Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
1nt and the key to his whole system is found in his physics, to Zeller it is found in his metaphysics, and to Pfleiderer in his religionlN* Heraclitus' theology was derived, according to Teichmuller, from Egypt ; according to Lassalle, from Lidia ; according to Pfleid- erer, from the Greek Mysteries. The Heraclitic flux, according to Pfleiderer, was consequent on his abstract theories ; according to Teichmiiller, his abstract theo- ries resulted from his observation of the flux. ( Pfleid- erer says that Heraclitus was an optimist ; Gottlob VI PREFACE. Mayer says that he was a pessunist. According to Schuster he was a hylozoist, according to Zeller a pan- theist, according to Pfleiderer a panzoist, according to Lassalle a panlogist.) Naturally, therefore, in the hands of these critics, with their various theories to support, rche remains of Heraclitus' work have suffered a violence of interpretation only partially excused by his known obscurity, j No small proportion of the fragments, as will be seen in my introduction, have been taken in a diametrically opposite sense. /Recently a contribution towards the disentanglement of this maze has been made by Mr. By water, an acute English scholar. His work (Heracliti Ephesii Reli- quiae, Oxford, 1877) is simply a complete edition of the now existing fragments of Heraclitus' work, together with the sources from which they are drawn, with so much of the context as to make them intelligible, j Under these circumstances I have thought that a translation of the fragments into English, that every man may read and judge for himself, would be the best contribution that could be made. The increasing interest in early Greek philosophy, and particularly in ^eraclitus, who is the one Greek thinker most in accord with the thought of our century^ makes such a translation justifiable, and the excellent and timely edition of the Greek text by Mr. Bywater makes it practicable. The translations both of the fragments and of the context are made from the original sources, though I PREFACE. VII have followed the text of Bywater except in a very- few cases, designated in the critical notes. As(^a number of the fragments are ambiguous, and several of them contain a play upon words/^ have appended the entire Greek text. ^ The collection of sources is wholly that of Mr. Bywater. In these I have made a translation, not of all the references, but only of those from which the fragment is immediately taken, adding others only in cases of especial interest. My acknowledgments are due to Dr. Basil L. Gil- dersleeve, of the Johns Hopkins University, for kind suggestions concerning the translation, and to Dr. Q. Stanley Hall for valuable assistance in relation to the plan of the work. Baltimore, September 1, 1888. CONTENTS. INTRODUCTION. Section I. — Historical and Critical.
2to Dr. Basil L. Gil- dersleeve, of the Johns Hopkins University, for kind suggestions concerning the translation, and to Dr. Q. Stanley Hall for valuable assistance in relation to the plan of the work. Baltimore, September 1, 1888. CONTENTS. INTRODUCTION. Section I. — Historical and Critical. PAGE Literature 1 Over-systemization in Philosophy 2 Over-interpretation in Historical Criticism 3 Exposition of Lassalle \ ■ 4 HegePs Conception of Heraclitus 5 Criticism of Hegel's Conception 6 Criticism of Lassalle 9 Exposition of Schuster 11 Criticism of Schuster 17 Exposition of Teichmiiller 23 Criticism of Teichmuller 31 Exposition of Pfleiderer 39 Criticism of Pfleiderer 46 Section II. — Reconstructive. I. Can the Positions of the Critics be harmonized? 66 Heraclitus' Starting-point 57 Heraclitus as a Preacher and Prophet 57 The Content of his Message 58 The Universal Order 60 Strife 62 The Unity of Opposites 63 The Flux 65 Cosmogony 68 Ethics 69 Optimism 71 CONTENTS. II. Cause of the Present Interest in Heraclitus 72 Passion for Origins 72 Greek Objectivity 73 Heraclitic Ideas 74 Relation to Socrates and Plato 75 Socrates 76 Birth of Self -consciousness 77 Loss of Love of Beauty 78 Rise of Transcendentalism 79 Platonic Dualism 80 Return to Heraclitus 82 Defeat of Heraclitus 83 Translation of thb Fbagmbnts 84-114 Critical Notes 115-123 Greek Text 124-131 INTRODUCTION. Section I. — Historical and Critical. ^Modern Heraclitic literature belongs wholly to the present century. The most important works are the following : — Schleiermacher yHerakleitos, der Dunkle von Ephesos, in Wolf and Buttmann's Museunj der Alterthumswissenschaft, Vol. I,(1807jpp. 313-533, and in Schleiermacher's Sammt. Werke, Abth. Ill, Vol. 2, Berlin, Vl838,)pp. 1-146 ;—Qjik. Bemays Heraclitea, /Bonn, 1848^HeraklitischeStudien, intheRhein. Mus., new series, VII, pp. 90-116, 1850 ; Neue Bruchstiicke des Heraklit, ibid. IX, pp. 241-269, 1854 ; Die Hera- klitischen Brief e, Berlin, 1869 ;-QFerd. Lassalle]) Die Philosophie Herakleitos des Dunkeln von Ephesos, 2 vols., (Berlin, 1858y|"^Paul Schuster) Heraklit von Ephesus, in Actis soc. phil. Lips. ed. Fr. Ritschelius, (l873>j[II, 1-397 ;-^eichmuller^Neue Stud. z. Gesch. der Begnflfe, Heft I, Glotha^876, and II, 1878)-^y water : Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae, Oxford, 1877)-^dmund Pfleiderer\ Die Philosophie des Heraklit vgn Ephesus im Lichter der My sterienidee, (Berlin, 1886 j-^Eduard Zeller : Die Philosophie der Qriechen^Bd. I, pp. 566-677. /There may be mentioned also the following addi- tional writings which have been consulted in the preparation of these pages :-^ottlob Mayer) Heraklit von Ephesus und Arthur Schopenhauer ^^ Heidelberg, 1886 ])(Campbell : Theaetetus of Plato, Appendix A, Oxford, 1883 ; A. W. Benn : The Greek Philosophers, London, I882) 2 HERACLITUS.
3lowing addi- tional writings which have been consulted in the preparation of these pages :-^ottlob Mayer) Heraklit von Ephesus und Arthur Schopenhauer ^^ Heidelberg, 1886 ])(Campbell : Theaetetus of Plato, Appendix A, Oxford, 1883 ; A. W. Benn : The Greek Philosophers, London, I882) 2 HERACLITUS. vAfter the introductory collection and arrangement of the Heraclitic fragments by Schleiermacher, and the scholarly discriminative work and additions of Bernays, four attempts have been made successively by Lassalle, Schuster, Teichmtiller, and Pfleiderer, to reconstruct or interpret the philosophical system of Heraclitus. The positions taken and the results arrived at by these eminent scholars and critics are largely, if not wholly, different and discordant. A brief statement of their several positions will be our best introduction to the study of Heraclitus at first hand, and at the same time will offer us incidentally some striking examples of prevalent methods of his- toric criticism. ) ^ One of the greatest evils in circles of philosophical and religious thought has always been the evil of over- systemization. It is classification, or the scientific method, carried too far. It is the tendency to arrange under any outlined system or theory, more facts than it will properly include. It is the temptation, in a word, to classify according to resemblances which are too faint or fanciful. In the field of historic criticism this evil takes the form of over-interpretationA Just as in daily life we interpret every sense perception according to our own mental forms, s(\we tend to read our own thoughts into every saying of the ancients, and then proceed to use these, often without dis- honesty, to support our favorite modern systems. j The use of sacred writings will naturally occur to every one as the most striking illustration of this over-interpre- tation. Especially in the exegesis of the Bible has this prostitution of ancient writings to every man's religious views been long since recognized and condemned, and if most recently this tendency has been largely cor- HISTORICAL AND CRITICAL. 3 rected in religious circles, it is all the more deplorable, in philosophical criticism, to find it still flourishing. ^Unfortunately, this vice continues, and it appears nowhere more plainly than in the interpretation of Greek philosophy. There is a great temptation to modem writers to use the Greek philosophers as props to support their own systems — a temptation to inter- pret them arbitrarily, to look down upon them patron- izingly, as it were, showing that what they meant was this or that modern thought, having only not learned to express themselves as well as we have.
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.
1nt and the key to his whole system is found in his physics, to Zeller it is found in his metaphysics, and to Pfleiderer in his religionlN* Heraclitus' theology was derived, according to Teichmuller, from Egypt ; according to Lassalle, from Lidia ; according to Pfleid- erer, from the Greek Mysteries. The Heraclitic flux, according to Pfleiderer, was consequent on his abstract theories ; according to Teichmiiller, his abstract theo- ries resulted from his observation of the flux. ( Pfleid- erer says that Heraclitus was an optimist ; Gottlob VI PREFACE. Mayer says that he was a pessunist. According to Schuster he was a hylozoist, according to Zeller a pan- theist, according to Pfleiderer a panzoist, according to Lassalle a panlogist.) Naturally, therefore, in the hands of these critics, with their various theories to support, rche remains of Heraclitus' work have suffered a violence of interpretation only partially excused by his known obscurity, j No small proportion of the fragments, as will be seen in my introduction, have been taken in a diametrically opposite sense. /Recently a contribution towards the disentanglement of this maze has been made by Mr. By water, an acute English scholar. His work (Heracliti Ephesii Reli- quiae, Oxford, 1877) is simply a complete edition of the now existing fragments of Heraclitus' work, together with the sources from which they are drawn, with so much of the context as to make them intelligible, j Under these circumstances I have thought that a translation of the fragments into English, that every man may read and judge for himself, would be the best contribution that could be made. The increasing interest in early Greek philosophy, and particularly in ^eraclitus, who is the one Greek thinker most in accord with the thought of our century^ makes such a translation justifiable, and the excellent and timely edition of the Greek text by Mr. Bywater makes it practicable. The translations both of the fragments and of the context are made from the original sources, though I PREFACE. VII have followed the text of Bywater except in a very- few cases, designated in the critical notes. As(^a number of the fragments are ambiguous, and several of them contain a play upon words/^ have appended the entire Greek text. ^ The collection of sources is wholly that of Mr. Bywater. In these I have made a translation, not of all the references, but only of those from which the fragment is immediately taken, adding others only in cases of especial interest. My acknowledgments are due to Dr. Basil L. Gil- dersleeve, of the Johns Hopkins University, for kind suggestions concerning the translation, and to Dr. Q. Stanley Hall for valuable assistance in relation to the plan of the work. Baltimore, September 1, 1888. CONTENTS. INTRODUCTION. Section I. — Historical and Critical.
2to Dr. Basil L. Gil- dersleeve, of the Johns Hopkins University, for kind suggestions concerning the translation, and to Dr. Q. Stanley Hall for valuable assistance in relation to the plan of the work. Baltimore, September 1, 1888. CONTENTS. INTRODUCTION. Section I. — Historical and Critical. PAGE Literature 1 Over-systemization in Philosophy 2 Over-interpretation in Historical Criticism 3 Exposition of Lassalle \ ■ 4 HegePs Conception of Heraclitus 5 Criticism of Hegel's Conception 6 Criticism of Lassalle 9 Exposition of Schuster 11 Criticism of Schuster 17 Exposition of Teichmiiller 23 Criticism of Teichmuller 31 Exposition of Pfleiderer 39 Criticism of Pfleiderer 46 Section II. — Reconstructive. I. Can the Positions of the Critics be harmonized? 66 Heraclitus' Starting-point 57 Heraclitus as a Preacher and Prophet 57 The Content of his Message 58 The Universal Order 60 Strife 62 The Unity of Opposites 63 The Flux 65 Cosmogony 68 Ethics 69 Optimism 71 CONTENTS. II. Cause of the Present Interest in Heraclitus 72 Passion for Origins 72 Greek Objectivity 73 Heraclitic Ideas 74 Relation to Socrates and Plato 75 Socrates 76 Birth of Self -consciousness 77 Loss of Love of Beauty 78 Rise of Transcendentalism 79 Platonic Dualism 80 Return to Heraclitus 82 Defeat of Heraclitus 83 Translation of thb Fbagmbnts 84-114 Critical Notes 115-123 Greek Text 124-131 INTRODUCTION. Section I. — Historical and Critical. ^Modern Heraclitic literature belongs wholly to the present century. The most important works are the following : — Schleiermacher yHerakleitos, der Dunkle von Ephesos, in Wolf and Buttmann's Museunj der Alterthumswissenschaft, Vol. I,(1807jpp. 313-533, and in Schleiermacher's Sammt. Werke, Abth. Ill, Vol. 2, Berlin, Vl838,)pp. 1-146 ;—Qjik. Bemays Heraclitea, /Bonn, 1848^HeraklitischeStudien, intheRhein. Mus., new series, VII, pp. 90-116, 1850 ; Neue Bruchstiicke des Heraklit, ibid. IX, pp. 241-269, 1854 ; Die Hera- klitischen Brief e, Berlin, 1869 ;-QFerd. Lassalle]) Die Philosophie Herakleitos des Dunkeln von Ephesos, 2 vols., (Berlin, 1858y|"^Paul Schuster) Heraklit von Ephesus, in Actis soc. phil. Lips. ed. Fr. Ritschelius, (l873>j[II, 1-397 ;-^eichmuller^Neue Stud. z. Gesch. der Begnflfe, Heft I, Glotha^876, and II, 1878)-^y water : Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae, Oxford, 1877)-^dmund Pfleiderer\ Die Philosophie des Heraklit vgn Ephesus im Lichter der My sterienidee, (Berlin, 1886 j-^Eduard Zeller : Die Philosophie der Qriechen^Bd. I, pp. 566-677. /There may be mentioned also the following addi- tional writings which have been consulted in the preparation of these pages :-^ottlob Mayer) Heraklit von Ephesus und Arthur Schopenhauer ^^ Heidelberg, 1886 ])(Campbell : Theaetetus of Plato, Appendix A, Oxford, 1883 ; A. W. Benn : The Greek Philosophers, London, I882) 2 HERACLITUS.
3lowing addi- tional writings which have been consulted in the preparation of these pages :-^ottlob Mayer) Heraklit von Ephesus und Arthur Schopenhauer ^^ Heidelberg, 1886 ])(Campbell : Theaetetus of Plato, Appendix A, Oxford, 1883 ; A. W. Benn : The Greek Philosophers, London, I882) 2 HERACLITUS. vAfter the introductory collection and arrangement of the Heraclitic fragments by Schleiermacher, and the scholarly discriminative work and additions of Bernays, four attempts have been made successively by Lassalle, Schuster, Teichmtiller, and Pfleiderer, to reconstruct or interpret the philosophical system of Heraclitus. The positions taken and the results arrived at by these eminent scholars and critics are largely, if not wholly, different and discordant. A brief statement of their several positions will be our best introduction to the study of Heraclitus at first hand, and at the same time will offer us incidentally some striking examples of prevalent methods of his- toric criticism. ) ^ One of the greatest evils in circles of philosophical and religious thought has always been the evil of over- systemization. It is classification, or the scientific method, carried too far. It is the tendency to arrange under any outlined system or theory, more facts than it will properly include. It is the temptation, in a word, to classify according to resemblances which are too faint or fanciful. In the field of historic criticism this evil takes the form of over-interpretationA Just as in daily life we interpret every sense perception according to our own mental forms, s(\we tend to read our own thoughts into every saying of the ancients, and then proceed to use these, often without dis- honesty, to support our favorite modern systems. j The use of sacred writings will naturally occur to every one as the most striking illustration of this over-interpre- tation. Especially in the exegesis of the Bible has this prostitution of ancient writings to every man's religious views been long since recognized and condemned, and if most recently this tendency has been largely cor- HISTORICAL AND CRITICAL. 3 rected in religious circles, it is all the more deplorable, in philosophical criticism, to find it still flourishing. ^Unfortunately, this vice continues, and it appears nowhere more plainly than in the interpretation of Greek philosophy. There is a great temptation to modem writers to use the Greek philosophers as props to support their own systems — a temptation to inter- pret them arbitrarily, to look down upon them patron- izingly, as it were, showing that what they meant was this or that modern thought, having only not learned to express themselves as well as we have.
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.