academica of cicero. - 912 Freedom Library

The Project Gutenberg eBook of ...
e??a??pte??, e??a??pt????, d???t???? (the last in Sext. A.M. VIII. 277) often recur in Greek.
Primum esse ... nihil interesse: there is no inconsistency. Carneades allowed that visa, in
themselves, might be true or false, but affirmed that human faculties were incapable of
distinguishing those visa which proceed from real things and give a correct representation of the
things, from those which either are mere phantoms or, having a real source, do not correctly
represent it. Lucullus confuses essential with apparent difference. Non iungitur: a supposed case
of d?a?t?s??, which is opposed to s??a?t?s?? and explained in Sext. A.M. VIII. 430.
§45. Assentati: here simply = assensi. Praeteritis: here used in the strong participial sense, "in the
class of things passed over," cf. in remissis Orat. 59. Primum igitur ... sed tamen: for the slight
anacoluthia cf. Madv. Gram. 480. Iis qui videntur: Goer. is qui videtur, which is severely
criticised by Madv. Em. 150. For Epicurus' view of sensation see n. on 79, 80.
§§46—48. Summary. The refusal of people to assent to the innate clearness of some
phenomena (e?a??e?a) is due to two causes, (1) they do not make a serious
endeavour to see the light by which these phenomena are surrounded, (2) their faith
is shaken by sceptic paradoxes (46). The sceptics argue thus: you allow that mere
phantom sensations are often seen in dreams, why then do you not allow what is
easier, that two sensations caused by two really existing things may be mistaken the
one for the other? (47). Further, they urge that a phantom sensation produces very
often the same effect as a real one. The dogmatists say they admit that mere phantom
sensations do command assent. Why should they not admit that they command
assent when they so closely resemble real ones as to be indistinguishable from them?
(48)
§46. Circumfusa sint: Goer. retains the MSS. sunt on the ground that the clause quanta sint is
inserted pa?e??et????! Orelli actually follows him. For the phrase cf. 122 circumfusa tenebris.
Interrogationibus: cf. I. 5 where I showed that the words interrogatio and conclusio are
convertible. I may add that in Sextus pure syllogisms are very frequently called e??t?se??, and
that he often introduces a new argument by e??tata? ?a? t??t?, when there is nothing
interrogatory about the argument at all. Dissolvere: ap???es?a? in Sext. Occurrere: cf. 44.
§47. Confuse loqui: the mark of a bad dialectician, affirmed of Epicurus in D.F. II. 27. Nulla
sunt: on the use of nullus for non in Cic. cf. Madv. Gram. 455 obs. 5. The usage is mostly
colloquial and is very common in Plaut. and Terence, while in Cic. it occurs mostly in the
Letters. Inaniter: cf. 34. There are two ways in which a sensation may be false, (1) it may come
from one really existent thing, but be supposed by the person who feels it to be caused by a
totally different thing, (2) it may be a mere fa?tasµa or a?ap?asµa t?? d?a???a?, a phantom
behind which there is no reality at all. Quae in somnis videantur: for the support given by Stoics
to all forms of divination see Zeller 166, De Div. I. 7, etc. Quaerunt: a slight anacoluthon from
dicatis above. Quonam modo ... nihil sit omnino: this difficult passage can only be properly
explained in connection with 50 and with the general plan of the Academics expounded in 41.
After long consideration I elucidate it as follows. The whole is an attempt to prove the
proposition announced in 41 and 42 viz. omnibus veris visis adiuncta esse falsa. The criticism in
50 shows that the argument is meant to be based on the assumption known to be Stoic, omnia
deum posse. If the god can manufacture (efficere) sensations which are false, but probable (as the
Stoics say he does in dreams), why can he not manufacture false sensations which are so
probable as to closely resemble true ones, or to be only with difficulty distinguishable from the
true, or finally to be utterly indistinguishable from the true (this meaning of inter quae nihil sit
omnino is fixed by 40, where see n.)? Probabilia, then, denotes false sensations such as have
only a slight degree of resemblance to the true, by the three succeeding stages the resemblance is
made complete. The word probabilia is a sort of tertiary predicate after efficere ("to manufacture
so as to be probable"). It must not be repeated after the second efficere, or the whole sense will
be inverted and this section placed out of harmony with 50. Plane proxime: = quam proxime of
36.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14970/14970-h/14970-h.htm[1/5/2010 10:31:57 AM]