academica of cicero. - 912 Freedom Library

The Project Gutenberg eBook of ...
superhuman except by the recovery of Aristotle's lost works, which did not happen till too late.
Sensus: we seem here to have a remnant of the distinction drawn by Arist. between animal heat
and other heat, the former being a?a????? t? t?? ast??? st???e?? (De Gen. An. II. 3, qu. R. and
P. 299). Ignem: the Stoics made no difference, except one of degree, between a???? and p??, see
Zeller 189, 190. Ipsam naturam: p?? is ?at' e????? st???e??? (Stob. I. 10, 16), and is the first
thing generated from the ap???? ????; from it comes air, from air water, from water earth (Diog.
Laert. VII. 136, 137) The fire is ???????, from it comes the ???eµ?????? of man, which
comprises within it all powers of sensation and thought. These notions came from Heraclitus who
was a great hero of the Stoics (Zeller ch. VIII. with notes) For his view of sensation and thought
see Sextus Adv. Math. VII. 127—129, qu. by R. and P. 21. The Stoics probably misunderstood
him; cf. R. and P. "Heraclitus," and Grote's Plato I. 34 sq. Expers corporis: for Stoic materialism
see Zeller, pp. 120 sq. The necessity of a connection between the perceiving mind and the things
perceived followed from old physical principles such as that of Democritus (?? ?a? e????e?? ta
?ete?a ?a? d?afe???ta pas?e?? ??p' a??????, qu. from Arist. De Gen. et Corr. I. 7, by R. and P.
43), the same is affirmed loosely of all the old f?s????, (Sextus Adv. Math. VII. 116), and by
Empedocles in his lines ?a?a? µe? ?a?a? ?p?paµe?, etc. Plato in the Timaeus fosters the same
notion, though in a different way. The Stoics simply followed out boldly that line of thought.
Xenocrates: see II. 124, n. Superiores: merely the supposed old Academico-Peripatetic school.
Posse esse non corpus: there is no ultimate difference between Force and Matter in the Stoic
scheme, see Zeller, pp. 134, 135.
§40. Iunctos: how can anything be a compound of one thing? The notion that iunctos could mean
aptos (R. and P. 366) is untenable. I entirely agree with Madv. (first Excursus to his D.F.) that
we have here an anacoluthon. Cic. meant to say iunctos e quadam impulsione et ex assensu
animorum, but having to explain fa?tas?a was obliged to break off and resume at sed ad haec.
The explanation of a Greek term causes a very similar anacoluthon in De Off. I. 153. Schuppe,
De Anacoluthis Ciceronianis p. 9, agrees with Madv. For the expression cf. D.F. II. 44 e duplici
genere voluptatis coniunctus Ernesti em. cunctos, Dav. punctos, ingeniose ille quidem says Halm,
pessime I should say. Fa?tas?a?: a full and clear account of Stoic theories of sensation is given
by Zeller, ch. V., R. and P. 365 sq. Nos appellemus licet: the same turn of expression occurs D.F.
III. 21, IV. 74. Hoc verbum quidem hoc quidem probably ought to be read, see 18. Adsensionem =
s???ata?es??. In nobis positam: the usual expression for freedom of the will, cf. II. 37, De Fato,
42, 43 (a very important passage). The actual sensation is involuntary (a???s??? Sext. Emp. Adv.
Math. VIII. 397). Tironum causa I note that the Stoics sometimes speak of the assent of the mind
as involuntary, while the ?ata??pt??? fa?tas?a compels assent (see II. 38). This is, however, only
true of the healthy reason, the unhealthy may refuse assent.
§41. Visis non omnibus: while Epicurus defended the truth of all sensations, Zeno abandoned the
weak positions to the sceptic and retired to the inner citadel of the ?ata??pt??? fa?tas?a.
Declarationem: e?a??e?a?, a term alike Stoic, Epicurean, and Academic, see n. on II. 17. Earum
rerum: only this class of sensations gives correct information of the things lying behind. Ipsum
per se: i.e. its whole truth lies in its own e?a??e?a, which requires no corroboration from
without. Comprehendibile: this form has better MSS. authority than the vulg comprehensibile.
Goerenz's note on these words is worth reading as a philological curiosity Nos vero, inquit: Halm
with Manut. writes inquam. Why change? Atticus answers as in 14, 25, 33. ?ata??pt??: strictly
the thing which emits the visum is said to be ?ata??pt??, but, as we shall see in the Lucullus, the
sensation and the thing from which it proceeds are often confused. Comprehensionem: this word
properly denotes the process of perception in the abstract, not the individual perception. The
Greeks, however, themselves use ?ata????? for ?ata??pt??? fa?tas?a very often. Quae manu
prehenderentur: see II. 145. Nova enim dicebat: an admission not often made by Cic., who
usually contends, with Antiochus, that Zeno merely renamed old doctrines (cf. 43). Sensum: so
Stob., I. 41, 25 applies the term a?s??s?? to the fa?tas?a. Scientiam: the word ep?st?µ? is used
in two ways by the Stoics, (1) to denote a number of coordinated or systematised perceptions (?
ata???e?? or ?ata??pt??a? fa?tas?a?) sometimes also called te??? (cf. Sext. Pyrrh. Hyp. III. 188
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14970/14970-h/14970-h.htm[1/5/2010 10:31:57 AM]