academica of cicero. - 912 Freedom Library

The Project Gutenberg eBook of ...
Democritus. I see some good in Strato, yet I will not assent absolutely either to his
system or to yours (121). All these matters lie far beyond our ken. We know nothing
of our bodies, which we can dissect, while we have not the advantage of being able
to dissect the constitution of things or of the earth to see whether she is firmly fixed
or hovers in mid air (122). Xenophanes, Hicetas, Plato and Epicurus tell strange
things of the heavenly bodies. How much better to side with Socrates and Aristo,
who hold that nothing can be known about them! (123) Who knows the nature of
mind? Numberless opinions clash, as do those of Dicaearchus, Plato and Xenocrates.
Our sapiens will be unable to decide (124). If you say it is better to choose any
system rather than none, I choose Democritus. You at once upbraid me for believing
such monstrous falsehoods (125). The Stoics differ among themselves about physical
subjects, why will they not allow me to differ from them? (126) Not that I deprecate
the study of Physics, for moral good results from it (127). Our sapiens will be
delighted if he attains to anything which seems to resemble truth. Before I proceed to
Ethics, I note your weakness in placing all perceptions on the same level. You must
be prepared to asseverate no less strongly that the sun is eighteen times as large as
the earth, than that yon statue is six feet high. When you admit that all things can be
perceived no more and no less clearly than the size of the sun, I am almost content
(128).
§116. Tres partes: cf. I. 19. Et a vobismet: "and especially by you". The threefold division was
peculiarly Stoic, though used by other schools, cf. Sext. P.H. II. 13 (on the same subject) ??? St??
??? ?a? a???? t??e?. For other modes of dividing philosophy see Sext. A.M. VII. 2. At illud ante:
this is my em. for the MSS. velut illud ante, which probably arose from a marginal variant "vel
ut" taking the place of at; cf. a similar break in 40 sed prius, also in 128 at paulum ante. Such
breaks often occur in Cic., as in Orator 87 sed nunc aliud, also T.D. IV. 47 repenam fortasse, sed
illud ante. For velut Halm writes vel (which Bait. takes), Dav. verum. Inflatus tumore: cf. De Off.
I. 91 inflati opinionibus. Bentl. read errore. Cogere: this word like a?a??a?e?? and ß?a?es?a?
often means simply to argue irresistibly. Initia: as in 118, bases of proof, themselves naturally
incapable of proof, so a??a? in Gk. Digitum: cf. 58, 143. Punctum esse etc.: s?µe??? est?? ??
µe??? ???e? (Sext. P.H. III. 39), st??µ? = t? aµe?e? (A.M. IX. 283, 377). Extremitatem: = ep?
fa?e?a?. Libramentum: so this word is used by Pliny (see Forc.) for the slope of a hill. Nulla
crassitudo: in Sext. the ep?fa?e?a is usually described not negatively as here, but positively as
µ???? µeta p?at??? (P.H. III. 39), pe?a? (extremitas) s?µat?? d?? e??? d?astase??, µ???? ?a?
p?at?? (A.M. III. 77). Liniamentum ... carentem: a difficult passage. Note (1) that the line is
defined in Greek as µ???? ap?ate?. (Sext. as above), (2) that Cic. has by preference described
the point and surface negatively. This latter fact seems to me strong against the introduction of
longitudinem which Ursinus, Dav., Orelli, Baiter and others propose by conjecture. If anything is
to be introduced, I would rather add et crassitudine before carentem, comparing I. 27 sine ulla
specie et carentem omni illa qualitate. I have merely bracketed carentem, though I feel Halm's
remark that a verb is wanted in this clause as in the other two, he suggests quod sit sine.
Hermann takes esse after punctum as strongly predicative ("there is a point," etc.), then adds
similiter after liniamentum and ejects sine ulla. Observe the awkwardness of having the line
treated of after the superficies, which has induced some edd. to transpose. For liniamentum =
lineam cf. De Or. I. 187. Si adigam: the fine em. of Manut. for si adiiciamus of MSS. The
construction adigere aliquem ius iurandum will be found in Caes. Bell. Civ. I. 76, II. 18, qu. by
Dav., cf. also Virg. Aen. III. 56 quid non mortalia pectora cogis auri sacra fames? Sapientem nec
prius: this is the "egregia lectio" of three of Halm's MSS. Before Halm sapientemne was read,
thus was destroyed the whole point of the sentence, which is not that the sapiens will swear to
the size of the sun after he has seen Archimedes go through his calculations, but that the sapiens,
however true he admits the bases of proof to be which Archimedes uses, will not swear to the
truth of the elaborate conclusions which that geometer rears upon them. Cicero is arguing as in
128 against the absurdity of attaching one and the same degree of certainty to the simplest and
the most complex truths, and tries to condemn the Stoic sapiens out of his own mouth, cf. esp.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14970/14970-h/14970-h.htm[1/5/2010 10:31:57 AM]