Archaic Logic: Symbol and Structure in Heraclitus, Parmenides and Empedocles PDF
Preview Archaic Logic: Symbol and Structure in Heraclitus, Parmenides and Empedocles
DE PROPRIETATIBUS LITTERARUM edenda curat C.H. VAN SCHOONEVELD Indiana University Series Practica, 11 ARCHAIC LOGIC: SYMBOL AND STRUCTURE IN HERACLITUS, PARMENIDES, AND EMPEDOCLES by RAYMOND ADOLPH PRIER Von Humboldt Fellow - Hamburg 1976 MOUTON THE HAGUE - PARIS © Copyright 1976 Mouton & Co. B.V., Publishers, The Hague No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photo- print, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers. ISBN 90279 3155 0 Printed in the Netherlands Εις, δύο, τρεις • ö δέ δη τέταρτος ήμίν sono qui To three close friends and scholars: Robert Barnes Jane Cody Elaine Gazda AUTHOR'S PREFACE The following study represents an attempt not only to explicate in some small way a mode of thought significantly different from much of our own, but also to suggest a new criterion of judgment for Classical Philology. These two purposes merge into one insofar as both come about from my own sharp disagreement with certain prevailing critical attitudes towards the so-called pre-Socratics. These essentially ungrounded attitudes are characterized, as I see them, by strong relativistic and materialistic premises which, although hidden for the most part, result in awkward misunderstandings of the pre- Platonic corpus in general and an uneven, if not castrating, criticism of specific authors in particular. These modern critical stances did not exist in the pre- Aristotelian Greek world in any predominant form, but Classical Philology in the later half of the twentieth century maintains otherwise and has, conse- quently, severely limited itself and very probably its future by adopting a narrow and unnecessarily rigid criterion of judgment that largely misrep- resents the literary evidence at hand. Beyond the by no means unanimous acknowledgment that Aristotle revealed little of the real worth of the pre- Socratics, modern Classical Philology has not even suggested the need of a method — let alone the method itself - that might grasp the period between Homer and the Platonic revolution. I offer this study as an attempt to supply this critical tool. The method I shall suggest is one stemming from my studies for over a decade of Archaic Greek literature and, therefore, represents the accomplish- ment of more than intermittent thought over several years. I could not, however, have completed my endeavor without the encouragement and help of several universities and individuals. I should like to thank Stanford, Yale, U.C.L.A., and U.S.C. for the use of their libraries and U.S.C. for supplying the funds to put in order the final manuscript. I am especially indebted to Robert Brumbaugh, Thomas Cole, Michael Gagarin, Eric Havelock, and Bruno Snell for encouragement and advice along the way. I also wish to acknowledge Apeiron, Classical Philology, and Classical World in whose pages a portion of the following text has appeared in the past. Hamburg, August 1975 CONTENTS Preface VII I The Archaic Configuration of Mind 1 II The Homeric Hymns and Hesiod 27 III Heraclitus 57 IV Parmenides 90 V Empedocles 120 VI Language, Time, and Form 149 Bibliography 154 Index of Ancient Passages 159
The list of books you might like
