A Critical History of Greek Philosophy

299 Pages·2014·0.83 MB·English

by  W. T. Stace

A Critical History of Greek Philosophy
W. T. Stace
Project Gutenberg’s A Critical History of Greek Philoso- LONDON — BOMBAY — CALCUTTA — MADRAS
phy, by W. T. Stace
MELBOURNE
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
and with
NEW YORK — BOSTON — CHICAGO
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give
it away or
DALLAS — SAN FRANCISCO
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Ltd
included
TORONTO
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net
A CRITICAL HISTORY OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY
Title: A Critical History of Greek Philosophy
BY
Author: W. T. Stace
W. T. STACE
Release Date: August 12, 2010 [EBook #33411]
MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED
Language: English
ST. MARTIN’S STREET, LONDON
*** START OFTHISPROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK
CRITICAL HISTORY OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY ***
1920
Produced by Don Kostuch
COPYRIGHT
[Transcriber’s Notes]
GLASGOW: PRINTED AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
ThistextisderivedfromacopyintheAveMariaUniversity
BY ROBERT MACLEHOSE AND CO. LTD.
library, catalog number “B 171 .S8”
{v}
[End Transcriber’s Notes]
PREFACE
A CRITICAL HISTORY OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY
This book contains the substance, and for the most part
MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED the words, of
a course of public lectures delivered during the first three are difficult in themselves, however clearly expressed. No
months of amount of
1919. Theoriginaldivisionintolectureshasbeendropped, explanation can ever render them anything but difficult to
the matter the
being more conveniently redivided into chapters. unsophisticated mind, and anything in the nature of “phi-
losophy made
Theaudiencetowhomthelecturesweredeliveredwascom-
posed of easy” is only to be expected from quacks and charlatans.
Greek philosophy is not, even now, antiquated. It is not
members of the general public, and not only of students.
from the
For the most
point of view of an antiquary or historian {vi} that its
part they possessed no previous knowledge of philosophy.
treasures are
Hence this
valuable. We are dealing here with living things, and not
book,liketheoriginallectures,assumesnopreviousspecial
with mere
knowledge, though it assumes, of course, a state of general
deadthings—notwiththedrybonesanddebrisofabygone
education
age. And I
in the reader. Technical philosophical terms are carefully
have tried to lecture and write for living people, and not
explained
for mere
when first introduced; and a special effort has been made fossil-grubbers. IfIdidnotbelievethatthereistobefound
to put here,
philosophicalideasintheclearestwaypossible. Butitmust in Greek philosophy, at least a measure of the truth, the
be truth that
remembered that many of the profoundest as well as the does not grow old, I would not waste five minutes of my
most difficult life upon it.
ofhumanconceptionsaretobefoundinGreekphilosophy. “We do not,” says a popular modern writer, [Footnote 1]
Such ideas “bring the
young mind up against the few broad elemental questions the Arab mathematicians in Spain, or started with Roger
that are the Bacon in
questions of metaphysics .... We do not make it discuss, chemistry, or Sir Richard Owen in comparative anatomy
correct it, .... It is time
elucidate it. That was the way of the Greeks, and we wor- the educational powers began to realise that the questions
ship that of
divine people far too much to adopt their way. No, we metaphysics,theelementsofphilosophy,are,hereandnow
lecture to our to be done
young people about not philosophy but philosophers, we afresh in each mind .... What is wanted is philosophy, and
put them not a
shallow smattering of the history of philosophy ... {vii}
through book after book, telling how other people have
The proper
discussed these
way to discuss metaphysics, like the proper way to discuss
questions. We avoid the questions of metaphysics, but we
mathematics
deliver
or chemistry, is to discuss the accumulated and digested
semi-digested half views of the discussions of, and answers
product of
to these
human thought in such matters.”
questionsmadebymenofallsortsandqualities,invarious
remote [Footnote 1: H. G. Wells in “First and Last Things.”]
languages and under conditions quite different from our Plausible words these, certain to seem conclusive to the
own. . . . It mob,
is as if we began teaching arithmetic by long lectures upon notwithstandingthatforoneelementoftruththeycontain
the origin nine of
of the Roman numerals, and then went on to the lives and untruth! The elements of truth are that our educational
motives of system
unwarrantably leaves unused the powerful weapon of oral philosophy, etc., they rest wholly upon a false parallel, and
discussion—so involve
forcibly wielded by the Greeks—and develops book knowl- a total failure to comprehend the nature of philosophic
edge at the truth, and its
expense of original thought. Though even here it must be
fundamental difference from arithmetical, chemical, or
remembered,
physical truth.
as regards the Greeks, (1) that if they studied the history
If Eratosthenes thought the circumference of the earth to
of
be so much,
philosophy but little, it was because there was then but
whereasithasnowbeendiscoveredtobesomuch,thenthe
little
later
historyofphilosophytostudy,and(2)thatifanyoneimag-
correctviewsimplycancelsandrendersnugatorytheolder
ines that
view.
the great Greek thinkers did not fully master the thought
of their {viii}Theoneiscorrect,theotherincorrect. Wecanignore
and
predecessors before constructing their own systems, he is
grievously forget the incorrect view altogether. But the development
of
mistaken, and (3) that in some cases the over-reliance on
oral philosophy proceeds on quite other principles. Philosophi-
cal truth is
discussion—the opposite fault to ours—led to intellectual
no sum in arithmetic to be totted up so that the answer is
dishonesty, quibbling, ostentation, disregard of truth, shal-
thus
lowness,
and absence of all principle; this was the case with the formallyandfinallycorrectorincorrect. Rather,thephilo-
Sophists. sophical
As to the comparisons between arithmetic and philosophy, truth unfolds itself, factor by factor, in time, in the succes-
chemistry and sive
systems of philosophy, and it is only in the complete series toweldthevariousfactorsofthetruthintoasingleorganic
that the whole
completetruthistobefound. ThesystemofAristotledoes or system, which should thus be the total result to date, is
not simply another
question. Only one such attempt has ever been made, but
cancel and refute that of Plato. Spinoza does not simply
no one will
abolish
pretend that it is possible to understand it without a thor-
Descartes. AristotlecompletesPlato,ashisnecessarycom-
ough
plement.
knowledge of all previous systems, a knowledge, in fact, of
Spinoza does the same for Descartes. And so it is always.
the
The
separatefactorsofthetruthbeforetheyarethuscombined
calculation of Eratosthenes is simply wrong, and so we can
into a
afford to
total result. Besides, that attempt, too, is now part of the
forget it. But the systems of Plato, Aristotle, Spinoza, history
Leibniz,
of philosophy!
etc.,areallalikefactorsofthetruth. Theyareastruenow
Henceanyphilosophicalthinkingwhichisnotfounded{ix}
as they
upon a
were in their own times, though they are not, and never
thorough study of the systems of the past will necessarily
were, the
be shallow
whole truth. And therefore it is that they are not simply
and worthless. And the notions that we can dispense with
wrong, done
this study,
with, finished, ended, and that we cannot afford to forget and do everything out of our own heads, that everyone is
them. to be his own
Whether it is not possible to bring the many lights to a philosopher, and is competent to construct his own system
single focus, in his own
way—such ideas are utterly empty and hollow. Of these that it needs any enquiry, or that it is possible for anyone
truths, indeed, to think
we see a notable example in what the writer just quoted otherwise. Yetanyonewhowilltakethetrouble,notmerely
styles his
superficiallytodipintothehistoryofphilosophy,butthor-
“metaphysic.” This so-called metaphysic is wholly based oughly to
upon the
submit himself to its discipline, will at least learn that this
assumptionthatknowledgeanditsobjectexist,eachonits is an
own
assumption,averydoubtfulassumption,too,whichnoone
account, external to one another, the one here, the other now has the
there over
right to foist upon the public without discussion as if it
were an
against it, and that knowledge is an “instrument” which in
this
axiomatic truth. He might even learn that it is a false
assumption.
external manner takes hold of its object and makes it its
own. The
Andhewillnote,asanominoussign,thatthesubjectivism
which
very moment the word “instrument” is used here, all the
rest, permeates and directs the whole course of Mr. Wells’s
thinking is
including the invalidity of knowledge, follows as a matter
of course. identicalincharacterwiththat{x}subjectivismwhichwas
the
Such assumption then—that knowledge is an
“instrument”—our writer essential feature of the decay and downfall of the Greek
philosophic
makes, wholly uncritically, and without a shadow of right.
He gives no spirit, and was the cause of its final ruin and dissolution.
sign that it has ever even occurred to him that this is an I would counsel the young, therefore, to pay no attention
assumption, to plausible
and shallow words such as those quoted, but, before form- Firstly, in dealing with Plato’s politics I have relied on the
ing their own
“Republic,” andsaidnothingofthe“Laws.” Thiswouldnot
philosophic opinions, most thoroughly and earnestly to be
study and
permissible in a history of political theories, nor even in a
masterthehistoryofpastphilosophies,firsttheGreekand history
then the
of philosophy which laid any special emphasis on politics.
modern. That this cannot be done merely by reading a But, from
modern resume of
my point of view, politics lie on the extreme outer margin
that history, but only by studying the great thinkers in of
their own
philosophy,sothatamoreslendertreatmentofthesubject
works, is true. But philosophical education must begin, is
and the
permissible. Moreover, the “Republic,” whether written
early or late,
function of such books as this, is, not to complete it, but
to begin
expresses, in my opinion, the views of Plato, and not those
of
it; and to obtain first of all a general view of what must
afterwards Socrates, and it still remains the outstanding, typical, and
be studied in detail is no bad way of beginning. Moreover, characteristic{xi}expressionofthePlatonicpoliticalideal,
the study
however much that ideal had afterwards to be modified by
ofthedevelopmentandhistoricalconnexionsofthevarious practical
philosophies, which is not found in the original writings considerations.
themselves,
Secondly, Ihavenotevenmentionedtheview, nowheldby
willalwaysprovideaworkforhistoriesofphilosophytodo. some, that
Two omissions in this book require, perhaps, a word of the theory of Ideas is really the work of Socrates, and not
explanation. of Plato,
and that Plato’s own philosophy consisted in some sort of antiquary. ItisliketheBacon-Shakespearequestion,which
esoteric no lover
number-theory,combinedwiththeisticandotherdoctrines. of drama, as such, need concern himself with at all. No
I can only doubt the
saythatthistheory,asexpoundedforexamplebyProfessor Plato-Socrates question is of interest to antiquarians, but
Burnet, after all,
doesnotcommenditselftome,that,infact,Idonotbelieve fundamentally,itdoesnotmatterwhoistohavethecredit
it, but of the
that, it being impossible to discuss it adequately in a book theory of Ideas, the only essential thing for us being to
of this understand
kind, I have thought that, rather than discuss it inade- that theory, and rightly to apprehend its value as a factor
quately, it of the
werebettertoleaveitalonealtogether. Moreover,itstands truth. Thisbookisprimarilyconcernedwithphilosophical
on a ideas,
totallydifferentfootingfrom,say,ProfessorBurnet’sinter- their truth, meaning, and significance, and not with the
pretation rights and
ofParmenides,whichIhavediscussed. Thatconcernedthe wrongs of antiquarian disputes. It does indeed purport to
{xii} be a
interpretation of the true meaning of a philosophy. This
merely history, as well as a discussion of philosophic conceptions.
But
concerns the question who was the author of a philosophy.
That was a thisonlymeansthatittakesupphilosophicalideasintheir
questionofprinciple,thismerelyofpersonalities. Thatwas historical sequence and connexions, and it does this only
of because the
importancetothephilosopher, thismerelytothehistorian conceptionsofevolutioninphilosophy,oftheonwardmarch
and of thought
to a determined goal; of its gradual and steady rise to the {xiii}
supreme
CONTENTS
heights of idealism, its subsequent decline, and ultimate
CHAPTER PAGE
collapse,
I. THE IDEA OF PHILOSOPHY IN GENERAL. THE
are not only profoundly impressive as historical phenom-
ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY 1
ena, but are of
II. THE IONICS. THALES. ANAXIMANDER.
vital importance to a true conception of philosophy itself.
Were it ANAXIMENES. OTHER IONIC THINKERS 20
III. THE PYTHAGOREANS 31
not for this, Mr. Wells would, I think, be right, and I for
one should IV. THE ELEATICS. XENOPHANES. PARMENIDES.
abandon treatment in historical order altogether. Lastly, I ZENO. CRITICAL REMARKS ON ELEATICISM 40
may remark
V. HERACLEITUS 72
thatthedescriptionofthisbookasacritical historymeans
VI. EMPEDOCLES 81
that it
VII. THE ATOMISTS 86
is, or attempts to be critical, not of dates, texts, readings,
and the VIII. ANAXAGORAS 94
like, but of philosophical conceptions. IX. THE SOPHISTS 106
I owe a debt of thanks to Mr. F. L. Woodward, M.A., late X. SOCRATES 127
principal of
XI. THE SEMI-SOCRATICS. THE CYNICS. THE
Mahinda College, Galle, Ceylon, for assisting me in the
CYRENAICS. THE MEGARICS 155
compilation of
This text was converted to LaTeX by means of Guten-
the index of names, and in sundry other matters. Mark software (version Jul 12 2014).
W.T.S. ThetexthasbeenfurtherprocessedbysoftwareintheiTeX
project, by Bill Cheswick.
January, 1920.