Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
1towards change is conceived now as "destiny," " force," " necessity," " justice," or, when exhibited 16 HERACLITUS. in definite forms of time and matter, as *' intelligence '* (Id. p. 182, 194 ff.). - The Heraclitic harmony of opposites, as of the bow and the lyre, is a purely physical harmony. It is simply the operation of the strife of opposite forces, by which motion within an organism, at the point where if further continued it would endanger the whole, is balanced and caused to return within the limits of a determined amplitude (Id. p. 230 flf.). The identity of opposites means only that very dif- ferent properties may unite in the same physical thing, either by simultaneous comparison with different things or successive comparison with a changeable thing (Id. pp. 236, 243). The second or political section of Heraclitus' work treated of arts, ethics, society, and politics. It aimed to show how human arts are imitations of Nature, and how organized life, as in the universe and the indi- vidual, so in the state, is the secret of unity in variety. The central thought was the analogy existing between man and the universe, between the microcosm and the macrocosm, from which it results that the true ethical principle lies in imitation of Nature, and that law is founded on early customs which sprang from Nature (Id. p. 310 flf.). The third or theological section was mainly devoted to showing that the names of things are designations of their essence. That Heraclitus himself, not merely his followers, held the (pua^c dpd6T7j<; dvofidxcovy and used etymologies as proofs of the nature of things, Schuster believes is both consistent with his philosophy and conclusively proved by Plato's Cratylus. Primitive men named things from the language which Nature spoke to them ; names, therefore, give us the truth of HISTORICAL AND CRITICAL. 17 things. Etymologies of the names of the gods was the proof first brought forward, as in Plato's Cratylus; hence the name of this section of the work. To show this connection* of names and things was to prove the intimate connection of man with Nature, and so to lead to the conclusion that all knowledge is based on experience, which, indeed, was the end he had in view (Id. p. 317 flf.). (^It is not our purpose to criticize in detail Schuster's conception of Heraclitus. Much of it will commend itself to the careful student of the remains, particu- larly that which relates to the Heraclitic flux and its relation to the primitive fire. Suggestive, also, if not unimpeachable, is his conception of the relation of the microcosm to the macrocosm, and of the harmony and identity of opposites. In his exposition of these doctrines, Schuster has rendered valuable service. We can by no means, however, allow thus tentatively to pass, Schuster's conception of Heraclitus as a purely empirical philosopher. Before noticing this, a word needs to be said in regard to Schuster's method as a whole.
2. In his exposition of these doctrines, Schuster has rendered valuable service. We can by no means, however, allow thus tentatively to pass, Schuster's conception of Heraclitus as a purely empirical philosopher. Before noticing this, a word needs to be said in regard to Schuster's method as a whole. As to the latter, the very extent of the task proposed made over-systemization inevitable. In criticism of Schuster's attempt, Zeller has well said that with the extant material of Heraclitus' book, the recovery of its plan is impossible (Vol. 1, p. 570, note). Such a plan of reconstruction as that which Schuster undertakes, demands the power not only to penetrate the sense of every fragment, but also so to read the mind of the author as to be able to restore that of the large absent portions. The small number and enigmatical character of the fragments which are extant, together with the contradictory character of ancient testimony to Heraclitus, makes such a task extremely hazardous. 18 HERACLITUS. It can be carried through only by the help of "unlun- ited conjecture." Such conjecture Schuster has used extensively. The necessity of carrying through his plan has led him to find in some passages more mean- ing than they will justly bear, while his apparently preconceived notion as to the wholly empirical charac- ter of the system has led him to distort the meaning of many sentences. We shall see examples of this presently. Incidentally, his method may be illustrated by his connection and use of the two passages: d.'uO pcbnoD^: /lii^ec AnoOavovTa^^ daaa oux SXnovTac obdh doxiouac (Clement of Alex. Strom, iv, 22, p. 630 ; cp. frag. 122), and al (po'^al dajnQjvrae xaO^ ^drjv (Plutarch, de Fac. in orbe lun. 28, p. 943 ; cp. frag. 38). Schuster conjectures that these passages came together in the original work, and he renders and interprets them as follows : " There awaits men in death what they neither hope nor believe," namely, rest and the joy of a sleep-like con- dition (!), so that even instinctively '' souls scent out death," desiring to obtain it (Schuster, p. 190). Not to speak of the forced translation of the latter fragment, only the most vivid imagination would think of using these passages in this way, especially as Clement himself, in his use of the first passage, refers it to the punishments which happen to men after death (see below, frags. 122 and 124, sources), and Plutarch, in respect to the second, uses it as proof that souls in Hades are nourished by vapors (see below, frag. 38, sources). But Schuster's conception of Heraclitus did not admit of belief in a distinct life after death, and it was necessary to make these passages fit in with the plan. The attempt to weave the fragments into a con- nected whole, and their division into the three Logoi, may be regarded on the whole as a decided failure. HISTORICAL JLND CRITICAL.
3not admit of belief in a distinct life after death, and it was necessary to make these passages fit in with the plan. The attempt to weave the fragments into a con- nected whole, and their division into the three Logoi, may be regarded on the whole as a decided failure. HISTORICAL JLND CRITICAL. 19 Schuster fipds only thirteen fragments for the con- cluding theological section, although our knowledge of Heraclitus and his times would rather indicate, as indeed Teichmiiller thinks probable, that the theo- logical section was the principal portion of the book. Turning now to the theory of knowledge, according to Schuster, as we have seen, Heraclitus is an empiri- cist and sensationalist and knows no world but the visible. With this conclusion we cannot agree. Schus- ter's argument that this doctrine must have arisen with Heraclitus since it was held by Protagoras, his disciple, has little weight. The order of development was rather that pointed out by Plato himself in the Theaetetus (p. 151 ff.), namely, that the sensational theory of knowledge was the outcome of the Protagorean doc- trine that man is the measure of all things, and that this in turn grew out of the Heraclitic flux. No doubt the sensational theory was implied by the Sophists, but it was incipient with them and not yet formulated. Much less can it be attributed to Heraclitus, whose contribution to the theory began and ended with the eternal flux. A sensational theory of knowledge, it is quite true, was likely to be an outcome of the Ephe- sian's philosophy, but he did not himself proceed thus far. The question, theoretically considered, was be- yond his time. There are passages which indicate that he held, inconsistently it may be, quite the oppo- site doctrine. ** Eyes and ears," he says, "are bad witnesses to men having rude souls" (Sextus Emp. adv. Math. vii. 126 ;=frag. 4 ; cp. frags. 3, 5, 6, 19, etc., and below (p. 50). The passage which offers Schuster the strongest support for his sensationalism is that noted above (p. 13) from Hippolytus, " Whatever con- cerns seeing, hearing and learning (jiddTjac^, Schuster 20 HERACLITUS. translates " Erforschung "), I particularly honor '* (frag. 13). Adopting the simplest and most natural meaning of this passage, it has no bearing on any theory of knowledge, but means merely, as Pfleiderer points out (Heraklit, p. 64, note), that Heraclitus prefers the pleasures of the higher senses, as of seeing, hearing, and the knowledge acquired thereby, to the sensual pleasures of the lower senses which the masses pursue. If, however, Schuster will take it in a theoretical sense, then it comes into conflict with the other passage, ** The hidden harmony is better than the visible." The contradiction is foreseen by Schuster, who deliberately changes the latter into a question (see above, p. 13), without a shadow of right, as may be seen by reference to the context in Hippolytus (see below, frag.
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.
1towards change is conceived now as "destiny," " force," " necessity," " justice," or, when exhibited 16 HERACLITUS. in definite forms of time and matter, as *' intelligence '* (Id. p. 182, 194 ff.). - The Heraclitic harmony of opposites, as of the bow and the lyre, is a purely physical harmony. It is simply the operation of the strife of opposite forces, by which motion within an organism, at the point where if further continued it would endanger the whole, is balanced and caused to return within the limits of a determined amplitude (Id. p. 230 flf.). The identity of opposites means only that very dif- ferent properties may unite in the same physical thing, either by simultaneous comparison with different things or successive comparison with a changeable thing (Id. pp. 236, 243). The second or political section of Heraclitus' work treated of arts, ethics, society, and politics. It aimed to show how human arts are imitations of Nature, and how organized life, as in the universe and the indi- vidual, so in the state, is the secret of unity in variety. The central thought was the analogy existing between man and the universe, between the microcosm and the macrocosm, from which it results that the true ethical principle lies in imitation of Nature, and that law is founded on early customs which sprang from Nature (Id. p. 310 flf.). The third or theological section was mainly devoted to showing that the names of things are designations of their essence. That Heraclitus himself, not merely his followers, held the (pua^c dpd6T7j<; dvofidxcovy and used etymologies as proofs of the nature of things, Schuster believes is both consistent with his philosophy and conclusively proved by Plato's Cratylus. Primitive men named things from the language which Nature spoke to them ; names, therefore, give us the truth of HISTORICAL AND CRITICAL. 17 things. Etymologies of the names of the gods was the proof first brought forward, as in Plato's Cratylus; hence the name of this section of the work. To show this connection* of names and things was to prove the intimate connection of man with Nature, and so to lead to the conclusion that all knowledge is based on experience, which, indeed, was the end he had in view (Id. p. 317 flf.). (^It is not our purpose to criticize in detail Schuster's conception of Heraclitus. Much of it will commend itself to the careful student of the remains, particu- larly that which relates to the Heraclitic flux and its relation to the primitive fire. Suggestive, also, if not unimpeachable, is his conception of the relation of the microcosm to the macrocosm, and of the harmony and identity of opposites. In his exposition of these doctrines, Schuster has rendered valuable service. We can by no means, however, allow thus tentatively to pass, Schuster's conception of Heraclitus as a purely empirical philosopher. Before noticing this, a word needs to be said in regard to Schuster's method as a whole.
2. In his exposition of these doctrines, Schuster has rendered valuable service. We can by no means, however, allow thus tentatively to pass, Schuster's conception of Heraclitus as a purely empirical philosopher. Before noticing this, a word needs to be said in regard to Schuster's method as a whole. As to the latter, the very extent of the task proposed made over-systemization inevitable. In criticism of Schuster's attempt, Zeller has well said that with the extant material of Heraclitus' book, the recovery of its plan is impossible (Vol. 1, p. 570, note). Such a plan of reconstruction as that which Schuster undertakes, demands the power not only to penetrate the sense of every fragment, but also so to read the mind of the author as to be able to restore that of the large absent portions. The small number and enigmatical character of the fragments which are extant, together with the contradictory character of ancient testimony to Heraclitus, makes such a task extremely hazardous. 18 HERACLITUS. It can be carried through only by the help of "unlun- ited conjecture." Such conjecture Schuster has used extensively. The necessity of carrying through his plan has led him to find in some passages more mean- ing than they will justly bear, while his apparently preconceived notion as to the wholly empirical charac- ter of the system has led him to distort the meaning of many sentences. We shall see examples of this presently. Incidentally, his method may be illustrated by his connection and use of the two passages: d.'uO pcbnoD^: /lii^ec AnoOavovTa^^ daaa oux SXnovTac obdh doxiouac (Clement of Alex. Strom, iv, 22, p. 630 ; cp. frag. 122), and al (po'^al dajnQjvrae xaO^ ^drjv (Plutarch, de Fac. in orbe lun. 28, p. 943 ; cp. frag. 38). Schuster conjectures that these passages came together in the original work, and he renders and interprets them as follows : " There awaits men in death what they neither hope nor believe," namely, rest and the joy of a sleep-like con- dition (!), so that even instinctively '' souls scent out death," desiring to obtain it (Schuster, p. 190). Not to speak of the forced translation of the latter fragment, only the most vivid imagination would think of using these passages in this way, especially as Clement himself, in his use of the first passage, refers it to the punishments which happen to men after death (see below, frags. 122 and 124, sources), and Plutarch, in respect to the second, uses it as proof that souls in Hades are nourished by vapors (see below, frag. 38, sources). But Schuster's conception of Heraclitus did not admit of belief in a distinct life after death, and it was necessary to make these passages fit in with the plan. The attempt to weave the fragments into a con- nected whole, and their division into the three Logoi, may be regarded on the whole as a decided failure. HISTORICAL JLND CRITICAL.
3not admit of belief in a distinct life after death, and it was necessary to make these passages fit in with the plan. The attempt to weave the fragments into a con- nected whole, and their division into the three Logoi, may be regarded on the whole as a decided failure. HISTORICAL JLND CRITICAL. 19 Schuster fipds only thirteen fragments for the con- cluding theological section, although our knowledge of Heraclitus and his times would rather indicate, as indeed Teichmiiller thinks probable, that the theo- logical section was the principal portion of the book. Turning now to the theory of knowledge, according to Schuster, as we have seen, Heraclitus is an empiri- cist and sensationalist and knows no world but the visible. With this conclusion we cannot agree. Schus- ter's argument that this doctrine must have arisen with Heraclitus since it was held by Protagoras, his disciple, has little weight. The order of development was rather that pointed out by Plato himself in the Theaetetus (p. 151 ff.), namely, that the sensational theory of knowledge was the outcome of the Protagorean doc- trine that man is the measure of all things, and that this in turn grew out of the Heraclitic flux. No doubt the sensational theory was implied by the Sophists, but it was incipient with them and not yet formulated. Much less can it be attributed to Heraclitus, whose contribution to the theory began and ended with the eternal flux. A sensational theory of knowledge, it is quite true, was likely to be an outcome of the Ephe- sian's philosophy, but he did not himself proceed thus far. The question, theoretically considered, was be- yond his time. There are passages which indicate that he held, inconsistently it may be, quite the oppo- site doctrine. ** Eyes and ears," he says, "are bad witnesses to men having rude souls" (Sextus Emp. adv. Math. vii. 126 ;=frag. 4 ; cp. frags. 3, 5, 6, 19, etc., and below (p. 50). The passage which offers Schuster the strongest support for his sensationalism is that noted above (p. 13) from Hippolytus, " Whatever con- cerns seeing, hearing and learning (jiddTjac^, Schuster 20 HERACLITUS. translates " Erforschung "), I particularly honor '* (frag. 13). Adopting the simplest and most natural meaning of this passage, it has no bearing on any theory of knowledge, but means merely, as Pfleiderer points out (Heraklit, p. 64, note), that Heraclitus prefers the pleasures of the higher senses, as of seeing, hearing, and the knowledge acquired thereby, to the sensual pleasures of the lower senses which the masses pursue. If, however, Schuster will take it in a theoretical sense, then it comes into conflict with the other passage, ** The hidden harmony is better than the visible." The contradiction is foreseen by Schuster, who deliberately changes the latter into a question (see above, p. 13), without a shadow of right, as may be seen by reference to the context in Hippolytus (see below, frag.
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.