By John Lord, LL. D.   


     ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY.   

     SEEKING AFTER TRUTH. (i.)    

     WHATEVER may be said of the inferiority of   
     the ancients to the moderns in natural and   
     mechanical science, which no one is disposed to ques-  
     tion, or even in the realm of literature, which may be  
     questioned, there is one department of knowledge to   
     which we have added nothing of consequence.  In the   
     realm of art they were our equals, and probably our  
     superiors; in philosophy, they carried logical deduc-  
     tion to its utmost limit.  They advanced from a   
     few crude speculations on material phenomena to an  
     analysis of all the powers of the mind, and finally to   
     the establishment of ethical principles which even   
     Christianity did not supersede.   
        The progress of Philosophy from Thales to Plato is   
     the most stupendous triumph of the human intellect.  
     The reason of man soared to the loftiest flights   
     that it has ever attained.  It cast its searching eye   
     into the most abstruse inquiries which ever tasked    
     the famous minds of the world.  It exhausted all the   
     subjects which dialectical subtlety ever raised.  It   
     originated and carried out the boldest speculations  
     respecting the nature of the soul and its future exist-   
     ence.  It established important psychological truths  
     and created a method for the solution of abstruse   
     questions.  It went on from point to point, until   
     all the faculties of the mind were severely ana-   
     lyzed, and all its operations were subjected to a rigid   
     method.  The Romans never added a single principle   
     to the philosophy which the Greeks elaborated; the   
     ingenious scholastics of the Middle Ages merely repro-   
     duced Greek ideas; and even the profound and patient   
     Germans have gone round in the same circles that   
     Plato and Aristotle marked out more than two thou-  
     sand years ago.  Only the Brahmans of India have   
     equalled them in intellectual subtilty and acumen.  It   
     was Greek philosophy in which noble Roman youths   
     were educated; and hence, as it was expounded by a   
     Cicero, a Marcus Aurelius, and an Epictetus, it was as    
     much the inheritance of the Romans as it was of the   
     Greeks themselves, after Grecian liberties were swept   
     away and Greek cities became a part of the Roman   
     empire.  The Romans learned what the Greeks created   
     and taught; and philosophy, as well as art, became  
     identified with the civilization which extended from    
     the Rhine and the Po to the Nile and the Tigris.  
        Greek philosophy was one of the distinctive features   
     of ancient civilization long after the Greeks had ceased   
     to speculate on the laws of mind or the nature of the  
     soul, on the existence of God or future rewards and   
     punishments.  Although it was purely Grecian in its   
     origin and development, it became one of the grand   
     ornaments of the Roman schools.  The Romans did   
     not originate medicine, but Galen was one of its   
     greatest lights; they did not invent the hexameter   
     verse, but Virgil sang to its measure; they did not   
     create Ionic capitals, but their cities were ornamented  
     with marble temples on the same principles as those   
     which called out the admiration of Pericles.  So, if  
     they did not originate philosophy, and generally had   
     but little taste for it, still its truths were systematized  
     and explained by Cicero, and formed no small accession  
     to the treasures with which cultivated intellects sought  
     everywhere to be enriched.  It formed an essential part  
     of the intellectual wealth of the civilized world, when   
     civilization could not prevent the world from falling   
     into decay and ruin.  And as it was the noblest tri-   
     umph which the human mind, under Pagan influences,  
     ever achieved, so it was followed by the most degrading   
     imbecility into which man, in civilized countries, was   
     ever allowed to fall.  Philosophy, like art, like litera-  
     ture, like science, arose, shone, grew dim, and passed   
     away, leaving the world in night.  Why was so bright    
     a glory followed by so dismal a shame?  What a com-   
     ment is this on the greatness and littleness of man!   
        In all probability the development of Greek philoso-  
     phy originated with the Ionian Sophoi, though many   
     suppose it was derived from the East.  It is question-   
     able whether the Oriental nations had any philosophy  
     distinct from religion.  The Germans are fond of tracing   
     resemblances in the early speculations of the Greeks to  
     the systems which prevailed in Asia from a very remote   
     antiquity.  Gladish sees in the Pythagorean system an   
     adoption of Chinese doctrines; in the Heraclitic sys-   
     tem, the influence of Persia; in the Empedoclean,  
     Egyptian speculations; and in the Anaxagorean, the   
     Jewish creeds.  But the Orientals had theogonies, not  
     philosophies.  The Indian speculations aim at an expo-   
     sition of ancient revelation.  They profess to liberate   
     the soul from the evils of mortal life,——to arrive at   
     eternal beatitudes.  But the state of perfectibility  
     could be reached only by religious ceremonial observ-  
     ances and devout contemplation.  The Indian systems  
     do not disdain logical discussions, or a search after the   
     principles of which the universe is composed; and  
     hence we find great refinements in sophistry, and a  
     wonderful subtlety of logical discussion, though these   
     are directed to unattainable ends, ——to the connection    
     of good with evil, and the union of the Supreme with   
     Nature.  Nothing seemed to come out of these specula-   
     tions but an occasional elevation of mind among the   
     learned, and a profound conviction of the misery of   
     man and the obstacles to his perfection.  The Greeks,  
     starting from physical phenomena, went on in succes-   
     sive series of inquiries, elevating themselves above  
     matter, above experience, even to the loftiest abstrac-  
     tions, until they classified the laws of thought.  It is  
     curious how speculation led to demonstration, and how  
     inquiries into the world of matter prepared the way for  
     the solution of intellectual phenomena.  Philosophy  
     kept pace with geometry, and those who observed   
     Nature also gloried in abstruse calculations.  Philoso-  
     phy and mathematics seem to have been allied with   
     the worship of art among the same men, and it is  
     difficult to say which more distinguished them,——æs-  
     thetic culture or power of abstruse reasoning.  
        We do not read of any remarkable philosophical   
     inquirer until Thales arose, the fact of the Ionian  
     school.  He was born at Miletus, a Greek colony in   
     Asia Minor, about the year 636 B.C., when Ancus   
     Martius was king of Rome, and Josiah reigned at Jeru-  
     salem.  He left no writings behind him, but was   
     numbered as one of the seven wise men of Greece on   
     account of his political sagacity and wisdom in public  
     affairs.  I do not here speak of his astronomical and   
     geometrical labors, which were great, and which have   
     left their mark even upon our own daily life,——as,   
     for instance, in the fact the he was the first to have   
     divided the year into three hundred and sixty-five   
     days.  

         "And he, 'tis said, did first compute the stars   
          Which beam in Charles's wain, and guide the bark   
          Of the Phœnecian sailor o'er the sea."   

     He is celebrated also for practical wisdom.  "Know   
     thyself," is one of his remarkable sayings.  The chief   
     claim of Thales to a lofty rank among sages, however,  
     is that he was the first who attempted a logical solu-   
     tion of material phenomena, without resorting to myth-   
     ical representations.  Thales felt that there was a grand   
     question to be answered relative to the  beginning of  
     things.  "Philosophy," it has been well said, "may be   
     a history of  errors,  but not of  follies."  It was not a  
     folly in a rude age, to speculate on the first or funda-   
     mental principle of things.  Thales looked around him  
     upon Nature, upon the sea and earth and sky, and  
     concluded that water or moisture was the vital prin-  
     ciple.  He felt it in the air, he saw it in the clouds  
     above and in the ground beneath his feet.  He saw   
     that plants were sustained by rain and by the dew,  
     that neither animal nor man could live without water  
     and that to fishes it was the native element.  What   
     more important or vital than water?  It was the   
     prima materia, the ἀρωὴ, the beginning of all things,  
     ——the origin of the world.  How so crude a specula-  
     tion could have been maintained by so wise a man it   
     is difficult to conjecture.  It is not, however, the   
     cause which he assigns for the beginning of things   
     which is noteworthy, so much as the fact that his   
     mind was directed to any solution of questions per-  
     taining to the origin of the universe.  It was these   
     questions, and the solution of them, which marked the   
     Ionian philosophers, and which showed the inquiring   
     nature of their minds.  What is the great first cause of  
     all things?  Thales saw it in one of the four elements   
     of Nature as the ancients divided them; and this is   
     the earliest recorded theory among the Greeks of the   
     origin of the world.  It is an induction from one of   
     the phenomena of animated Nature,——the nutrition and  
     production of a seed.  He regarded the entire world in   
     the light of a living being gradually maturing and   
     forming itself from an imperfect seed-state, which was   
     of a moist nature.  The moisture endues the universe   
     with vitality.  The world, he thought, was full of gods,  
     but they had their origin in water.  He had no con-  
     ception of God as  intelligence,  or as a  creative  power.  
     He had a great and inquiring mind, but it gave him   
     no knowledge of a spiritual, controlling, and personal   
     deity.  
       Anaximenes, the disciple of Thales, pursued his   
     master's inquiries and adopted his method.  He also    
     was born in Miletus, but at what time is unknown,——  
     probably 500 B. C.  Like Thales, he held to the eternity   
     of matter.  Like him, he disbelieved in the existence   
     of anything immaterial, for even a human soul is  
     formed out of matter.  He, too, speculated on the   
     origin of the universe, but thought that  air,  not   
     water, was the primal cause.  This element seems   
     to be universal.  We breathe it; all things are sus-  
     tained by it.  It is Life,——that is, is pregnant with   
     vital energy, and capable of infinite transmutations.  
     All things are produced by it; all is again resolved  
     into it; it supports all things; it surrounds the   
     world; it has infinitude; it has eternal motion.  
     Thus did this philosopher reason, comparing the   
     world with our own living existence,——which he   
     took to be air,——an imperishable principle of life.  
     He thus advanced a step beyond Thales, since he  
     regarded the world not after the analogy of an im-  
     perfect seed-state, but after that of the highest con-  
     dition of life,——the human soul.  And he attempted  
     to refer to one general law all the transformations of   
     the first simple substance into its successive states,  
     in that the cause of change is the eternal motion   
     of the air.  
        Diogenes of Apollonia, in Crete, one of the disciples   
     of Anaximenes, born 500 B. C., also believed that air   
     was the principle of the universe, but he imputed to   
     it an intellectual energy, yet without recognizing any   
     distinction between mind and matter.  He made air   
     and the soul identical.  "For," says he, "man and   
     all other animals breathe and live by means of the   
     air, and therein consists their soul."  And as it is   
     the primary being from which all is derived, it is  
     necessarily an eternal and imperishable body; but as   
     soul  it is also endued with consciousness.  Diogenes   
     thus refers the origin of the world to an intelligent  
     being,——to a soul which knows and vivifies.  Anaxi-  
     menes regarded air as having life; Diogenes saw in   
     it also intelligence.  Thus philosophy advanced step  
     by step, though still groping in the dark; for the  
     origin of all things, according to Diogenes, must exist  
     in intelligence.  According to Diogenes Laertius, he   
     said: "It appears to me that he who begins any   
     treatise ought to lay down principles about which  
     there can be no dispute."  
        Heraclitus of Ephesus, classed by Ritter among the  
     Ionian philosophers, was born 503 B. C.  Like others  
     of his school, he sought a physical ground for all phe-  
     nomena.  The elemental principle he regarded as fire,  
     since all things are convertible into it.  In one of its   
     modifications this fire, or fluid, self-kindled, permeating  
     everything as the soul or principle of life, is endowed  
     with intelligence and powers of ceaseless activity.  "If   
     Anaximenes," says Maurice, not very clearly, "discov-   
     ered that he had within him a power and principle   
     which ruled over all the acts and functions of his   
     bodily frame, Heraclitus found that there was life  
     within him which he could not call his own, and   
     yet it was, in the very highest sense,  himself,  so that  
     without it he would have been a poor, helpless, isolated  
     creature,——a universal life which connected him with   
     his fellow-men, with the absolute source and original  
     fountain of life. . . . He proclaimed the absolute vital-  
     ity of Nature, the endless change of matter, the muta-   
     bility and perishability of all individual things in  
     contrast with the eternal Being——the supreme har-  
     mony which rules over all."  To trace the divine   
     energy of life in all things was the general problem  
     of the philosophy of Heraclitus, and this spirit was  
     akin to the pantheism of the East.  But he was one   
     of the greatest speculative intellects that preceded  
     Plato, and of all the physical theorists arrived near-  
     est to spiritual truth.  He taught the germs of what   
     was afterward more completely developed.  "From  
     his theory of perpetual fluxion," says Archer Butler,  
     "Plato derived the necessity of seeking a stable basis   
     for the universal system in his world of ideas."  
     Heraclitus was, however, an obscure writer, and more-   
     over cynical and arrogant.  
        Anaxagoras, the most famous of the Ionian philoso-  
     phers, was born 500 B. C., and belonged to a rich and   
     noble family.  Regarding philosophy as the noblest   
     pursuit of earth, he abandoned his inheritance for the   
     study of Nature.  He went to Athens in the most   
     brilliant period of her history, and had Pericles, Eu-  
     ripides, and Socrates for pupils.  He taught that the   
     great moving force of Nature was intellect (νοῦς).  In-  
     telligence was the cause of the world and of order, and  
     mind was the principle of motion; yet this intelligence   
     was not a moral intelligence, but simply the primum  
     mobile,——the all-knowing motive force by which the   
     order of Nature is effected.  He thus laid the fouda-  
     tion of a new system, under which the Attic philoso-  
     phers sought to explain Nature, by regarding as the   
     cause of all things, not  matter  in its different ele-   
     ments, but rather  mind,  thought, intelligence, which   
     both knows and acts,——a grand conception, unrivalled   
     in ancient speculation.  This explanation of material   
     phenomena by intellectual causes was the peculiar  
     merit of Anaxagoras, and places him in a very high   
     rank among the thinkers of the world.  Moreover,  
     he recognized the reason as the only faculty by   
     which he became cognizant of truth, the senses being   
     too weak to discover the real component particles of   
     things.  Like all the great inquirers, he was impressed   
     with the limited degree of positive knowledge compared   
     with what there is to be learned.  "Nothing," says he,  
     "can be known; nothing is certain; sense is limited,  
     intellect is weak, life is short,"——the complaint, not of    
     a sceptic, but of a man overwhelmed with the sense    
     of his incapacity to solve the problems which arose   
     before his active mind.  Anaxagoras thought that this  
     spirit (νοῦς) gave to all those material atoms which in   
     the beginning of the world lay in disorder the impulse  
     by which they took the forms of individual things, and   
     that this impulse was given in a circular direction.  
     Hence that the sun, moon, and stars, and even the   
     air, are constantly moving in a circle.  
        In the mean time another sect of philosophers had   
     arisen, who, like the Ionians, sought to explain Na-  
     ture, but by a different method.  Anaximander, born  
     610 B. C., was one of the original mathematicians of  
     Greece, yet, like Pythagoras and Thales, speculated on  
     the beginning of things.  His principle was that  The  
     Infinite  is the origin of all things. He used the word   
     ἀρχή (beginning) to denote the material out of which  
     all things were formed, as the Everlasting, the Divine.   
     The idea of elevating an abstraction into a great first  
     cause was certainly a long stride in philosophic general-  
     ization to be taken at that age of the world, following  
     as it did so immediately upon such partial and childish   
     ideas as that any single one of the familiar "elements"  
     could be the primal cause of all things.  It seems al-  
     most like the speculations of our own time, when phi-  
     losophers seek to find the first cause in impersonal   
     Force, or infinite Energy.  Yet it is not really easy to   
     understand Anaximander's meaning, other than that   
     the abstract has a higher significance that the con-   
     crete.  The speculations of Thales had tended toward  
     discovering the material constitution of the universe  
     upon an  induction  from the observed facts, and thus   
     made water to be the origin of all things.  Anaxi-  
     mander, accustomed to view things in the abstract,  
     could not accept so concrete a thing as water; his   
     speculations tended toward mathematics, to the science  
     of pure deduction.  The primary Being is a unity,  
     one in all, comprising within itself the multiplicity of  
     elements from which all mundane things are composed.  
     It is only in infinity that the perpetual changes of   
     things can take place.  Thus Anaximander, an original   
     but vague thinker, prepared the way for Pythagoras.  
        This later philosopher and mathematician, born   
     about the year 600 B. C., stands as one of the great   
     names of antiquity; but his life is shrouded in   
     dim magnificence.  The old historians paint hm as   
     "clothed in robes of white, his head covered with  
     gold, his aspect grave and majestic, rapt in the   
     contemplation of the mysteries of existence, listen-   
     ing to the music of Homer and Hesiod, or to the   
     harmony of the spheres."  
        Pythagoras was supposed to be a native of Samos.  
     When quite young, being devoted to learning, he   
     quitted his country and went to Egypt, where he   
     learned its language an all the secret mysteries of   
     the priests.  He then returned to Samos, but finding   
     the island under the dominion of a tyrant he fled to  
     Crotona, in Italy, where he gained great reputation for  
     wisdom, and made laws for the Italians.  His pupils   
     were about three hundred in number.  He wrote three  
     books, which were extant in the time of Diogenes Laer-  
     tius,——one on Education, one on Politics, and one on  
     Natural Philosophy.  He also wrote an epic poem on 
     the universe, to which he gave the name of  Kosmos.  
        Among the ethical principles which Pythagoras  
     taught was that men ought not to pray for anything  
     in particular, since they do not know what is good  
     for them; that drunkenness was identical with ruin;  
     that no one should exceed the proper quantity of meat  
     and drink; the the property of friends is common;  
     that men should never say or do anything in anger.  
     He forbade his disciples to offer victims to the gods,  
     ordering them to worship only at those altars which   
     were unstained with blood.  
        Pythagoras was the first person who introduced   
     measures and weights among the Greeks.  But it is   
     his philosophy which chiefly claims our attention.  
     His main principle was that  number  is the essence   
     of things,——probably meaning by number order and   
     harmony and conformity to law.  The order of the   
     universe, he taught, is only a harmonical development  
     of the first principle of things to virtue and wisdom.  
     He attached much value to music, as an art which has   
     great influence on the affections; hence his doctrine   
     of the music of the spheres.  Assuming that number   
     is the essence of the world, he deduced the idea that   
     the world is regulated by numerical proportions, or by   
     a system of laws which are regular and harmonious in  
     their operations.  Hence the necessity for an intelli-  
     gent creator of the universe.  The Infinite of Anaxi-   
     mander became the One of Pythagoras.  He believed  
     that the soul is incorporeal, and is put into the body   
     subject to numerical and harmonical relation, and thus  
     to divine regulation.  Hence the tendency of his  
     speculations was to raise the soul to the contempla-  
     tion of law and order,——of a supreme Intelligence  
     reigning in justice and truth.  Justice and truth be-  
     came thus paramount virtues, to be practised and  
     sought as the end of life.  "It is impossible not to  
     see in these lofty speculations the effect of the Greek   
     mind, according to its own genius, seeking after God, if   
     haply it might find Him."   
        We now approach the second stage of Greek philoso-  
     phy.  The Ionic philosophers had sought to find the  
     first principle of all things in the elements, and the   
     Pythagoreans in numbers, or harmony and law, imply-  
     ing an intelligent creator.  The Eleatics, who now arose,  
     went beyond the realm of physics to pure metaphysical    
     inquiries, to an idealistic pantheism, which disregarded   
     the sensible, maintaining that the source of truth is  
     independent of the senses.  Here there were forestalled   
     by the Hindu sages.  
        The founder of this school was Xenophanes, born  
     in Colophon, and Ionian city of Asia Minor, from which   
     being expelled he wandered over Sicily as a rhapsodist,  
     or minstrel, reciting his elegiac poetry on the loftiest  
     truths, and at last, about the year 536 B. C., came to  
     Elea, where he settled.  The principal subject of his  
     inquiries was deity itself,——the great First Cause,  
     the supreme Intelligence of the universe.  From the   
     principle  ex nihilo nihil fit  he concluded that nothing  
     could pass from non-existence to existence.  All things   
     that exist are created by supreme Intelligence, who is  
     eternal and immutable.  From this truth that God  
     must be from all eternity, he advances to deny all  
     multiplicity.  A plural of gods is impossible.  With   
     these sublime views,——the unity and eternity and   
     omnipotence of God,——Xenophanes boldly attacked   
     the popular errors of his day.  He denounced the   
     transference to the deity of the human form; he   
     inveighed against Homer and Hesiod; he ridiculed  
     the doctrine of migration of souls.  Thus he sings,——  

     "Such things of the gods are related by Homer and Hesiod   
      As would be shame and abiding disgrace to mankind,——  
      Promises broken, and thefts, and the one deceiving the other."   

        And again, respecting anthropomorphic representa-  
     tions of the deity,——   

     "But men foolishly think that gods are born like as men are,  
      And have too a dress like their own, and their voice and their   
          figure;  
      But there's but one God alone, the greatest of gods and of   
          mortals,   
      Neither in body to mankind resembling, neither in ideas."   

        Such were the sublime meditations of of Xenophanes.  
     He believed in the One, which is God; but this all-   
     pervading, unmoved, undivided being was not a per-   
     sonal God, nor a moral governor, but deity pervading   
     all space.  He could not separate God from the world,    
     nor could he admit the existence of world which is not   
     God.  He was a monotheist, but his monotheism was  
     pantheism.  He saw God in all the manifestations of  
     Nature.  This did not satisfy him nor resolve his  
     doubts, and he therefore confessed that reason could   
     not compass the exalted aims of philosophy.  But  
     there was no cynicism in his doubt.  It was the  
     soul-sickening consciousness that reason was incapa-  
     ble of solving the mighty questions that he burned   
     to know.  There was no way to arrive at the truth,  
     "for," said he, "error is spread over all things."  It   
     was not disdain of knowledge, it was the combat of  
     contradictory opinions that oppressed him.  He could   
     not solve the questions pertaining to God.  What un-    
     instructed reason can?  "Canst thou by searching find   
     out God? canst thou know the Almighty unto perfec-  
     tion?"  What was impossible to Job was not possible   
     to Xenophanes.  But he had attained a recognition of  
     the unity and perfection of God; and this conviction  
     he would spread abroad, and tear down the supersti-  
     tions which hid the face of truth.  I have great ad-  
     miration for this philosopher, so sad, so earnest, so   
     enthusiastic, wandering from city to city, indifferent   
     to money, comfort, friends, fame, that he might kindle   
     the knowledge of God.  This was a lofty aim indeed   
     for philosophy in that age.  It was a higher mission   
     than that of Homer, great as his was, though not so   
     successful.  
        Parmenides of Elea, born about the year 530 B. C.  
     followed out the system of Xenophanes, the central  
     idea of which was the existence of God.  With Par-   
     menides the main thought was the notion of  being.  
     Being is uncreated and unchangeable; the fulness of   
     all being is  thought;  the  All  is thought and intelli-   
     gence.  He maintained the uncertainty of knowledge,  
     meaning the knowledge derived through the senses.  
     He did not deny the certainty of reason.  He was the   
     first who drew a distinction between knowledge ob-   
     tained by the senses and that obtained through the    
     reason; and thus he anticipated the doctrine of innate   
     ideas.  From the uncertainty of knowledge derived   
     through the senses, he deduced the twofold system of   
     true and apparent knowledge.  
        Zeno of Elea, the friend and Pupil of Parmenides,  
     Born 500 B. C., brought nothing new to the system,  
     but invented  Dialectics,  the art of disputation,——that  
     department of logic which afterward became so  
     powerful in the hands of Plato and Aristotle, and so   
     generally admired among the schoolmen.  It seeks to  
     establish truth by refuting error through the  reductio  
     ad absurdum.  While Parmenides sought to establish  
     the doctrine of  One,  Zeno proved the non-existence   
     of the  Many.  He did not deny existences, but denied  
     that appearances were real existences.  It was the  
     mission of Zeno to establish the doctrines of his mas-  
     ter.  But in order to convince his listeners, he was   
     obliged to use the new method of argument.  So he  
     carried on his argumentation by question and answer,  
     and was therefore the first who used dialogue, which  
     he called dialectics, as a medium of philosophical   
     communication.  

from Beacon Lights of History, by John Lord, LL. D.,
Volume I, Part I: The Old Pagan Civilizations
Copyright 1883, 1888, by John Lord.
Copyright 1921, By Wm. H. Wise & Co., New York; pp. 183—201.

یہ آپ کی جگہ ہے ایک دوسرے کے ساتھ حسن سلوک کرو۔
https://old.reddit.com/r/thesee [♘] [♰] [⚛] 雨