ysm
tanding of Anslot
..
to . the
Ita) ,
words)
c~sen t'al
I
.
. un,'nersdirff.>rt'nc(> ( dU
I er(n
Categorie$: genus. Sp'Cll'S, sP),(ll<'1 -"parable accidl'nl. lit'
-b t (p,opnlllfl. , ttol l (the
:,o.
dOff
t
essential attfl u I.'
many and I eren
describes the genus a~ rel~tmg
The genus is predicated
and a sserts it to be theIr su ~tance.
'n ,.Iation of oxen,
-b'
'sa genus I
..
of species (a IivlIlg e~llg. ':d I. (every ox is a Imng
horses, {'tc,) and of lII.dlVl, uar:dicated of individuals, In
being), whereas the sp~cles IS {both species and indivi?uals,
turn a difT('rentia is predl,cable 0 resented by Porphyry In ~.he
The 'result of this analYSIS ~vas P("The Tree of Porphyry )
of notions
form 0 f a py ramid
<
A
(Jubit.an<fli
.,
.,
Incorpornl
Corporeal
L;"in~
AoeD
AOCD
'~nslble
~nJib'e
ABCD
Ration.l
ABCOE
.mllo.....
ABCDEI'
S.)rrall'.~,
Pial"
1111' I
, )IIH'r i\Hli\itll\al~
,
h subordination and coortli
I t IS
-a graphic illuslrall~)nllto
~
Ct'
thl' classical prOCt'dUfl'
I' as \\ (>
as
0
uatlon of conccp s, .
\
of dichotomy, a form of IOg'il'al divi~ltlll \ t'w'd ill lIP. !ljln

,
:-iill' din'clion. it r('pfl'~('nls H :-;1'111'11\(' r ~t'lU' IlL
Oil hv
canerlling <lttrillllt('~
Porph),ry IS known III han' ht'I'11 iI lIill(', 1'111' II~ f ( Ii I~ Iiauily. In his work Adl'('rSlIs Chris/fflllOS ( \~ II 1st I 11' Chrts_
tians) which wa~ I,ltl'r hUfnt h)' tht' d\'r~Ylllt'll hUI partiallv
survind in fragments cih'd hy his nili('~ ht' argllt'd fo'r
poiylh('ism on the grounds thaI tilt, Olll' god of a lHoll()thl'islir
religion is like a monarch h,wing lin suhj"cts similar to
himselr. The trul' monarch. i.H'('ording to Porphyry, is not tht,
one who stays alon'. hut who I'piglls OHr his lik(', IIt'lin'. god \
cannot be callt'd a monarch tJlllt'ss hI' ndl'.-; 0\"('" (llllel' 1t0ds. )
Porphyry came out with a host of argullH'nts against thE' /
Christian ~cw Trstamrnt, ("posing its inconsistencies and
contradictions, )'et his own alternativ(' ,Vas a- do(.lriiie o'f
int~rmedla'rfes between man and thr OnC' .. a ruultitudt> of good
and bad demons and gods- which led him to the recognition of
miracles and justification of all sorls of Sllpf'l"stilioIlS, r.g.
belirfs in religious satrilke, prayt'r. mag-if', OI'acirs, etc.
As is evidenced from Porphyry's letter to ArH'bo, all these
rxternal manifestations of faith were rrgardcd by him as
expressions of "true" religion subject to allegorical interpretation. A vivid example of such interpretation is Porphyry's
work De antra nympharum (On the Cave of the Nymphs) in
which he discloses the "hidden meaning" of Homer's descripof a cave (The Odyssey, Xfll, 102112)
tion
15. The Syrian and Alhenian St-hools of ~('O.PI8tonism
The teaching of lamblichus of Chalcis (died s. 330 A.D.)

centres around the doctrine of gods. I n his works Life of
Pythagoras (D" Vila Pythagorica) and The Summary of
Pythagorean Doctrines (De Vita Pythagorica tiber), as well
as in the Exhortation (Protrepticus) he describes Pythagoreanism as divine philosophy and calls himself a Pythagorean, believing mathemati('!:) to be a prrpatatioll for thp :-;tucly
of gods, His Own teacbing, hOW('\"('I', is typical Il('()' Platonism.
Jamblichus proceeds from tbe Plotinian doctrine of t.hree
hypostases, the <?ne, th~ Nous (Reason, Intrlligrllce) alld the
Soul, yet he differentiates them furthf'r on th(, basis of
Plot!nus's princip.le ~f mediation starting' the line of a very
dHalipd systematisatIOn of nI'O-PlalQoism.
Having plat:cd an intermediary bHwef'n tlw One and the
.'lous in the form of a sf'l-sufflci('ut and sl'lf .emanating god
'f' \'
)g. I I tr
\ 'I!I~
hi' dlvidj. thr ('!:(1Il1l hyposl::!gig

\ul) 1111 " ed II 1<\ ntl'l gilli. e IIbjl'elsHf thought (Bcing)
llill Intf'lltC't IIU" J IllIII'elJ:. i.t, 3(:tioll IIf thought
111I1f'lligl'l1l"'l') Fach )f tll('IO, ill tun, IS :uokrn lp IIIto thn'j
t'II'IJll'llts making I triad, alld I'ach membN of ('ach triad is
dt'<"iared 11 ellit Y III il:--: own right and .HI inilprf'ndl'nt
silbstallcl'. i'a~.sing 11/\ til HII' Soul and pl'rforfllillg 011 it
1.1 similar olll'ratioll. JamblidlllS gets II whole p<lntlwon of ~olls
I'xl('rnal to till' world whil"h are followed by internal ~()ds ,of
thr('(' catE'goril's: 12 11I'<lv('lIly gilds which break up mto ,~r,
deiti('s and thrst' into 3fiO; 72 (Jf(lers of suhhl'avpniy gods
and thl'n 12 ortiNs of generating gods (theoi genesioyrgoi),
corresponding to 21 ruling gods. Next come angels, tht'o
demons and herol's.
All these nllmb('~s are in fact nothing else ~b~r.1 the as~r~.
logical calculus based on shN'r fancy, Poiemlclsmg agal?st
Porphyry in his De Mysteriis (On .ilysteries) o\'er. the reJa.llve
values of th('urgy and the intellect. Jamb~lchus give:.
referl'nce to the former on the grounds that ma~lc~1 practlce~
~enect and reprC's('nt tlu' impact of a high~r PI'I~lcllplC' ullI Ih~
.
.'. t
'Idlining Ihp 1I01t\" Will (,0\, I.t
(
(:,.
~~fv".'ti:~t1l, i'~ ,~~~';C~i~~;'tal ~he.~f~~rrr~~~~t~~~~~;~d1~;<r:~:;
lambhchus as dlvl,ne an.

t 'bod are higher than the
religious riles as actll\"~' ser; It~e ~bsolute he placed reli~ion
iot(>lIectual cootemp allOJ.l 0
e
th
1' I ' an I pl'le"t above 10
.
.
above phi
osop
1)
h'l.
I
..
1,,(.1,
plan'd
an
important
part
In
.
h
I
f
Jam
IC
IUS
\
\
.
.
.
TI
le~c .000
' ) f nt'o-Platoni"'m by substituting
tbe rt'llglOus cor.ruptlOlI ~ nali.sm was rather numerous, hut
theurgy and magic for ra~~o
for the views of its members.
we possess only scanty e\\ enc~mperor Julian the Apostate
Tradition ranks amon~ 1C1~1 a pagan after accession to the
who openly declared hUll" d an attempt to restore the
throne .In 361 A .D' am . rna Cof Jamblichus were eVI'd en tl'~
Hel\C'nistic rC'ligioll. l~h~tCWSdria a nco-Platonist woman
shared by Hypatia 0, k~~at~ death in 415 A.D. by a fanatic
philosophrr .WI,l,O ~'l.Is laC
,
.
mob of Clmstwns..
J blichus the centre of oe~~Platolllc
After the death of amyt'd to Athens. The Athemao school
thought seems lO hav.t' 1il0 neo. Platonic line of transition from
continued along the I~alil~ yet it di~played a murl~ grear~
h losophy to theo ogy bl
pI"
. I pro t'lll~.. It wa"' foundE'd , byAProc
d us
\
. tercst in theorctlca .
'ded in turning Plato s ca en)
III
'85 All)
(4tO-_.
. . who SUCCN
ker
Plotinian and gave a more systematic and canonical shapl.' to

the main tenets of neo-Platonism. His teachers Wt're Plutar h
of Athens and Syrianus of Alexandria, the first heads of t~e
Academy who openly professed the leaching of Plotinus
Proclus's heritage includes numerous comm'ntaries o
Plato's dialogues (Republic, Parmenides, Timaeus. Alcibi~
ades I), as well as his original works Elements oj Theology
and Fundamentals oj Physics (Institulio physica) , Of the
last two the latter is in fact a reproduction of Aristolle's
Physics whereas the forfller consists in the exposition of the
basic principles of nco-Platonic philosophy and theology
which are hard to distinguish, The enormo us Platonic Theology has come down to us entire, yet it was published only once
(in 1618 in Latin) and its English translation dates back to
1816, His other works are commentaries on Euclid's Book I,
philosophical treatises On Providence and Fate, Ten Questions on Providence and The Existence oj Evils available in
Latin translations; we also have his treatises on mathematics
and astronomy, as well as essays on the art of writing.
Proc1us preserves the outline of the lIeo- Platonic scheme
and remains true to the doctrine of three hypostases--the
One, the ~ous and the Soul, yet the starting point of his
discourse is not the One as such. but the dialectic of one and
many. Any plurality participate~ in the One, it derives from it
and is secondary to it. The One, on its part, may participate in
many, yet the "One as such" docs not share in any multiplicity
as it is absolutely the first. Since "all thaI is capable of generation is superior to the nature of the generated" (Prod. Elem,
th'ol. 7), many cannot be equal to Onc. The One is goodness
and everything related to it is good, though not as good as
the One itself.
Here Proclus, rlrst. reveals the idealist essence of his theory
by recognising the One, i.e, the general and the good" as
primary and, second. expounds the doctrine of emana.tlo~:
implicit in Plotintls, by describing in detail the "mechanism
of th' gen('ration of one from many. The downward movemenl
cha racteristic of the emanative process is followed by the
~Ipward movement whereby multiplicity is again integrated
Into the On', The starting point of the emanative process
with the terminal point of a reversion, a return to
I coincides
\ th! One.
It ~houlrl bE' noted t~at this cyclic "c hange" of all bein.g
ril'SCflbed
hy Proclus IS hardly a change at all, as it 15
,. ,
. him as ~ p~oc~ss of differentiation and, integra

tion of InLellig(,llce WlttliO Il".own ~pherc representmg noth
ing else than til(' logi~al relallOllsillp of the concrf'te an~ l.ht'
abstract. th(' lalter bl:'ln~ understood not as a common quall,ty
or property of individual objects in the !'en~e of f~rm.al. lo~pc,
but as the ('sse nee and substanc(' of a plurality of mdlvlduals,
as unity in diversity.
."
.
.
This profound and ('xtremeiy frUItful dlaleclicaJ Id.~~ \\as
conceived
utterly emasculated within the fram,ework. of. Proclus s neo- )

Platonic syMcm which turned th{' logl~al prLO~lt~ of the w~ol('
and the universal into the ontologIcal, prlO.nty of b~m~.
Idealism is incompalibl(' with the !eal dlale_c~lcs.of the IOdl'dual the- parlirular and the ullIversal which IS ba~ed on
~~e re~ognition of their eqllal va1i~i~y, ~ince .the un<;lversal
exists only in and through the indiVidual, ~nd V_IC~ v~r:a. ~~e
a'bstract -pl1ilosophica l doctrine of Proclus ~mp a.s~~:~g t~~
. t of the univer~al (th' One) and ep~ecl .. ~
.
~:Ibr~r~\;l~r a{~vl a~lht' iIH~I;~.\~i\il~~ ~Ia~o ()~I~~(' l:~;:~' '~I~IE~t 11;~~('r~~::1

miSSion
'.
his impot(,lI('t' agalllst
SlI
" . I -trary rule of thl'
I H
,If)1
HOlllan
Empire'b'
. d ta'l the proc('ss of emanation and turning
OesCfI In,g 10 e I
h'
hy of souls--- gods, angels.
the world IIlto a ~r'at'li le~)~~~lu~ gives free rein to hi:-;
demons, ,hero'~ a,1I me
enNal scheme laid dowl.' b.y
imagi~atlOn wlth~~r ~~:regare some important features III hiS
Jamb\lchus, H?w.e
i'sh him {rom his predecessors.
system that dlstlOgu .
s the emanation of one of th('
First, he regard~er~~~~;er~~linate, the determin('d a~HI .tl~~
triads formed by t Matter is no longer conceived as e~d, I,t IS
mixture of the two,
d
., "roelus adopts the StOIC VI('W
" As re"ar S eVI ,
.
",
"indifferent.
.,.,
P'
I
.
IS)
and
asserts
that
It
rf'SU
'
by
late
a
OOIS
.
,
hy
(also expre~sr d
. , s brtwt't'n good t'ntitil'S gl'lwratl'E .
bv pn)(luC"t of ('ontI"Hdi('\ion~
from illf'vitahlt' ('onnl~t. '.
the highest po\~('r, , Ilcl~~e tI(sec Procl, In Remp. 358ff., J){'(',
for their eXIS
.
.
.
necesS a ry
dubiL 123 ff.).,
'v s the process of emanation as
Second, Proclu~ ~oncel e_ followed by the return of many
escentof th' One.llltO many ver st{' of this pro('t'~S us
the One and
f(';nains in tllf' {'manat
~n~o
.1Il~rr~~~m:I13~d
~ntri:~ i~{ ;.~:~c~~~~~~~naii~:~~:~ti~;~~i:~: :~\li!~ :eI:r;:tt:~rlrl:O~::
'
h~
emanatlllg as It. IS d This pro('('ss (idenlitY-f'lllaoalwll-rt

"
tr for reunIOn.
.
it s{'ek ln ,.,
turn) described as assinutation to till' callSt' lIul 1!'i partle-.

patlon" of til(' inrer.i~r in till' sl'lwr iur ~'~1 in fart a gt'III'I:,
paU(>rn of til(' coglllllVt' process, my s l dll1I alld ,Ii~tnrled h.
Proch'an idealism. Extricat.l'll from Oil' ohs('uritit'S of Prfldll~'~
philosophy, it marked an Important sh'p forward in thp d,v~lopm{'nt of id('a~ist dial(>~' tic~. Howl'\'t'I',. Ow philosopher
himself hardly realised the ::HgniflcancC' of Ill S durtl'irH',
3:-;
his
attention seemed to be foclised not Oil thC' laws of thinking

underlying the dialectics of categories, but on how to aCcom.
modate the gocfs of tht' tradilional Ill'atht'li rl'ligioll lo lill'
triadic form of develoRmcnlo 8imilady to Jamhli ch ul', Pl'o('lus

puts religion above philosophy and thcurgy or the "making
of gods" above "theory" or the contemplation of the universe.
Extending this principle to ethics and laking his cue from
Jamblichus, Proclus adds yet ano ther gl'oup of virtues to
Porphyry's list of four - the hieratic (priestly) or " unifying"
virtues which, in his opinion, can alone bring man to unity
with God"
Proclus was the last original represen tative of ancient
philosophy. Of his followers we shall mention only two - Oamascius and Simplicius.
Damascius (fifth-sixth centuries A.D.) is c red ited with
a large work entitled Problems and Solutions About the First
Principles (Dubitattones et solutiones de primis principiis

in Platonis Parmenides). In short, these problems result from
the gulf between the incomprehensible and ineffable first
principle of the neo-Platonists and its derivatives accessible
to Reason and Soul. The first principle, aceol'ding to Damasci us, is not on ly a hove Reason, bu t also above the One. I t has no
predicates and the only possible attitude to it is silence
and admission of complete ignorance. Therefore the process of
transition from the first principle to substance does not lend
itself to any rational description: neither the triads
"identity -- emanation - return" and "unity potentiality actuality," nor the cause-effect relationship can represent it
in adequate terms as they are mere analogies.
. Damascius makes a~ attempt to bridge the gap by inc.reas109 the number of Intermediate links between the first
principle and Reason, whereupon he rpturns to the trail
~Iazed ~y P:odus. Thoug~1 ~is t~achillg contains a number o[
H1terE'stlOg Ideas, e.g. a dlstlIlctJlJll het\\.'('('n kinds of emanation, original concepti OilS of f'tNnity and tilllf', wholt' <lnd
parts, etc., it is on the whol(> inclitativ4' of th4' insolubility of
"
tlU'lllalll OlltI8(IIC'ifJll f)f IIl'o-I)lalflni~m the "ppos tlOn of

till' ".~ Illlt~ nrnlv ()f th(' flr .. t ,I I! l' Jod the fIlultipli(: )' of
IIII' wol'lll gl'll4'r,I\.l'fl from I.
Simpliritls (IIiI'd ;"':' A.i),) Wl'll df'~11 ill ttlf! hi!'otlJ~Y flf
philosophy as Aristotl,' Ii (.OI l1m"nta t~r lil~ ~flrb <Ire an Ir~\a
luuhlp SOllI"C(' of illfnrmatlflll on HlflI'nt philosolJhy, partlcu
larly tht' prl'-Sonati(s.
. .
In 52!! A.D. EllqH'l"Or JllsLinian known for .tllS p{'r~p(lItlO.n
of Christiali "tH'rf'sil'~" prohihilt'd the tparhlIlg of 1If'll('r~lr
philosophy and closed till' Afalif'IHY. at Athl'll~ .by a sp~~lill
edict. Its last SI'Vf'n tf'adlf'rs , inC'ludlllg Darnasr~lls and SIIIl
plicill g w('nt to P(>rsia on Ihf' invitalion of kwg Khosrau
Anushirvan who prof{'!'Ised to be a lover of Greek culturf',
The period of ancient philosop~y. ca.mc to an end. Th('
imm('diat(' futllrf' helonged to Christianity.
The nco~ Plat{)ni{' ppoch in the hi~tory of worid philn:-<.oph y V

renected a lrt'lIlpndolls social uphea\"al-Ihe {"ol.lap.'it', ~)f I
a wholr soeio-(,COD~Hnic formati.!!. that had ~ tholJ:a~f~ -y(>a r
n' t ben-illd jt and cOliTaboast co lossal achl(>\"l'm~nb In 1h('
~:t~~ral, social and cultural spheres. The b~eakdow~l ~r t.h.('
slave system wag not an instant catastrophe: It exlpll( (>( ~\{ ~
. d f
al cenLurirs and was marked h a gra ua
a pe.flo o. scv:~~omv and ~tca .y growl _QI k\~..;dat .rf'lalilon~
~~~"~le UIel~oriticaT (i~a-iilC-\~ork of t.he Rom.an Emp;re' f ~~l~~
.
I I ading and most Influential trent 0
..
Platonism, t lei e . '., f II c ,",me and reflected tIll' :-;oclal
S Irl 0
I -;;-- -- .
f
epoc II SC n .Red t lC '
-,
n-. n(1 "'odel\. in tcrfiS 0
.
('on!empor<HY mu
' J
II
cxperlcnc~.f . phicai <ioclrilles. This experienr(' was. IHg 1 Y
abstrac~ P 11. OSOn both sidl's: a lUali was heipll'ss, lI11s.cl"ahlr
contra?~ctol~
illusory frc('dom, yet omnipot('nl III till'
and pItiful 111 "di'vine" Empel'or, whereas socif'ty or,. rathN,
pergon o~ thr
. ,"
rstrangrd naturr of gorwl man
r. plrt' rrprNH'1I IIlg . ~
.
1 " 1 'rv
thr I~m
I
,I
of
idlliising
and
annl1l
ilhng t'V{ .
lr
)0
was ,apab.
I ' I" r lorinrss lies ilt tht' root of thr
individual.
ll
This profOll ( (on II.\( 1.(' IT bl:: Ollr and its links with
" ar(,h for t H' lIle. aI" ,"I"al 11('0('(' the a bso ItlllSil
""
on"lanl
sr
C .
. I
,ltlundf'H'rYIIHI\\{
.
.rrHi
the lllal I ,Olll'
\VOlIIH' ('Olln{'
" ,"10 ",I,""< .< 11 indi\"idll<lb
"parllrl\l;llt'
.
I ,I'
f
lioll 0 1 H
k' r"1 . I Ihr n'tllrll. rt\'t'r~I()1I to illY I I. II
in" or "PI;\.~~""Ir~':)tru:.tlll:i\"I~ of 1lI~tholngir<lllhil1ki[\g h;\~I'd nil
)(
"
\is
,I,"
P hil()~OP
II..
I"
the assumption that all being derives from a personal

principle and the world is essentially divine and demonic
The end of the slave-owning system and the downfall of
the "eternal" Roman Empire were reDected in the consciousness of the epoch as the end of philosophy, though it was only
a temporary impasse.
The teachings of ancient philosophers - the Milesians and
Pythagoreans, Heraclitus and the Eleatics, the atomists and
Plato, Aristotle and the Stoics, Sceptics and neo-Platonists
will remain forever in the gold fund of world civilisation as
grand monuments of the philosophical thought of their time.
to Marx, a historical epoch cannot be judged
its consciousness - yet it cannot be judged
its consciousness either, and it is philosophy
.,..J:L.,_ Even more important,
ancient doctrines in the
systems of later periods, their impact on the
of subsequent generations and their ability .to be
iostrumental in the solution of problems the ancients could
Dot even dream of.
REQUEST TO READERS
Protn . PubUlhen would be Ilad to baye
your opinion 01 'hil book. iw ftDllaUon and
desiln and Iny IUReationl you may baye lor
future publications.
\7 Z .-~
Pleue ..nd IU
auv.._"
Boulevard. MOl ~
I
I

History of Antient Philosophy

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

History of Antient Philosophy

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

>

Part One. EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY. .

-Chapter 1. FIRST PHILOSOPHICAL DOCTRINES

Chapler 2. IONIC PHILOSOPHY

Chapter 4. THE "PHYSIOLOGERS" OF THE FIFTH CENi'URY

Chapler 5. PHILOSOPHICAL FERMENT IN THE SECOND HALF

OF THE FIITH CENTURY. THE SOPHISTS. SOCRA1'BS AND

Put Two. CI.+SSIC+L GREEK PHILOSOPHY . .

.t SImi IInti Iht' Thl'nr~ nf I\n,,~II'II~I'

7. Litt' ilnd Wtlr!.

}\11n\\I,,\ ~I' I" I

Fnlm Iht' Thl'on

I~, Plato's Sehuol: "neit'rl! .-\rlldl'II1\'

~~: r~~~~ ~\'y',',hhoni:~11l

Chap/a I. EPICL'RUS A\D EP!CUREA~ISM

L l1elleni~m and Its Philo!'Ophy

Chapter 2. STO I CIS~I .

13. Life and Work . . . .

of Id\'a~ 1(1 CIlSIlIUIII~\

E~r PHI LOSOP HY

I'.\ itT O:'li J-'

E\HLY GRI':EK I'IIILOSOPll'f

First Philosophi('<ll Ooctrines

(If Iht' world

!iwore'!iral rllmprrlwlI"itlll. 011 1111'11\ 11'1".

tUlle to tht' world ;" l""I'lIli.llly ,I ('ogni"inj.{ ilulividual for

Karl \hrx . ..1 C,mlribulwri I" /I ('

.dl,I" 'orlll~ lind tjualilif'!'I 1'llilfJ~(Jpll:v,lhc:, ! Ire, het!" nl}' ')lIe

1.('. ";Ollll'thing 0\\

I," I'rha,'h ,\ntl th(',Ent! .. r (:lll~~i(";t! CprUl;t1l

I' '" 'I I~ ,It "~.,

lutes IIIP rU()ti~:.JOI'('(' _I~ progl'l's~ ill philo~()JlI~y_an(r account~

an~ Usu~lt' ~ .~~J Uudt'rJ.!ol's ('(J,;st<llltJ('r

I~ (I \lIP rlw hasic sta . C lange>, ~1al'x

whirh thl' phil(\~ophy of '1IItlquit)' \~ 11"'Hll'd II, I

eariv Ill'riod and was hut it stepping sIUI1\' to this maturil,

ronsi:;;t('nt doctrinE' of atomistic Illiltt'rill hSIll , a classical sysh'rn

2. Birth of Philosophy: Sot'ial Background

.. ,. '" ,III' hi .. ton: o( Ihflll~hl ,1II1i ,,',Ig a rl'ill .. pirHllal n'vII

allllo~t ("omplPlI' lo:o:s of I'ariy philo-;oplH'r,,' works. TIll' ~11f\'iv

K<lrl M<lrx "fY(f,

Thr fllndan1f:'ntai contradictioll undt'riyillJ,! all s{l('ial eI('_

lhc)lI~h ~otrl"wh~ ',', \10l'1-I'S Sp('akillg Altir"lasl,l,s '~Illd licobl'ews,

' , 11111 ar ('on

811d ~1.tfJrlall of 1,,,,1' fI>i'1 ful' iU!\Iilllq, h~ 'B ,II l

II I ~"I,h. '''11I II!,

,,('lInly <11111 hig "q~IIITI"11L'S III fad dn not amOll!!t tn ;lIlvthill'

-.1I.i:.;lo.l'ians ':f--- philosophy -('oming

n~l~IIHlhty f)~ (.,rpf'k Iholl~hl

h,...... ,. aln'ariy addUl'l,d langLiagf'

(\lfll(,IIIIII'S: II IS ha~'d to .mag-HII' any jn;:r'hallg'1' of opinioll";

of production and of its O\\'Il-rl'pl'oduclioll, Tht' sian' i", in no

", .. th e ruffian king refused

Till! transformation flf social relatioll'" as attf""tl,d by

!'Huk i IIII'. Ilr""un'IIH'lIt"

,If to 1ll'lrcJlonnur,\hl ,' ;lilt! illll'Ol'lall1 aw:

proc"<l<;n ... turm'll \0 1101iItf~, 11'<1111'1- ;lrt -L ~1t1I(',!:.

calla6our. n t (' oll\l.'r hand, lfl(' llHportatln' or ITltt'l1t'dlLal

production and social relations.

it ,pl'<lfiuft' l)I'ill~ 11111'111111\ fflr I'.ll'ort. Tbl' rif.vfliclJlflll-'ut

Fr{'dl'rick En g('ls. "Thl' ()ri~in of thl' F~mily, Pr; \atE' ~ropt'rty

r('prE'~E'nL" the scienti",t'", primary d('",i rr "tn Ill'a~ both si ~l p",

. B;~tori('al ~("il'II('I' llIa;llta;lI~ that mythology was tia' orig

I.luring tl~(' illrl'ption of phi,losophy and in ib early pt'fiO(I,

: r~~ ~\'y',',hhoni:~11l

~;~e~~nt ~!~ a~ld belong~ ~o ~he cl~sss~r ~~~~csco_~:~:~~