A beginner's history of philosophy

Front matter

. 4 ¢

j a) ae .

+433 ate the rg) Tope #, 3

Preface

Tuis book is intended as a text-book for sketch-courses in the history of philosophy. It is written for the student rather than for the teacher. It is a history of philosophy upon the background of geography and of literary and political history.

As a text-book for sketch-courses it employs summaries, tables, and other generalizations as helps to the memory. The philosophical teaching is presented as simply as possible, so as to bring into prominence only the leading doctrines. My own personal criticism and interpretation on the one hand, and explanations in technical language on the other, have been avoided as far as possible. Sometimes I have had to choose between interpretation and technicality, in which case the limitations of space have determined my choice. Since the book is intended for the student rather than for the teacher, it makes the teacher all the more necessary ; for it puts into the hands of the student an outline and into the hands of the teacher the class-room time for inspiring the student with his own interpretations. In making use of geographical maps, contemporary literature, and political history, this book is merely utilizing for pedagogical reasons the stock of information with which the college student is furnished when he begins the history of philosophy.

A good many years of experience in teaching the history of philosophy to beginners have convinced me that students come to the subject with four classes of vl PREFACE ideas, with which they can correlate philosophic doctrines: good geographical knowledge, some historical and some literary knowledge, and many undefined personal philosophical opinions. Of course, their personal philosophical opinions form the most important group, but more as something to be clarified by the civilizing influence of the subject than as an approach to the subject itself. The only “memory-hooks” upon which the teacher may expect to hang philosophic doctrines are the student’s ideas of history, literature, and geography. If the history of philosophy is treated only as a series of doctrines, the student beginning the subject feels not only that the land is strange, but that he is a stranger in it. Besides, to isolate the historical philosophical doctrines is to give the student a wrong historical perspective, since philosophic thought and contemporary events are two inseparable aspects of history. Each interprets the other, and neither can be correctly understood without the other. If the history of philosophy is to have any significance for the beginner, it must be shown to give a meaning to history.

So far as the materials that form any history of philosophy are concerned, I have merely tried to arrange and organize them with reference to the student and with reference to the history of which they form an integral part. I am therefore overwhelmingly indebted to every good authority to whom I have had access, but in the main I have followed the inspiring direction of the great Windelband. Many willing friends have read parts of the manuscript and offered suggestions and criticisms. I am particularly indebted to Professors C. P. Parker, Ephraim Emerton, A. O. Norton, and J. H. Ropes, and Dr. B. A. G. Fuller of Harvard University ;

PREFACE vil to Professor Mary W. Calkins of Wellesley College ; to Professors C.S. Wade and D. L. Maulsby of Tufts College; and to my wife, Abby B. Cushman. However, for all the faults of the book, which has been many years in preparation, I am alone responsible.

Instead of lists of books for collateral reading, placed at the end of chapters or of the book, the student will find references in the footnotes to the exact pages of many helpful books. I should like to call the student’s attention to an appendix to the discussion of Plato. This is a complete selection of passages from Plato made by the late Professor Jowett for English readers. This selection Professor Jowett was accustomed to distribute to his Oxford class, of which I was once fortunate to be a member.

Philosophical terms have been defined either in the text or in the footnotes. Such definitions must necessarily have as their aim their usefulness to the student, rather than their completeness.

Turts COLLEGE, June, 1910.

fs uae |

Ci wy ery ae ey)

ee AW. chi ate ee

INTRODUCTION — Tut Turee GENERAL PERIODS oF THE HistoRY oF PHILOSOPHY. ...... I THe CoMPARATIVE LENGTHS OF THE THREE GENERAL

PERIODS 6.22 730) pee ‘ F wD THe REAL Cheers OF THE enue Gueekt Pr-

IOUS Titer tae ere le aha = ae | TABLE OF THE Seen ernyces OF THE fa Gana

CHAPTER I. Toe Earty GREEK IN ANCIENT PHI- LOSOPHY

Tue Drvisions OF ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY .... . Tue LirERARY SOURCES OF ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY . THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE EARLY GREEK. 1. His Geographical Environment . 2. His Political Environment. Ay Na THE NATIVE TENDENCIES OF THE EARLY GREEK, AS SEEN (1) In the Development of his Religion, (2) in his Reflections upon Physical Events, and (3) in his Interestin Human Conduct . .. . oy Gh eae oe See THE an PERIODS OF GREEK aie mea DEP 'Yy nip ra)

ANAK T Oo

THe PERIL IN THE GREEK POLITICAL SITUATION: PERSIA AND CARTHAGE .. . meth

THE PERIL IN THE NEW Nay ‘Tae Meerintis OE TTHAGORABY a ihe Cots tai et en ah omee Ends eae AG

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE COSMOLOGISTS. . ... .

How THE PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION AROSE. ... .

Map SHOWING THE CITIES WHERE THE COSMOLOGISTS

THE MEMBERS OF THE MILESIAN SCHOOL .... .

THe MILESIAN: (PRILOSOPHY) W204 4.4 Vs We

XENOPHANES, THE RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHER ... .

THE PHILOSOPHY OF XENOPHANES . ......

HERACLEITUS AND THE ELEATICS. — THE EARLY For-

MULATION OF THE METAPHYSICAL PROBLEM. .. .

COMPARISON OF THE TEACHING OF THE MILESIANS, HER-

AOCLEITUS, (AND CTHE WOLEATION Kies iG oi ei os te Gee

a: Heraclestus i005 i ae te View Cee le ane

1. The Doctrine of Absolute and Wate Change

2. Fire is the Cosmic Substance . ..... .

3. The Definite Changes of Fire. . . ... .

4, The Practical Philosophy of Heracieitus . . .

b The Eleatics— Parmenides and Zeno . ... .

(a) Parmenides .... . Ay ean eles Se

1. The Cosmic Substance is ape 2 NORE Ea

2. Other Things than the Cosmic Substance

(Being) have no Real Existence . . . .

(6) The Philosophy of’ Zeno (se se ee

Tue REsuLts OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN HERACLEITUS

AND "PARMENDIS TOLLEY Be ier te ores in areas iy

EFFORTS TOWARD RECONCILIATION. . ...... THE NEw CONCEPTION OF CHANGE OF THE PLURALISTS THE NEw CONCEPTION OF THE UNCHANGING OF THE PLURALISTS— THE ELEMENT .........

THE INTRODUCTION OF THE CONCEPTION OF THE EFFIcnr CApse” PR 86 i eS ETON ee Bee, SUMMARY OF SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN THE THEORIES OF THE RECONCILERS . .......

CONTENTS xi

THE PLURALISTIC PHILOSOPHERS : EMPEDOCLES, ANAXA- GORAS, LEUCIPPUS, AND THE LATER PYTHAGOREANS . 42

Ture PHiItosopHy OF EMPEDOCLES . ....... 44

THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANAXAGORAS. . . oe eae Wak Ae THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE Reena Hutte ba hg AND

THE LATER PYTHAGOREANS .. . SS Lh, ee cee

’ 1. The Pythagorean Conception of ee bh) ok ase ake

2. The Pythagorean Dualistic World. . ... . 651

PMPE TURAL Re CO ky ey. Pk IE NOGA ne OS BG

CHAPTER IV. Tue AnTHROPOLOGICAL PERIOD: THE

BE TRLL ADM ECU) ey VLAN ep e0, di) PSS Webmin he LADO HecrnUne | BE AN HIsToRICAL SUMMARY OF THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERIOD | 0". yy eens ts OO THE PERSIAN nie AND THE Bri OF Keane SOP AES Pee GREEK ENLIGHTENMENT. (608) CA ey, 68 1. The Impulse for Lanne’ ‘ Beat eae) aa aH tte Oe 2. The Practical Need of KioWled ee PCA ONS Ce tat, 3. The Critical Attitude of Mind ........ 61 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SOPHISTS ...... . 64 LHAEVLROMINENT SOPHIATS Se a eo eh el se eth ee OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE SOPHISTS ....... 68 1. The Relativism of Protagoras. . . . .. . . 69 2. The Nihilism of Gorgias . . . SUAS eR a Tue Eruics oF THE SOPHISTS. — THE ee OF THEIR CRITICAL THEORY TO PoxitTicAL LirE .. . 71 MVEA SEY eet CN ae Shed Sk S gee Naor ge aeP ae ay tan WN gap EL VL OOCRA TES sw) WD) ae oe eT!

SOCRATES AND ARISTOPHANES .'.0.0. 0. 5. 2 6 8 74. Tue PERSONALITY AND LiFE OF SOCRATES. . . . . 75 SocRATES AND THE SOPHISTS. . . : . 80 THE UNSYSTEMATIC CHARACTER OF THE Boones Bay: ona 2 ep MD RES He Uae We SE ae i a A a I «2

AuECLoRAL, OF SOCRATES™ oS Poe a OK PRBS xii CONTENTS

WHAT THE Socratic IDEAL INVOLVES ..... . 85 THE Two STEpPs OF THE METHOD OF SOCRATES. . . 88 POCRATES AND ATHENS Wiles ated Ne ls Ue ee, THE LocicaAL EXPEDIENTS OF SOCRATES. .... . 92 SocRATES AND THE LESSER SOCRATICS ..... .- 93 THe (OS NIC SOHDOL Iie | chia AIOE ils Ha bey SU, eee Tan CyBENAIC SCHOOL Wee ai see be oe GON * ARES CHAPTER VI. Tue Systematic PeRIopD ... . 98 THE WANING OF THE GREEK NATIONAL SPIRIT . . . 98 THE PLACE OF THE THREE SYSTEMATIC PHILOSOPHERS IN’ GREEK History. ap Wo. Fates, | hea THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF THE SYSTEMATIC PERIOD |4 4 eh iiss ae Ee ees ale Buln Se eae A SUMMARY OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY ...... «102 (ZREEK ) PHILOSOPHY (OBJECTIVE)... 5 (5). > 2s oy 103 DEMOCRITUS AND PLATO — THEIR SIMILARITIES AND D1ir- FERENCES (0), 1050-28106 ) ie Oot Tie Mes ai he As ate te abla G te HO LHE (LAE POR GD EMOORTTUS sins) ye Ae uk ee bigs ie |. a hoe LOG THE COMPREHENSIVENESS OF THE AIM OF DEMoOCRI- TOS Ailes Hie tiie ietw Pith tele (ROM w/w Vide VAS | Mite cate ieee ele ee Ae gee Ue THE ENRICHED Puysics or DEmMocrITUS — HyLozoIsm ho BRCOMES MATERIALISM iy o/s Ls bk bee as ele Rant THE MATERIALISTIC PSYCHOLOGY OF DEmMocrITUS . . 111 Democritus’ THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE — THE WoRLD OF “I'WOFOLD | REALITY si. iil) ae te ee Ae, oe 11 THE EtuicAt THEORY OF DEmMocriITUS .... . . 116 CHAPTER a1. SE Cato tue titer agen week, oo), AAG ABDERAUAND TATHENS 245 Me ps bedi lantee es Rohe Tue DirFIcuLTIES IN UNDERSTANDING THE ite a OF PLATO Oh aie ils ig Pg Yee AR ge PRE EO aor ee reagent CO THE a AND “apes DE A LATO ss ited ike ale a ibe oh i? Plato's tturdent LAT :. Be wa wetiee as) Din os lets Ae 2.4P lato G8 ch PAVB ler. lectins a Meade ot hot sie vie herve ae Adee 3. Plato as Teacher of the Academy . ... . . 124

CONCERNING THE DIALOGUES OF PLATO ..... . 126

Contents

Tue Factors IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF PLATO’s Doc- TRINE . ,

1. His Inherited Teaddieics ;

2. His Philosophical Sources . : Tue Divisions oF PLATO’s PHILOSOPHY. SUMMARY OF PLATO’s DOCTRINE yi THE FORMATION OF PLATO’s METAPHYSICS. THE DEVELOPMENT OF PLATO’S Eee ae ae

Book II. The Middle Ages 476-1453)

CHAPTER XY. CHARACTERISTICS AND CoNDITIONS OFTHE MIDDLE JAG 0: uu kis en a, oun ae ae

COMPARISON OF THE HELLENIC-ROMAN PERIOD AND THs MIDDLE AGES}. iy. OE Ge RU ie ee Tre MEDLEVAL MAN ©." RO yh. eB

How THE UNIVERSE APPEARED TO THE enters MAN ee en og Grea Enis ae eee wee Ga 7G Saba Mars OF THE PTOLEMAIC COSMOGRAPHY. . . . 323, 325 THe MEpLEVAL MAN aT ScHooL ........ . 325 A MEDIEVAL LIBRARY cu: ae eesti be ive at We C0, OR ee 1. Books most commonly read . ..... . . 327 2. Books that the scholars might use . . . . 327

3. The Books most influential i sophinetie upon thetime .. . teeta pt Hae ile ee THE THREE PERIODS OF THE MIDDLE Nee sai eho. Bao

SUMMARY OF THE POLITICAL AND EDUCATIONAL WORLDS oF (TH: MEDIAVAL MAN. 2. Go alur. 4 a Pee Sa

CHAPTER XVI. Tue Earty Periop or tHE Mip-

Di Reems nT ee ee ek ny arte THe GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE EARLY Peak ‘ AN Earty MEDIZVAL GEOGRAPHICAL Map .. ., THE HisToRICAL POSITION OF AUGUSTINE .. . LATS MOLONCK 8) Neos eh el le few) eed Tue Lire oF AUGUSTINE ....... “ohae THE Two ELEMENTS IN AUGUSTINE’S Penernecet THE Nro-PLATONIC ELEMENT: THE INNER CERTAINTIES

OF CONSCIOUSNESS . . . Nail tn fe be THE AUTHORITY OF THE Cee ACCORDING TO AUGUS-

SARI LRN ace Nel ain Ge nee ey eet at et hee PMPA MTA CI CeO cera iat re. Ca ett ch ta kk thet ee THE REVIVAL OF CHARLEMAGNE .......

JOHN Scotus ERIGENA: LIFE AND TEACHING . . THE GREEK PRINCIPLE WHICH ERIGENA FORMULATED

FOR THE MippLE AGES ... . ea a ae THe Last CENTURY OF THE EARLY pein ata Sas oe

THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD WHAT Is SCHOLASTICISM?. ..... hh abe ANSELM : LIFE AND PosITION IN MEDIZVAL Beate ANSELM’s ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD . RoscELLinus: LIFE AND TEACHING .... .

Pr eR OWT ARETLARTM ogc os aacah \ sal ahs oim ‘ou, eotied E ABELARD’S CONCEPTUALISM. UNIVERSALS EXIST IN THE

PARTICULARS. .. Ha ee ERP deS aR.) ABELARD’S Te ca — THE capil BETWEEN AARC? AMID I NGMAS oo ce ak deh vias. oon’ aaa AEs

Tue GENERAL CHARACTER OF THIS LAST PERIOD . MIME SVEN CTE VILIZA TIONG S46 ch eta oh oe ee pene es he ale

. 339 . 340

. 341

345 347

. 349 . 350

352 353

354: 354

. 355

359 361

. 361 . 362 . 363

. 364

. 368 xx CONTENTS

MAP SHOWING THE GROWTH OF MOHAMMEDAN CIVIL-

IZATION IN THE MippitE AGES ........oa00 Tue First Contact oF THE Two CIVILIZATIONS . . 372 Tue CONFLICT BETWEEN THE Two CIVILIZATIONS. —

LS SU A ALL nil celle de eal ycaigiha Bl gubesibvaehe’y ons) MBEAN ae THE RMVT VAIS ORG LEARNING |1))') 5 \ciecinenuiee gia. she pyle, ae DIAGRAM OF DANTE’S PoETIC CONCEPTION OF THE UNI-

VL ME DET OTT TEU TR PORE IE Cee PTA AU MAUP LS MM AMR f° THE STRENGTH AND BURDEN OF ARISTOTLE TO THE

1. The Strength of Aristotle tothe Church. . . . 378

2. The Burden of Aristotle tothe Church .. . . 3879 THE PREDECESSORS OF AQUINAS. ....... . 39 THe Lire or THomMAs Aquinas. — THE FOUNDER OF

THE DOMINICAN TRADITION fer jo un | caer THE CENTRAL PRINCIPLE OF THOoMAS’s DocTRINE —

LABEL WOROLD )] RUTH Vidic ed used ha is a ein ee THE PROBLEM OF INDIVIDUALITY — THE RELATION OF

PARTICULARS AND UNIVERSALS ... .... . 380 THE PRIMACY OF THE WILL OR THE INTELLECT. . . 385 Duns Scotus, THE FOUNDER OF THE FRANCISCAN TRA-

DITION — LIFE AND PHILOSOPHICAL POSITION . . . 386

Duns Scotrus’s CONCEPTION OF THE TWOFOLD TRUTH. — THE SEPARATION OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION . . 387

THE ‘INSCRUTABLE (WiLL ‘Or GOD). 77ers OOD THE PROBLEM OF INDIVIDUALITY .. .... . + « oo9 APLTER Duns SCOTTI (00% ets ee ee ener ee OOO WILLIAM OF OcKkAM: LIFE AND TEACHING. ... . 391 ASTER OBIE eet ie ie METRY ye ty Tier ete Tekst, (De

ILLUSTRATIONS

PME ETN el Ne hdtwiL ay aye Hels vs nw he )\i'e) |e.) dt PORTS PIECE MAP SHOWING WHERE THE COSMOLOGISTS LIVED. ... 21 Pee SCMPIRE) OF (ALEXANDER Yeisen eo enve elie ey «205

Map or ATHENS SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE Four OES RON ae ee TEN ciky oc amen by ween a lee) BLO

PToLEMAIC COSMOGRAPHY SHOWING THE DIVISION OF THE

RIMEVERSHCINTOCMPHERERY eC cl e ene an el lar tellte ae

PTOLEMAIC COSMOGRAPHY SHOWING THE Epicyciic Move-

GROWTH OF MOHAMMEDANISM DURING THE MIDDLE AGEs,

SHOWING ITS CONTACT WITH CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION 370

DIAGRAM OF DANTE’s Poetic CONCEPTION OF THE UNI- VERSE e e e e . . e . e . s e ° . ° . ° 376 oe P PLY na ver Si, ei Mocks ps * Ey EE aaa Bata ain * oy ivi ig -

(e gy oe a Tigi alse hasan’ y H " », ye Ba ‘i i af es > Sp, 5 iy i ; ; Y eh} 7 J Pad . $y r 4 if ‘ 4 t ‘ te J ; PME 4 ess, : “ae i’ ‘ik ‘" s ‘ ‘* 7 tay ’) t j A r ’

“a ‘ , r te ' ry \ Nee r + 7" § é i i j i x ) y 7 ’ AL? d : five 7 N f au? : P , * ' , , ’ ei yp : , } ' ie fF ‘ \ j VAY ; fi , ; f 5 ‘ ‘ } ‘ * } i) } i Ly » ‘ 1 #,

A BEGINNER’S HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY

Introduction

THE THREE GENERAL PERIODS OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY

' The Comparative Lengths of the Three General Periods:

Ancient Philosophy, 625 B. c.—476 A. D.

Medizval Philosophy, 476 a. p.— 14538 a. D.

Modern Philosophy, 1453 a. D.—the present time.

These are the three general periods into which the history of philosophy naturally falls. The two dates that form the dividing lines between these three periods are 476, the fall of old Rome, and 1458, the fall of new Rome (Constantinople). From this it will be seen that 1000 years of medieval life lie between antiquity on the one side and 450 years of modern times on the other. Whatever value may be put upon the respective intellectual products of these three periods, it is important to note the great difference in their time-lengths. It is 2500 years since philosophical reflection began in Europe. Only 450 of these years belong to modern times. In other words, after the European man grew to reflective manhood, two fifths of his life belong to what is known as ancient civilization, two fifths to medizval, and only one fifth to modern civilization.

The Real Differences of the Three General Periods. The differences between these three periods of the re-

2 INTRODUCTION flective life of the European have been very real. They are not to be explained by merely political shiftings or economic changes; nor are they fully expressed as differences in literary or artistic productions. Their differences lie deeper, for they are differences of mental attitude. The history of philosophy is more profound, more difficult, and more human than any other history, because it is the record of human points of view. A good deal of sympathetic appreciation is demanded if the student takes on the attitude of mind of ancient and medizval times. One cannot expect to be possessed of such appreciation until one has traversed the history of thought through its entire length.

The history of philosophy is an organic development from an objective to a subjective view of life, with a traditional middle period in which subjective and objective mingle. Ancient thought is properly called objective, the medieval traditional, the modern subjective. Can we briefly suggest what these abstract terms mean? By the objectivity of ancient thought is meant that the ancient, in making his reflections upon life, starts from the universe as a whole. From this outer point of view he tries to see the interconnections between things. Nature is reality; men and gods are a part of nature. Man’s mental processes even are a part of the totality of things. Even ethically man is not an independent individual, but the member of a state. When the ancient came to make distinctions between mind and matter, he did not think of man as the knower in antithesis to matter as the object known, but he thought of mind and matter as parts of one cosmos. The antithesis in ancient thought is rather between appearances and essence, between non-realities and

INTRODUCTION 3 realities with differing emphasis. The ancient attempts speculatively to reconstruct his world, but it is always from the point of view of the world.

By the traditionalism of medieval thought is meant that men are controlled in their thinking by a set of authoritative doctrines from the past. In the Middle Ages, as the medizval period is called, the independent thinking of antiquity had ceased. Men reflected and reflected deeply, but they were constrained by a set of religious traditions. Authority was placed above them and censored their thinking. The objective Christian church and its authority took the place of the objective Greek cosmos. That church had certain infallible dogma, and thinking was allowed only in so far as it clarified dogma.

‘On the other hand, when we say that modern thought is subjective, we refer to an entire change in the centre of intellectual gravity. The starting-point is not the world, but the individual. The universe is set over against mind (dualism), or is the creation of mind (idealism). In any case the modern man looks upon the universe as his servant, the standard of truth to be found in himself and not in something external. The subject as knower is now placed in antithesis to the object as known, and the object is not independent of the human thinking process. Reality is man rather than the cosmos. The political state is justifiable so long as it enforces the rights of the individual ; religious authority is the expression of the individual conscience ; physical nature is a human interpretation. *

* Read Knight, Life and Teaching of Hume, pp. 102 f. (Blackwood Series) ; Falckenberg, Hist. Modern Phil., p. 10; Zeller, Pre-Socratic Phil., vol. i, pp. 161 f.

INTRODUCTION

Plato, Dante, and Goethe are good representatives of these three different historical periods of the human mind. How can they be understood without a philosophical appreciation of the periods in which they lived ?

Table of the Subdivisions of the Three General

3. Modern 1453-—modern times

Periods of Philosophy

Cosmological, 625-480 (to _ | Persian Wars). une i ae Anthropological, 480-399 (to death of death of Socrates).

Aristotle) Systematic, 399-322 (to death "of Aristotle).

Hellenic-Ro- { Ethical, 322 3. c.-1 A. p. (to man 322 B.c. | beginning of Christian era). —476 A. D.

(from death

of Aristotle

to fall of old

Rome). Religious, 100 B. c.-476 A. D.

Early Medieval, 476-1000 (from the fall of old Rome to the beginnings of modern Europe).

Transitional Medizval (1000-1200), (from beginnings of modern Europe to Crusades). Classic Medieval, 1200-1453 (from the Crusades to the fall of new Rome or Constantinople).

(to Locke’s

Essay and

the English

Revolution). | Natural Science, 1600-1690.

Enlightenment, 1690-1781 (from Locke’s Essay to Kant’s Critique).

German Idealism, 1781-1831 (from Kant’s Critique to the death of Hegel).

Evolution, 1820 to the present time.

BOOK I

ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY (625 B. C.-476 A. D.)

CHAPTER I THE EARLY GREEK IN ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY

The Divisions of Ancient Philosophy. The history of ancient philosophy falls naturally into two large divisions: pure Greek philosophy and Hellenic-Roman philosophy (or Greek philosophy in the Roman world). The date, 822 B. c., the death of Aristotle, which marks the line between these two periods, is one of the milestones of history. Alexander the Great had died in 323 B. C. The coincidence of the deaths of Aristotle and Alexander not only suggests their intimate relations as teacher and pupil during: their lives, but it throws into contrast Greek civilization before and after them. Before Aristotle and Alexander culture was the product entirely of the pure Greek spirit; after them ancient culture was the complex product of many factors — of Greek and Roman civilizations, and many Oriental religions, including Christianity. Before Aristotle and Alexander, ancient culture was characterized by a love of knowledge for its own sake, by freedom from ulterior ends either of service or of use; after these great makers of history, culture became attenuated to work in the special sciences and enslaved to practical questions. Before Aristotle and Alexander, the Greek city-states had arisen to political power ; after Aristotle and Alexander, Greece declined politically and was absorbed into the Roman empire.

The Literary Sources of Ancient Philosophy.* The literary sources of ancient philosophy are three: (1) the primary sources, or original writings ; (2) the secondary sources, or reports of the original writers obtained indirectly, or through other writers; (8) the interpretations of reliable modern historians of philosophy. The specialist in philosophy will, of course, go to the first two sources for his information. Other students will find many accurate modern histories of ancient philosophy. The student should have at hand the translations of the histories of Zeller, Windelband, Weber, Eucken, Ueberweg; those of the Englishmen, Burnet and Fairbanks ; of the Americans, Rogers and Turner.

“The writings of the early Greek philosophers of the pre-Socratic period exist now only in fragments. The complete works of Plato are still extant; so also are the most important works of Aristotle, and certain others which belong to the Stoic, Epicurean, Skeptic, and neo- Platonic schools. We possess the principal works of most of the philosophers of the Christian period in sufficient completeness.’ ! The secondary sources include quotations and comments upon earlier philosophers found in the writings of Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, Skeptics, neo-Platonists, and the so-called doxographers. Doxography — the commentating upon and collating of the works of former times — developed enormously in Alexandria, Pergamos, and Rhodes just after Aristotle.

* Read Fairbanks, First Philosophers of Greece, pp. 263 ff., especially the résumé.

1 Ueberweg, Hist. of Phil., vol. i, p. 7.

EARLY GREEK IN ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY 7

The founder of this work was Theophrastus, who was a disciple of Aristotle and his successor in the Lyceum. Among the important doxographers were Plutarch, Stobus, and Aetios.

The Environment of the Early Greek. The biologist seeks to explain a living creature by its previous environment and inherited instincts. So if we know the environment and inherited instincts of the early Greek, we shall be able to understand better firstly, why European philosophy began with the Greeks and not with some other people ; and secondly, why Greek philosophy took certain lines that it did take.

(1). His Geographical Environment. The Greece into which philosophy was born was much larger than the Greece of to-day. Ancient Greece consisted of all the coasts and islands which were washed by the Mediterranean Sea from Asia Minor to Sicily and southern Italy, and from Cyrene to Thrace. The motherland, the peninsula of Greece, at first played an insignificant role. The leadership was in the hands of the [onians, _who had colonized the coasts of Asia Minor. In the seventh century 8B. C., when the first Greek philosophy appears, these [onians commanded the world’s commerce among the three continents. Over the coasts of the entire Mediterranean they had extended their trade and established their colonies. Miletus became the wealthiest of these colonies and the cradle of Greek science. Its wealth afforded leisure to its people and therefore the opportunity for reflection.

(2). His Political Environment. An understanding of the Greek political world, in which its first philosophy appeared, requires an historical explanation of its rise. It takes us back four centuries to the age of the Epic (1000-750 B.c.). During more than two centuries of the age of the Epic two changes occurred which were to influence future Greek civilization: (1) The oligarchy which had supplanted the ancient patriarchal monarchy became firmly established ; and (2) the Epic was formed. The importance of the Epic of Homer lies not so much in the fact that a great poem was constructed, as that it was the formulation of the Greek religion, the Greek esthetic polytheism. Its writing indicates that the earlier unorganized, primitive, and savage forms of religion had given way, among the ruling classes at least, to an esthetic polytheism, which in a general way was fixed by the Epic itself. The period of more than a century, from 750 to 625 B. C., lying between the age of the Epic and Greek philosophy, may be called an age of political disturbances. The oligarchy had become oppressive to the rich and poor alike. There had grown up in Greece, especially in the colonies, a class of citizens who had become wealthy through commerce. The result of the misgovernment by the oligarchy was that (1) migrations took place, and (2) many revolutions occurred. This was particularly true of the colonies where the proletariat was powerful and the cities were full of adventurers. Plutocracy was at war with aristocracy, and this was the opportunity for bold men. These political troubles took form from 650 B. c. on, and the history of the Greek cities consists of the endeavor to establish popular government. About the time of the first Greek philosophers there arose here and there from the ruins of these civil struggles the so-called tyrants, of whom Thrasybulus at Miletus, Pittacus at Lesbos, Periander at Corinth, and Pisistratus at Athens are examples.

EARLY GREEK IN ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY 9

The courts of these tyrants became centres of intellectual life. They patronized poets, writers, and artists. The universalism of the Epic had vanished, and in its place came the individualism of the lyric and the satire. In many places the aristocrat went into gloomy retirement, and often cultivated poetry, science, and philosophy.

The Native Tendencies of the Early Greek. Why were the Greeks the first philosophers of Europe? Their geographical surroundings of sea and land had something to do with it. The passionate party strife between the old, ruling familes of nobles and the newly rich trading-class, which took place during the seventh century B. C., no doubt cultivated an early independence of opinion and strength of personality. But, after all, genius was in the blood of the race, and who can say that the true cause was not in the mixing of the blood of the virile Aryan invaders with that of the aboriginal inhabitants? Whatever may be the answer to that question, the Greek race in the seventh century B. Cc. had an extraordinary curiosity about the world of nature. It loved the concrete fact as no other race of the time loved it, and it loved to give a clear and articulate expression to the concrete fact that it saw. It had an artistic nature that was hostile to all confusion. Let us point out three ways in which the Greek was even in this early time organizing his experiences, reflecting upon the workings of social and nature forces, and thus preparing the way for consideration of the more ultimate questions of philosophy.