academica of cicero. - 912 Freedom Library

The Project Gutenberg eBook of ...
same country. Virtutis usum: cf. the description of Aristotle's finis in D.F. II. 19. Ipsum habitum:
the mere possession. So Plato, Theaetet. 197 B, uses the word ?e???, a use which must be clearly
distinguished from the later sense found in the Ethics of Arist. In this sense virtue is not a ?e???,
according to the Stoics, but a d?a?es?? (Stob. II. 6, 5, Diog. VII. 89; yet Diog. sometimes speaks
of virtue loosely as a ?e???, VII. 92, 93; cf. Zeller 249, with footnotes). Nec virtutem cuiquam
adesse ... uteretur: cf. Stob. II. 6, 6 d?? ?e?? t?? a????p?? e??a? t? µe? t?? sp??da???, t? de t?
? fa????, ?a? t? µe? t?? sp??da??? d?a pa?t?? t?? ß??? ???s?a? ta?? a?eta??, t? de t?? fa???
? ta?? ?a??a??. Perturbationem: I am surprised that Halm after the fine note of Wesenberg,
printed on p. 324 of the same volume in which Halm's text of the Acad. appears, should read the
plural perturbationes, a conj. of Walker. Perturbationem means emotion in the abstract;
perturbationes below, particular emotions. There is exactly the same transition in T.D. III. 23, 24,
IV. 59, 65, V. 43, while perturbatio is used, in the same sense as here, in at least five other
passages of the T.D., i.e. IV. 8, 11, 24, 57, 82. Quasi mortis: a trans. of Stoic pa?es?, which Cic.
rejects in D.F. III. 35. Voluit carere sapientem: emotion being a disturbance of equilibrium in the
reason, and perfect reason being virtue (20), it follows that the Stoic sapiens must be emotionless
(Zeller 228 sq.). All emotions are reasonless; ??d??? or laetitia for instance is a????? epa?s??.
(T.D. Books III. and IV. treat largely of the Stoic view of emotions.) Wesenberg, Em. to the T.D.
III. p. 8, says Cic. always uses efferri laetitia but ferri libidine.
§39. Aliaque in parte: so Plato, Tim. 69 C, Rep. 436, 441, Arist. De Anima II. 3, etc.; cf. T.D. I.
20. Voluntarias: the whole aim of the Stoic theory of the emotions was to bring them under the
predominance of the will. How the moral freedom of the will was reconciled with the general
Stoic fatalism we are not told. Opinionisque iudicio suscipi: all emotion arose, said the Stoics,
from a false judgment about some external object; cf. Diog. VII. 111. ta pa?? ???se?? e??a?.
Instances of each in Zeller 233. For iudicio cf. D.F. III. 35, T.D. III. 61, IV. 14, 15, 18.
Intemperantiam: the same in T.D. IV. 22, Gk. a???as?a, see Zeller 232. Quintam naturam: the
peµpt? ??s?a or peµpt?? s?µa of Aristotle, who proves its existence in De Coelo I. 2, in a
curious and recondite fashion. Cic. is certainly wrong in stating that Arist. derived mind from this
fifth element, though the finest and highest of material substances. He always guards himself
from assigning a material origin to mind. Cic. repeats the error in T.D. I. 22, 41, 65, D.F. IV. 12.
On this last passage Madv. has an important note, but he fails to recognise the essential fact,
which is clear from Stob. I. 41, 33, that the Peripatetics of the time were in the habit of deriving
the mind from a????, which is the very name that Aristotle gives to the fifth element (s?µa a??
e???? in the De Coelo), and of giving this out to be Aristotle's opinion. The error once made, no
one could correct it, for there were a hundred influences at work to confirm it, while the works of
Aristotle had fallen into a strange oblivion. I cannot here give an exhaustive account of these
influences, but will mention a few. Stoicism had at the time succeeded in powerfully influencing
every other sect, and it placed ???? e? a??e?? (see Plutarch, qu. R. and P. 375). It had destroyed
the belief in immaterial existence The notion that ???? or ???? came from a???? was also
fostered by the language of Plato. He had spoken of the soul as ae?????t?? in passages which
were well known to Cic. and had taken great hold on his mind One from the Phaedrus 245 C is
translated twice, in Somnium Scipionis (De Rep. VI.), and T.D. I. 53 sq. Now the only thing with
Aristotle which is ae?????t?? in eternal perfect circular motion (for to the ancients circular
motion is alone perfect and eternal), is the a???? or peµpt?? s?µa, that fiery external rim of the
universe of which the stars are mere nodes, and with which they revolve. How natural then, in
the absence of Aristotle's works, to conclude that the ae?????t?? ???? of Plato came from the
ae?????t?? a???? of Aristotle! Arist. had guarded himself by saying that the soul as an a??? ???
?se?? must be a????t??, but Cic. had no means of knowing this (see Stob. I. 41, 36). Again,
Plato had often spoken of souls at death flying away to the outer circle of the universe, as though
to their natural home, just where Arist. placed his peµpt?? s?µa Any one who will compare T.D.
I. 43 with the Somn. Scipionis will see what power this had over Cicero. Further, Cic. would
naturally link the mind in its origin with the stars which both Plato and Arist. looked on as divine
(cf. Somn. Scip. 15) These considerations will be enough to show that neither Cic. nor Antiochus,
whom Madv. considers responsible for the error, could have escaped it in any way not
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14970/14970-h/14970-h.htm[1/5/2010 10:31:57 AM]