Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
1. . φύσεως κόσμον ἀγήρω (R. P. 148 ς fin.). 2 I do not mean to imply that the philosophers used this title them- selves; for early prose writings had no titles. The writer mentioned his name and the subject of his work in the first sentence, as Herodotos, for instance, does, INTRODUCTION 13 discussing the earlier philosophy,’ and its history shows clearly enough what its original meaning must have been. In Greek philosophical language, φύσις always means that which is primary, fundamental, and persistent, as opposed to what is secondary, derivative, and transient; what is “given,” as opposed to that which is made or becomes. It is what is there to begin with. It is true that Plato and his successors also identify φύσις with the best or most normal con- dition of a thing; but that is just because they held the goal of any development to be prior to the process by which it is reached. Such an idea was wholly un- known to the pioneers of philosophy. They sought the explanation of the incomplete world we know, not in the end, but in the beginning. It seemed to them that, if only they could strip off all the modifications which Art and Chance had introduced, they would get at the ultimately real; and so the search after φύσις, first in the world at large and afterwards in human society, became the panes interest of the age we have to deal with. Aco, The word ais, ΑΝ chic the early cosmologists are usually said to have designated the object of their search, is in this sense purely Aristotelian, It is quite natural that it should be employed in the well- known historical sketch of the First Book of the Jeta- physics; for Aristotle is there testing the theories of earlier thinkers by his own doctrine of the four causes. But Plato never uses the term in this connexion, and it does not occur once in the genuine fragments of the 1 Plato, Laws, 892 c 2, φύσιν βούλονται λέγειν γένεσιν (1.6. τὸ ἐξ οὗ γίγνεται) τὴν περὶ τὰ πρῶτα (1.6. τὴν τῶν πρώτων). Arist. Phys. B, I. 193 ἃ 21, διόπερ οἱ μὲν πῦρ, οἱ δὲ γῆν, οἱ δ᾽ ἀέρα φασίν, οἱ δὲ ὕδωρ, οἱ δ᾽ ἔνια τούτων, οἱ δὲ πάντα ταῦτα τὴν φύσιν εἶναι τὴν τῶν ὄντων. 14 EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY ᾽ early philosophers. It is confined to the Stoic and Peripatetic handbooks from which most of our know- ledge is derived, and these simply repeat Aristotle. Zeller has pointed out in a footnote’ that it would be an anachronism to refer the subtle Aristotelian use of the word to the beginnings of speculation. To Anaximander ἀρχή could only have meant “begin- ning,” and it was far more than a beginning that the early cosmologists were looking for: it was the eternal ground of all things.
2To Anaximander ἀρχή could only have meant “begin- ning,” and it was far more than a beginning that the early cosmologists were looking for: it was the eternal ground of all things. There is one very important conclusion that follows at once from the account just given of the meaning of φύσις, and it is, that the search for the primary sub- stance really was the thing that interested the Ionian philosophers. Had their main object been, as Teichmiiller held it was, the explanation of celestial and meteorological phenomena, their researches would not haye been called Περὶ φύσεως ἱστορίη,, but rather Περὶ οὐρανοῦ or Περὶ μετεώρων. Ἀπά this we shall find confirmed by a study of the way in which Greek cosmology developed. The growing thought which may be traced through the successive representatives of any school is always that which concerns the primary substance, while the astronomical and other theories are, in the main, peculiar to the individual thinkers. Teichmiiller undoubtedly did good service by his protest against the treatment of these theories as mere isolated curiosities. They form, on the con- 1 Zeller, p. 217, n. 2 (Eng. trans. p. 248, n. 2). See below, Chap. I. PSF ἃς 2 We have the authority of Plato for giving them this name. Cf. Phd. 96 « 7, ταύτης τῆς σοφίας ἣν δὴ καλοῦσι περὶ φύσεως ἱστορίαν. So, in the fragment of Euripides referred to on p. 12, n. 1, the man who discerns “the ageless order of immortal vous” is referred ‘to as ὅστις τῆς ἱστορίας ἔσχε μάθησιν. INTRODUCTION 1:55 trary, coherent systems which must be looked at as wholes. But it is none the less true that Greek philosophy began, as it ended, with the search for what ν' was abiding in the flux of things. | » VIII. But how.could this give back to nature the Motion and life of which it had been robbed by advancing know- ledge? Simply by making it possible for the life that had hitherto been supposed to reside in each particular thing to be transferred to the one thing of which all others were passing forms. The very process of birth, growth, and decay might now be regarded as the unceasing activity of the one ultimate reality. Aristotle and his followers expressed this by saying that the early cosmologists believed in an “eternal motion,” and in substance this is correct; though it is not probable that they said anything about the eternal motion in their writings. It is more likely that they simply took it for granted. In early- times, it is not movement but rest that has to be ‘accounted for, and we may be sure that the eternity of motion was not asserted till it had been denied. As we shall see, it was Parmenides who first denied it. The idea of a single ultimate substance, when , thoroughly worked out, seemed to leave no room for motion; and after the time of Parmenides, we do find that philosophers were concerned to show how ἢ it began. Αἱ first, this would not seem to require, explanation at all. κ᾿
3The idea of a single ultimate substance, when , thoroughly worked out, seemed to leave no room for motion; and after the time of Parmenides, we do find that philosophers were concerned to show how ἢ it began. Αἱ first, this would not seem to require, explanation at all. κ᾿ Modern writers sometimes give the name of Hylozoism to this way of thinking, but the term is apt to. “be misleading. It suggests theories which deny the separate reality of life and spirit, whereas, in the days of Thales, and even far later, the distinction } tive view of 16 EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY between matter and spirit had not been felt, still less formulated in such a way that it could be denied. The uncreated, indestructible reality of which these early thinkers tell us was a body, or even matter, if we choose to call it so; but it was not matter in the sense in which matter is opposed to spirit. - * The downfall *1X. We have indicated the main characteristics of ΠΡ the primitive view of the world, and we have sketched aires rorid. in outline the view which displaced it; we must now consider the causés which led to the downfall of the one and the rise of the other. Foremost among these was undoubtedly the widening of the Greek horizon occasioned by the great extension of maritime enter- prise which followed the decay of the Phoenician naval supremacy. The scene of the old stories had, as a rule, been laid just outside the boundaries of the world known to the men who believed them. Odysseus does not meet with Kirke or the Kyklops or the Sirens in the familiar Aegean, but in regions which lay beyond the ken of the Greeks at the time the Odyssey - was composed. Now, however, the West was begin- ning to be familiar too, and the fancy of the Greek explorers led them to identify the lands which they discovered with the places which the hero of the national fairy-tale had come to in his wanderings. It was soon discovered that the monstrous beings in question weré no longer to be found there, and the belief grew up that they had never been there at all. So, too, the Milesians had settled colonies all round the Euxine. The colonists went out with ᾿Αργὼ πᾶσι μέλουσα in their minds ; and, at the same time as they changed the name of the Inhospitable to the Hospit- able Sea, they logalised the “far country” (aia) of the INTRODUCTION 17
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
1. . φύσεως κόσμον ἀγήρω (R. P. 148 ς fin.). 2 I do not mean to imply that the philosophers used this title them- selves; for early prose writings had no titles. The writer mentioned his name and the subject of his work in the first sentence, as Herodotos, for instance, does, INTRODUCTION 13 discussing the earlier philosophy,’ and its history shows clearly enough what its original meaning must have been. In Greek philosophical language, φύσις always means that which is primary, fundamental, and persistent, as opposed to what is secondary, derivative, and transient; what is “given,” as opposed to that which is made or becomes. It is what is there to begin with. It is true that Plato and his successors also identify φύσις with the best or most normal con- dition of a thing; but that is just because they held the goal of any development to be prior to the process by which it is reached. Such an idea was wholly un- known to the pioneers of philosophy. They sought the explanation of the incomplete world we know, not in the end, but in the beginning. It seemed to them that, if only they could strip off all the modifications which Art and Chance had introduced, they would get at the ultimately real; and so the search after φύσις, first in the world at large and afterwards in human society, became the panes interest of the age we have to deal with. Aco, The word ais, ΑΝ chic the early cosmologists are usually said to have designated the object of their search, is in this sense purely Aristotelian, It is quite natural that it should be employed in the well- known historical sketch of the First Book of the Jeta- physics; for Aristotle is there testing the theories of earlier thinkers by his own doctrine of the four causes. But Plato never uses the term in this connexion, and it does not occur once in the genuine fragments of the 1 Plato, Laws, 892 c 2, φύσιν βούλονται λέγειν γένεσιν (1.6. τὸ ἐξ οὗ γίγνεται) τὴν περὶ τὰ πρῶτα (1.6. τὴν τῶν πρώτων). Arist. Phys. B, I. 193 ἃ 21, διόπερ οἱ μὲν πῦρ, οἱ δὲ γῆν, οἱ δ᾽ ἀέρα φασίν, οἱ δὲ ὕδωρ, οἱ δ᾽ ἔνια τούτων, οἱ δὲ πάντα ταῦτα τὴν φύσιν εἶναι τὴν τῶν ὄντων. 14 EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY ᾽ early philosophers. It is confined to the Stoic and Peripatetic handbooks from which most of our know- ledge is derived, and these simply repeat Aristotle. Zeller has pointed out in a footnote’ that it would be an anachronism to refer the subtle Aristotelian use of the word to the beginnings of speculation. To Anaximander ἀρχή could only have meant “begin- ning,” and it was far more than a beginning that the early cosmologists were looking for: it was the eternal ground of all things.
2To Anaximander ἀρχή could only have meant “begin- ning,” and it was far more than a beginning that the early cosmologists were looking for: it was the eternal ground of all things. There is one very important conclusion that follows at once from the account just given of the meaning of φύσις, and it is, that the search for the primary sub- stance really was the thing that interested the Ionian philosophers. Had their main object been, as Teichmiiller held it was, the explanation of celestial and meteorological phenomena, their researches would not haye been called Περὶ φύσεως ἱστορίη,, but rather Περὶ οὐρανοῦ or Περὶ μετεώρων. Ἀπά this we shall find confirmed by a study of the way in which Greek cosmology developed. The growing thought which may be traced through the successive representatives of any school is always that which concerns the primary substance, while the astronomical and other theories are, in the main, peculiar to the individual thinkers. Teichmiiller undoubtedly did good service by his protest against the treatment of these theories as mere isolated curiosities. They form, on the con- 1 Zeller, p. 217, n. 2 (Eng. trans. p. 248, n. 2). See below, Chap. I. PSF ἃς 2 We have the authority of Plato for giving them this name. Cf. Phd. 96 « 7, ταύτης τῆς σοφίας ἣν δὴ καλοῦσι περὶ φύσεως ἱστορίαν. So, in the fragment of Euripides referred to on p. 12, n. 1, the man who discerns “the ageless order of immortal vous” is referred ‘to as ὅστις τῆς ἱστορίας ἔσχε μάθησιν. INTRODUCTION 1:55 trary, coherent systems which must be looked at as wholes. But it is none the less true that Greek philosophy began, as it ended, with the search for what ν' was abiding in the flux of things. | » VIII. But how.could this give back to nature the Motion and life of which it had been robbed by advancing know- ledge? Simply by making it possible for the life that had hitherto been supposed to reside in each particular thing to be transferred to the one thing of which all others were passing forms. The very process of birth, growth, and decay might now be regarded as the unceasing activity of the one ultimate reality. Aristotle and his followers expressed this by saying that the early cosmologists believed in an “eternal motion,” and in substance this is correct; though it is not probable that they said anything about the eternal motion in their writings. It is more likely that they simply took it for granted. In early- times, it is not movement but rest that has to be ‘accounted for, and we may be sure that the eternity of motion was not asserted till it had been denied. As we shall see, it was Parmenides who first denied it. The idea of a single ultimate substance, when , thoroughly worked out, seemed to leave no room for motion; and after the time of Parmenides, we do find that philosophers were concerned to show how ἢ it began. Αἱ first, this would not seem to require, explanation at all. κ᾿
3The idea of a single ultimate substance, when , thoroughly worked out, seemed to leave no room for motion; and after the time of Parmenides, we do find that philosophers were concerned to show how ἢ it began. Αἱ first, this would not seem to require, explanation at all. κ᾿ Modern writers sometimes give the name of Hylozoism to this way of thinking, but the term is apt to. “be misleading. It suggests theories which deny the separate reality of life and spirit, whereas, in the days of Thales, and even far later, the distinction } tive view of 16 EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY between matter and spirit had not been felt, still less formulated in such a way that it could be denied. The uncreated, indestructible reality of which these early thinkers tell us was a body, or even matter, if we choose to call it so; but it was not matter in the sense in which matter is opposed to spirit. - * The downfall *1X. We have indicated the main characteristics of ΠΡ the primitive view of the world, and we have sketched aires rorid. in outline the view which displaced it; we must now consider the causés which led to the downfall of the one and the rise of the other. Foremost among these was undoubtedly the widening of the Greek horizon occasioned by the great extension of maritime enter- prise which followed the decay of the Phoenician naval supremacy. The scene of the old stories had, as a rule, been laid just outside the boundaries of the world known to the men who believed them. Odysseus does not meet with Kirke or the Kyklops or the Sirens in the familiar Aegean, but in regions which lay beyond the ken of the Greeks at the time the Odyssey - was composed. Now, however, the West was begin- ning to be familiar too, and the fancy of the Greek explorers led them to identify the lands which they discovered with the places which the hero of the national fairy-tale had come to in his wanderings. It was soon discovered that the monstrous beings in question weré no longer to be found there, and the belief grew up that they had never been there at all. So, too, the Milesians had settled colonies all round the Euxine. The colonists went out with ᾿Αργὼ πᾶσι μέλουσα in their minds ; and, at the same time as they changed the name of the Inhospitable to the Hospit- able Sea, they logalised the “far country” (aia) of the INTRODUCTION 17
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.