academica of cicero. - 912 Freedom Library

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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]
The Project Gutenberg eBook of ... te???? de e??a? s?st?µa e? ?ata???e?? s???e??µ?asµe???); (2) to denote a single perception, which use is copied by Cic. and may be seen in several passages quoted by Zeller 80. Ut convelli ratione non posset: here is a trace of later Stoicism. To Zeno all ?ata??pt??a? fa?tas?a? were asfa?e??, aµetapt?t?? ??p? ?????. Later Stoics, however, allowed that some of them were not impervious to logical tests; see Sext. Adv. Math. VII. 253, qu. Zeller 88. Thus every ?ata??pt??? fa?tas?a, instead of carrying with it its own evidence, had to pass through the fire of sceptical criticism before it could be believed. This was, as Zeller remarks, equivalent to giving up all that was valuable in the Stoic theory. Inscientiam: ex qua exsisteret: I know nothing like this in the Stoic texts; aµa??a is very seldom talked of there. Opinio: d??a, see Zeller and cf. Ac. II. 52, T.D. II. 52, IV. 15, 26. §42. Inter scientiam: so Sextus Adv. Math. VII. 151 speaks of ep?st?µ?? ?a? d??a? ?a? t?? e? µe??p?a? t??t?? ?ata?????. Soli: Halm, I know not why, suspects this and Christ gives solum ei. Non quod omnia: the meaning is that the reason must generalize on separate sensations and combine them before we can know thoroughly any one thing. This will appear if the whole sentence be read uno haustu; Zeller p. 78 seems to take the same view, but I have not come across anything exactly like this in the Greek. Quasi: this points out normam as a trans. of some Gk. word, ???t????? perhaps, or ???µ?? or ?a???. Notiones rerum: Stoic e????a?; Zeller 81— 84, R. and P. 367, 368. Quodque natura: the omission of eam is strange; Faber supplies it. Imprimerentur: the terms e?apesf?a??sµe??, e?ap?µeµa?µe??, e?tet?p?µe?? occur constantly, but generally in relation to fa?tas?a?, not to e????a?. Non principia solum: there seems to be a ref. to those a??a? t?? ap?de??e?? of Arist. which, induced from experience and incapable of proof, are the bases of all proof. (See Grote's Essay on the Origin of Knowledge, first printed in Bain's Mental and Moral Science, now re-published in Grote's Aristotle.) Zeno's e????a? were all this and more. Reperiuntur: two things vex the edd. (1) the change from oratio obliqua to recta, which however has repeatedly taken place during Varro's exposition, and for which see M.D.F. I. 30, III. 49; (2) the phrase reperire viam, which seems to me sound enough. Dav., Halm give aperirentur. There is no MSS. variant. Aliena: cf. alienatos D.F. III. 18. A virtute sapientiaque removebat: cf. sapiens numquam fallitur in iudicando D.F. III. 59. The firma adsensia is opposed to imbecilla 41. For the adsensio of the sapiens see Zeller 87. More information on the subject-matter of this section will be found in my notes on the first part of the Lucullus. In his constitit: cf. II. 134. §§43—end. Cicero's historical justification of the New Academy. Summary. Arcesilas' philosophy was due to no mere passion for victory in argument, but to the obscurity of phenomena, which had led the ancients to despair of knowledge (44). He even abandoned the one tenet held by Socrates to be certain; and maintained that since arguments of equal strength could be urged in favour of the truth or falsehood of phenomena, the proper course to take was to suspend judgment entirely (45). His views were really in harmony with those of Plato, and were carried on by Carneades (46). §43. Breviter: MSS. et breviter; see 37. Tunc: rare before a consonant; see Munro on Lucr. I. 130. Verum esse [autem] arbitror: in deference to Halm I bracket autem, but I still think the MSS. reading defensible, if verum be taken as the neut. adj. and not as meaning but. Translate: "Yet I think the truth to be ... that it is to be thought," etc. The edd. seem to have thought that esse was needed to go with putandam. This is a total mistake; cf. ait ... putandam, without esse II. 15, aiebas removendum II. 74; a hundred other passages might be quoted from Cic. §44. Non pertinacia aut studio vincendi: for these words see n. on II. 14. The sincerity of Arcesilas is defended also in II. 76. Obscuritate: a side-blow at declaratio 41. Confessionem ignorationis: see 16. Socrates was far from being a sceptic, as Cic. supposes; see note on II. 74. Et iam ante Socratem: MSS. veluti amantes Socratem; Democritus (460—357 B.C.) was really very little older than Socrates (468—399) who died nearly sixty years before him. Omnis paene veteres: the statement is audaciously inexact, and is criticised II. 14. None of these were sceptics; http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14970/14970-h/14970-h.htm[1/5/2010 10:31:57 AM]
Page 1 and 2:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of ...
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30: The Project Gutenberg eBook of ...
Page 79: The Project Gutenberg eBook of ...
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141:
show all

academica of cicero. - 912 Freedom Library

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?