The Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics
- Disponibilité
- Texte consultable
- Qualité du texte
- Contrôles automatiques réussis
- Format du texte
- Texte numérique extrait du document
- Type de document
- Étude savante
- Droits d’usage
- Domaine public
- Extraits
- 1 027
page 22
STATE OF CULTURE IX GREECE.
Chap.
'
given.
New ideas had penetrated every branch of
That idealism in which the Greek mind
so beautifully and lucidly found expression had
been set forth by Plato in brilliant purity, and had
knowledg-e.
been by Aristotle combined with careful observation.
Practice
and
theorv had
brought the dialectical
method to the position of an art. A valuable instrument of thought had been gained in the scientific
use of terms of which Aristotle was the real originator.
Within a few generations the intellectual
treasures of Greece had been manifoldly increased,
both in extent and value. The heritage received by
Socrates from his predecessors could hardly be recognised as the same in that which Aristotle
left
to his
successors.
Great as was the progress made by Greek philosophy in the fourth century before Christ, quite as
great were the difficulties with which it had perpetually to contend
quite as difficult the problems
on the solution of which it had to labour. Aristotle
;
had already pointed out the weak points in the
system of Plato, which rendered it impossible for
him to accept that system as satisfactory. From the
platform of later knowledge still further objections
might be raised to it. Even in Aristotle's own
system inconsistencies on some of the most important
points might be found, concealed under a certain
indefiniteness of expression, but fatal if once brought
to light to the soundness of the whole.
For with all
his ingenuity, Aristotle never succeeded in
niously blending
all
harmo-
the elements out of which his
page 23
MERITS AND DEFECTS OF EARLIER SYSTEMS.
system was composed. Thus the divergencies of his
immediate followers from the original Aristotelian
teaching may be accounted for.
Nor were these defects of a kind that could be
easily disposed of. The deeper the enquiry is carried,
the clearer it becomes that they were defects embedded in the foundations of the systems both of
Plato and Aristotle, and underlying the wliole
previous range of philosophic thought.
details and minor points, they may all
Omitting
be ultimately
either to an imperfect knowledge
referred to two
and experience of the world, or to the overhaste of
idealistic philosophy to draw conclusions.
To the
:
former defect
may be
attributed the mistakes
natural science into which Plato
in
and Aristotle fell,
and the limited character of their view of history to
;
the latter, the Platonic theory of ideas with
y*
it involves
all
that
- the antithesis of ideas and appearances,
of reason and the senses, of knowledge andignorance,
-
of the present world and the world to come
and
likewise the corresponding points in the system of
Aristotle; such, for instance (to name some of the
principal ones only), as the relation of the particular
and the general, of .form and matter, of God and the
world, of the theory of final causes
and natural ex-
planations, of the rational and the in-ational parts of
the soul, of speculative theory and practice.
Both defects are closely connected.
The Greek
philosophers were content with an uncertain and
imperfect knowledge of facts, because they trusted
conceptions too implicitly, and were ignoran t of their
B 2
Cfap.
'
page 24
STATE OF CULTURE IN GREECE.
Chap,
origin and worth
;
and they had this unconditional
"
trust in the truth of conceptions because the study of
nature was yet in
its
infancy.
Their knowledge of
history was too limited for them to see the difference
between the results of careful observation and those
of ordinary unmethodical experience, to realise the
uncertainty of most of the traditional principles and
the necessity for a stricter method of induction. The
common
to both Plato and Aristotle lay in
undue
prominence to the dialectical method
attaching
fault
inherited from Socrates to the neglect of observa_tion, and in assuming that conceptions expressing
the very essence of things can be deduced in a purely
logical
way from
language.
current
beliefs
and the use of
In Plato this dialectical exclusiveness
appears most strongly, and finds striking expression
If all conceptions are
in his theory of recollection.
moment of birth and need only
the agency of sensible things to produce a consciousinherent from the
ness of their existence, it is only legitimate to infer
that, to
know the essence of things, we must look
within and not without, and obtain ideas by abstraction from the
mind rather than by induction from
It is equally legitimate to infer that
experience.
the ideas derived from the mind are the true standard
by which experience must be judged.
Whenever
ideas and ex]^5erience disagree, instead of regarding
ideas as at fault, we ought to look upon the data of
experience as imperfect, and as inadequately expressing the ideas which constitute the thing as it really
exists.
Thus the whole theorv of ideas, and all that
page 25
MERITS AND DEFECTS OF EARLIER SYSTEMS.
it
from the
implies, is seen to be a natural corollary
Socratic theory of conceptions.
this theory
Even those parts of
which seem most incongruous are best
of the
explained by being referred to the principles
Socratic process.
From this defective assumption Aristotle is only
partially free.
the defects in
He attempted, it is true, to supply
the Socratic and Platonic theory of
which
conceptions by observation of a kind with
Plato's experimental knowledge cannot be compared
either for accuracy or extent.
With that attempt he
combined a complete transformation of the
Platonic metaphysics, whereby he secured the same
also
to the universal
position for particulars in relation
that his predecessor had secured for observation in
relation to conceptional
did not go far enough.
knowledge. But Aristotle
In his theory of knowledge
he cannot wholly discard the assumption that the
soul has its knowledge by a process of development
from within, and is not only endowed with the capaalso from its birth the
city of thinking, but possesses
In his scientific method a crisubstance of ideas.
tical investigation of
common notions and of idiom
-
that in fact which he himself calls proof by probabilities
-
is
constantly taking the
place
of
strict
His endeavours to harmonise the two
antagonistic currents in Plato's teacliing may have
induction.
been undertaken in all sincerity, but the antagonism
was too deeply seated to yield to his efforts.
It not
only reappears in the fundamental ideas of his system,
but it colours all its general results. Beginning with
Chap.
page 26
STATE OF CULTURE JiV GREECE.
6
Chap,
"
the antithesis between form and 'matter,
it
ends in
the contrast between the ivorld and a soul independent
of the world, in the conception of reason as something-
above man, never combining with the lower parts of
his nature to form one complete living unity.
Conuectionbet IV ten the
theories of
B.
Granting that the Socratic philosophy of concep^j^^^g jg ^^i^ source from which these peculiarities are
-i
derived, still that philosophy is itself only the expres-
and Greek ^ion of the character of the nation which produced
it.
In an earlier work it has been shown ^ that the
characttr.
most distinctive feature of Greek life lay in confounding the outer and the inner worlds, in ingenuously assuming that the two originally corresponded,
and are still in perfect harmony with one another.
When the whole mental life of a people bears this
impress, it is sure to be reflected in its philosophy
also.
Together with the advantages which accrue
from the confusion of the two, philosophy shares also
the disadvantages
which unavoidably attend any
real distinction between
theory which ignores the
The mind only gradually and imperfectly
them.
becomes aware of the distinctive peculiarity of mental
life,
of the notion of personality, of the fact that
moral rights and duties are independent of external
circumstances, of the share of the individual will in
It has also less hesitation in transcreating ideas.
ferring phases of consciousness directly to things
themselves, in I'egarding the world from ideal points
of view borrowed from the sphere of mind, in accept-
ing
own notions of things as realities without
its
'
Zeller's Fhllusojjhie dcr Griechen.
Part I. 9(i.
page 27
PHILOSOPHY AND NATIONAL CHARACTER.
them
testing their actual truth, and even treating
the
of
the
than
as more real
senses, and
reality
confounding the critical analysis of a notion
with the experimental investigation of a thing.
If the ]Dhilosophy of Greece iu the time of its greatest
in
defects ; if, further,
perfection was not free from these
these defects were tlie cause of all the important
faults in
the systems of Plato and Aristotle
the
;
creators of these systems and their immediate successors are not the only ones to blame but the whole
;
mental peculiarity of the people is at fault of which
within the province of science these men were the
greatest representatives.
As the faults of the Platonic and Aristotelian
systems are seen to be connected with the geaeial
character of Greek life, it becomes obvious how difficult
it
must have been
themselves from them.
Greeks to emancipate
To overcome the difficulty
for
nothing short of a radical breaking away from old
lines of thought
would
avail.
The origin of ideas,
the primary meaning of conceptions, must be enquired
into with
searching thoroughness;
a sharper dis-
tinction must be drawn between what is supplied
from without and what is supplied from within the
;
truth of axioms hitherto
received
in
metaphysics
must be more carefully investigated than had ever
been done as yet. The intellect must accustom itself
to an accuracy of observation, and to a strictness of
inductive process, never before reached in Greece.
Experimental sciences must attain a degree of completeness which
it
was vain to hope to reach by the
Chap.
I.
page 28
STATE OF CULTURE IN GREECE.
methods and means then in vogue. The fashion of
regarding nature as though it were a living being
Chap,
'
which allowed questions as to facts to be answered
by sjDeculations as to final causes or by the desire of
Ennature to realise beauty, must be abandoned.
duties
man's
moral
nature
and
must
into
a
quiries
be kept apart from the simple study of his conduct
in relation to natural surroundings, the disastrous
effects which flow from the confusion of the two beinsr
only too apparent in the national type of the Greeks,
in the exclusively political character of their morality,
and in their adherence to slavery.
Before this pass could be reached how much was
there not to alter in the condition and mental habit
Could it indeed be expected that a more
and
more scientific method would gain
vigorous
of Greece
!
foothold so long as the tendency to look upon the
of nature as analogous to the life of man was
life
kept alive by a religion such as that of Hellas ?
that moral science would liberate itself from
Or
the
trammels of Greek propriety of conduct, whilst in all
practical matters those trammels were in full force ?
TOr that a clearer distinction would be drawn between
what comes from without and what from within in
ideas
a distinction which we vainly look for in
Aristotle
until a depth and an intensity had been
given to the inner life, and until the rights and value
of the individual as such had obtained a recognition
which it required the combined influence of Christianity and the peculiar Germanic character to bring
about ? The more vividly the national ty^e and the
-
i
I
'
'
-
page 29
PHILOSOPHY AND NATIONAL CHARACTER.
national conditions surrounding Greek philosophy are
9
Chap.
"
realised, the firmer becomes the conviction, that to
heal
its
defects
- which are apparent even in
greatest and most
brilliant
achievements
its
- nothing
short of a revolution in the whole mental tone of
Greece would avail
plished, but not
- such
as history has seen accom-
after
till
many
sliifts
and many
centuries.
On the platform of the ancient life of Greece
such a change could not possibly have come about.
It may be that under
more favourable circumstances
Greek philosophy might have further developed along
the same course of purely intellectual enquiry which
successfully followed in the hands
representatives, more particularly of
What results might in this way have been
it had previously so
of its
earlier
Aristotle.
attained, we cannot exactly determine.
Speculation
however, useless. In point of fact, the historical
circumstances under which philosophy had. to grow
is,
Philosophy had become what it
was under the influence of those circumstances. The
cannot be ignored.
Socratic theory of conceptions, and Plato's theory
of ideas, presuppose on the one hand the high cul-
ture of the age of Pericles, and the brilliant career
of Athens and Greece following on the Persian war.
They also presuppose the political degradation and
the moral exhaustion of Greece during and after the
Peloponnesian war.
Aristotle, with his high intel-
lectual culture, despairing of everything
direct
and
practical, with his wide view of things, his knowledge
of every kind,
his
system matured and elaborate,
page 30
STATE OF CULTURE IN GREECE.
10
-
and embracing all the results of previous enquiry
appears as the child of an age which was bearing to
the grave a great historical epoch, in which intel-
Chap,
^
lectual labour had begun to take the place of vigorous
political action.
The bloom of Greek philosophy was short-lived,
but not more short-lived than the bloom of national
I
I
I
The one was dependent on the other, and both
were due to the action of the same causes. The Greeks,
life.
,'
;
with a high appreciation of freedom, a ready aptitude
for politics, and a
genius for artistic creations, prowithin
the
duced
sphere of politics one result of its
kind uniivalled and unique. They neglected, however, to lay the foundations wide
and deep.
Their
political endurance was not equal to their versatility
Communities limited in extent
restlessness.
and simple in arrangement sufficed for them. But
how could such communities include all branches of
the Greek family, and satisfy at once all legitimate
and
aspirations ? It is the same within the department of
science. Prematurely concluding and rashly advanc-
ing from isolated experiences without mediating links
to the most general conceptions, they constructed
theories upon a foundation of limited and imperfect
experience, which it was wholly inadequate to bear.
Whether, and in kow far, the intellect of Greece, if
left to itself, might have remedied these defects in a
longer protracted calm of development, is a question
which it is impossible to answer. As a fact, that
intellect was far
j
'
too intimately bound up with the
the
in short.
moral, and the religious life
political,
-
page 31
]
nilLOSOrHY AND NATIONAL CHARACTER.
with the whole mental tone and culture of the people
not to be seriously affected by a change in any one
11
Chap.
-
of them.
'_
It lay, too, in the character and historical
to have only a brief period of
progress of that people
At the time that the
over.
soon
that
splendour, and
in
philosophy of Greece reached its highest point
Plato and Aristotle, Greece was in all other respects
in
a hopeless
state
of decline.
Notwithstanding
individual attempts to revive it, the old morality and
since the beginpropriety of conduct had disappeared
The old belief in
nino- of the Peloponnesian war.
To the bulk of the
the gods was likewise gone.
its ethics afforded
with
people the rising philosophy
no substitute.
Art, although carefully cultivated,
come up to the excellence of the strictly
Political relations became daily more
classic period.
failed to
unsatisfactory.
In the
fifth
century before Christ
the rivalry of Athens and Sparta had ranged the
In the succeeding
states of Greece into two groups.
century disunion spread further.
The effort made by
Thebes under Epaminondas to found a new leaderDestitute of a political
ship only multiplied parties.
centre of gravity, the Greeks, of their
own choice,
drifted into a disgraceful dependence on the conquered
\ and now declining Persian empire.
Persian gold
wielded an influence which Persian arms had been
The petty jealousies of tiny
states and tribes frittered away in endless local feuds
unable to exercise.
resources which with unity and leadership might have
accomplished wonders. Civil order declined, and with
it the
well-being and martial prowess of the nation
/
page 32
STATE OF CULTURE IN GREECE.
12
Chap.
I.
The growing pursuit of the art of
war as a profession took the decision of battle more
and more oat of the hands of free citizens, and placed
it in those of the numerous bands of mercenaries
which are one of the most baneful phenomena of that
age, a sure sign of the decline of freedom, and of the
declined also.
approach of a military despotism. When by the rise
of the Macedonian power the danger of a military
despotism loomed nearer, patriots in Greece continued to deceive themselves with the hope that
their self-devotion would avert the danger^ but any
unbiassed reader of history sees in the failure of their
attempts to avert it the natural and inevitable result
of causes so deeply rooted in the Greek character and
the course of Greek history, that neither the most
heroic exertions of individuals, nor the united resist-
ance of the divided states, which came too late,
could for one moment have rendered the final issue
doubtful.
C.
Greece
after the
battle of
Cheer onea.
By the battle of Cheeronea the doom of Greece
was sealed.
Never since then has Greece attained to
real political freedom.
All attempts to shake off the
Macedonian supremacy ended in humiliating disasters.
In the subsequent struggles Hellas, and Athens in
particular, were the play-ball of changing rulers, the
continual arena of their warfare.
The second half
of the third century was reached before a purely
Grecian power the Achgean League was formed,
-
-
round which the hopes of the nation rallied, but the
attempt was wholly inadequate to meet the real
requirements of the tiines.
Soon it became apparent
page 33
DECLINE OF GliEECE.
13
Chap.
that no remedies were forthcominsr to heal the ills
.
.
.
1
from which the country was suffering. Discord, their
old
hereditary
failing,
rendered
it
impossible
Greeks to be independent in foreign relations, or to
Their best resources
be united and settled at home.
were wasted in perpetual struggles between Achaeans,
^tolians, and Spartans. The very individual who
led the Achaeans against the Macedonians in the
cause of independence, called the Macedonians back
to the
Peloponnesus to gain their support against
Sparta.
When the supremacy of Macedonia was
broken by the arms of Rome, a more avowed depend-
And when, in the
was incorporated
Achaia
of
the
146
B.C.,
province
year
into the Roman empire, even the shadow of freedom
ence on Italian allies succeeded.
which up to that time had been assured departed for
ever.
Sad as were the external affairs of Greece at this
its intelperiod, and marked as was the decline of
lectual power, its mental horizon, nevertheless, extended and its culture became more generally diffused.
The Macedonian ascendency, which gave the death-
blow to the independence of Greece, also broke down
the barriers which had hitherto separated Greeks
from foreigners.
'_
for
A new world was opened out before
them, and a vast territory offered for their energies
Greece was brought into manifold conto explore.
tact with the Eastern nations belonging to the
Macedonian monarchy, whereby it secured for its
culture the place of honour among them, but at the
same time became subject to a slow, but, in the long
/
j