A BEGINNER’S HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY
Illustration: SOCRATES
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ Transcriber’s Notes │
│ │
│ │
│ Punctuation has been standardized. │
│ │
│ Characters in small caps have been replaced by all caps. │
│ │
│ Non-printable characteristics have been given the following │
│ Italic text: --> _text_ │
│ bold text: --> =text=. │
│ │
│ This book was written in a period when many words had │
│ not become standardized in their spelling. Words may have │
│ multiple spelling variations or inconsistent hyphenation in │
│ the text. These have been left unchanged unless indicated │
│ with a Transcriber’s Note. │
│ │
│ The symbol ‘‡’ indicates the description in parenthesis has │
│ been added to an illustration. This may be needed if there │
│ is no caption or if the caption does not describe the image │
│ adequately. │
│ │
│ Index references have not been checked for accuracy. │
│ │
│ Footnotes are identified in the text with a number in │
│ brackets [2] and have been accumulated in a single section │
│ at the end of the text. │
│ │
│ Transcriber’s Notes are used when making corrections to the │
│ text or to provide additional information for the modern │
│ reader. These notes are identified in the text by a ♦ symbol, │
│ and are accumulated in a single section at the end of the │
│ book. │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
A BEGINNER’S HISTORY
OF PHILOSOPHY
BY
HERBERT ERNEST CUSHMAN, LL.D., PH.D.
_Sometime Professor of Philosophy in Tufts College_
_Lecturer of Philosophy in Harvard College_
_Lecturer of Philosophy in Dartmouth College_
VOL. I
ANCIENT AND MEDIÆVAL PHILOSOPHY
_Revised Edition_
Illustration: (‡ Colophon)
HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY
BOSTON · NEW YORK · CHICAGO
DALLAS · SAN FRANCISCO
The Riverside Press Cambridge
COPYRIGHT, 1910 AND 1918, BY HERBERT ERNEST CUSHMAN
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO REPRODUCE
THIS BOOK OR PARTS THEREOF IN ANY FORM
The Riverside Press
CAMBRIDGE · MASSACHUSETTS
PRINTED IN THE U.S.A.
TO
GEORGE HERBERT PALMER, LITT.D., LL.D.
ALFORD PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY
IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY
WHO HAS INTERPRETED LIFE TO
MANY YOUNG MEN BY MAKING
PHILOSOPHY A LIVING
SUBJECT TO THEM
PREFACE
This book is intended as a text-book for sketch-courses in the history
of philosophy. It is written for the student rather than for the
teacher. It is a history of philosophy upon the background of geography
and of literary and political history.
As a text-book for sketch-courses it employs summaries, tables,
and other generalizations as helps to the memory. The philosophical
teaching is presented as simply as possible, so as to bring into
prominence only the leading doctrines. My own personal criticism and
interpretation on the one hand, and explanations in technical language
on the other, have been avoided as far as possible. Sometimes I have
had to choose between interpretation and technicality, in which case
the limitations of space have determined my choice. Since the book
is intended for the student rather than for the teacher, it makes
the teacher all the more necessary; for it puts into the hands of the
student an outline and into the hands of the teacher the class-room
time for inspiring the student with his own interpretations. In making
use of geographical maps, contemporary literature, and political
history, this book is merely utilizing for pedagogical reasons the
stock of information with which the college student is furnished when
he begins the history of philosophy.
A good many years of experience in teaching the history of philosophy
to beginners have convinced me that students come to the subject
with four classes of ideas, with which they can correlate philosophic
doctrines: good geographical knowledge, some historical and some
literary knowledge, and many undefined personal philosophical
opinions. Of course, their personal philosophical opinions form the
most important group, but more as something to be clarified by the
civilizing influence of the subject than as an approach to the subject
itself. The only “memory-hooks” upon which the teacher may expect
to hang philosophic doctrines are the student’s ideas of history,
literature, and geography. If the history of philosophy is treated
only as a series of doctrines, the student beginning the subject feels
not only that the land is strange, but that he is a stranger in it.
Besides, to isolate the historical philosophical doctrines is to give
the student a wrong historical perspective, since philosophic thought
and contemporary events are two inseparable aspects of history. Each
interprets the other, and neither can be correctly understood without
the other. If the history of philosophy is to have any significance for
the beginner, it must be shown to give a meaning to history.
So far as the materials that form any history of philosophy are
concerned, I have merely tried to arrange and organize them with
reference to the student and with reference to the history of which
they form an integral part. I am therefore overwhelmingly indebted to
every good authority to whom I have had access, but in the main I have
followed the inspiring direction of the great Windelband. Many willing
friends have read parts of the manuscript and offered suggestions and
criticisms. I am particularly indebted to Professors C. P. Parker,
Ephraim Emerton, A. O. Norton, and J. H. Ropes, and Dr. B. A. G.
Fuller of Harvard University; to Professor Mary W. Calkins of Wellesley
College; to Professors C. S. Wade and D. L. Maulsby of Tufts College;
and to my wife, Abby B. Cushman. However, for all the faults of the
book, which has been many years in preparation, I am alone responsible.
Instead of lists of books for collateral reading, placed at the end
of chapters or of the book, the student will find references in the
footnotes to the exact pages of many helpful books. I should like to
call the student’s attention to an appendix to the discussion of Plato.
This is a complete selection of passages from Plato made by the late
Professor Jowett for English readers. This selection Professor Jowett
was accustomed to distribute to his Oxford class, of which I was once
fortunate to be a member.
Philosophical terms have been defined either in the text or in the
footnotes. Such definitions must necessarily have as their aim their
usefulness to the student, rather than their completeness.
TUFTS COLLEGE, June, 1910.
PREFACE TO THE REVISED EDITION
The only change which the reader will find in the revision of this
volume is in the form of presentation of the philosophies of the
earlier cosmologists (Chapter II).
HERBERT E. CUSHMAN.
WEST NEWTON, February, 1918.
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION――THE THREE GENERAL PERIODS OF THE HISTORY OF
PHILOSOPHY, 1
THE COMPARATIVE LENGTHS OF THE THREE GENERAL PERIODS, 1
THE REAL DIFFERENCES OF THE THREE GENERAL PERIODS, 1
TABLE OF THE SUBDIVISIONS OF THE THREE GENERAL PERIODS, 4
BOOK I. ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY
(625 B. C.–476 A. D.)
CHAPTER I. THE EARLY GREEK IN ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY, 5
THE DIVISIONS OF ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY, 5
THE LITERARY SOURCES OF ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY, 6
THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE EARLY GREEK, 7
1. His Geographical Environment 7
2. His Political Environment 7
THE NATIVE TENDENCIES OF THE EARLY GREEK, AS SEEN
(1) In the Development of his Religion, (2) in his
Reflections upon Physical Events, and (3) in his
Interest in Human Conduct, 9–11
THE THREE PERIODS OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY, 12
CHAPTER II. THE COSMOLOGICAL PERIOD: THE PHILOSOPHY OF
NATURE, 15
THE PERIL IN THE GREEK POLITICAL SITUATION: PERSIA AND
CARTHAGE, 15
THE PERIL IN THE NEW RELIGION: THE MYSTERIES AND PYTHAGORAS, 16
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE COSMOLOGISTS, 18
TABLE OF COSMOLOGISTS, 20
HOW THE PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION AROSE, 20
MAP SHOWING THE CITIES WHERE THE COSMOLOGISTS LIVED, 21
SUMMARY COMPARISON OF THE MONISTIC PHILOSOPHIES, 22
1. THE MILESIAN SCHOOL, 24
THE MILESIAN PHILOSOPHY, 25
2. XENOPHANES, THE RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHER, 26
THE PHILOSOPHY OF XENOPHANES, 27
3. HERACLEITUS, “THE MISANTHROPIST” AND “THE OBSCURE,” 28
a. Heracleitus’ Doctrine of Absolute and Universal
Change, 28
b. Fire is the Cosmic Substance, 29
c. The Definite Changes of Fire, 30
d. The Practical Philosophy of Heracleitus, 31
4. THE ELEATIC SCHOOL, 32
a. PARMENIDES, 32
(1) The Cosmic Substance is Being, 33
(2) Other Things than the Cosmic Substance (Being)
have no Real Existence, 34
b. ZENO, 35
THE PHILOSOPHY OF ZENO, 36
THE RESULTS OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN HERACLEITUS AND
PARMENIDES, 37
CHAPTER III. PLURALISM, 39
EFFORTS TOWARD RECONCILIATION, 39
THE NEW CONCEPTION OF CHANGE OF THE PLURALISTS, 40
THE NEW CONCEPTION OF THE UNCHANGING OF THE PLURALISTS――THE
ELEMENT, 40
THE INTRODUCTION OF THE CONCEPTION OF THE EFFICIENT CAUSE, 41
SUMMARY OF SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN THE THEORIES OF
THE RECONCILERS, 41
THE PLURALISTIC PHILOSOPHERS: EMPEDOCLES, ANAXAGORAS,
LEUCIPPUS, AND THE LATER PYTHAGOREANS, 42
THE PHILOSOPHY OF EMPEDOCLES, 44
THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANAXAGORAS, 45
THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE ATOMISTS――LEUCIPPUS AND THE SCHOOL
AT ABDERA, 47
THE LATER PYTHAGOREANS, 48
1. The Pythagorean Conception of Being, 49
2. The Pythagorean Dualistic World, 51
3. Pythagorean Astronomy, 52
HISTORICAL RETROSPECT, 53
CHAPTER IV. THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERIOD: THE PHILOSOPHY OF
MAN, 55
AN HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERIOD, 55
THE PERSIAN WARS AND THE RISE OF ATHENS, 56
THE GREEK ENLIGHTENMENT, 58
1. The Impulse for Learning, 58
2. The Practical Need of Knowledge, 59
3. The Critical Attitude of Mind, 61
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SOPHISTS, 64
THE PROMINENT SOPHISTS, 67
THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE SOPHISTS, 68
1. The Relativism of Protagoras, 69
2. The Nihilism of Gorgias, 70
THE ETHICS OF THE SOPHISTS.――THE APPLICATION OF THEIR
CRITICAL THEORY TO POLITICAL LIFE, 71
SUMMARY, 73
CHAPTER V. SOCRATES, 74
SOCRATES AND ARISTOPHANES, 74
THE PERSONALITY AND LIFE OF SOCRATES, 75
SOCRATES AND THE SOPHISTS, 80
THE UNSYSTEMATIC CHARACTER OF THE SOCRATIC PHILOSOPHY, 82
THE IDEAL OF SOCRATES, 83
WHAT THE SOCRATIC IDEAL INVOLVES, 85
THE TWO STEPS OF THE METHOD OF SOCRATES, 88
SOCRATES AND ATHENS, 91
THE LOGICAL EXPEDIENTS OF SOCRATES, 92
SOCRATES AND THE LESSER SOCRATICS, 93
THE CYNIC SCHOOL, 95
THE CYRENAIC SCHOOL, 96
CHAPTER VI. THE SYSTEMATIC PERIOD, 98
THE WANING OF THE GREEK NATIONAL SPIRIT, 98
THE PLACE OF THE THREE SYSTEMATIC PHILOSOPHERS IN GREEK
HISTORY, 98
THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF THE SYSTEMATIC PERIOD, 100
A SUMMARY OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY, 102
GREEK PHILOSOPHY (OBJECTIVE), 103
DEMOCRITUS AND PLATO――THEIR SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES, 104
THE LIFE OF DEMOCRITUS, 106
THE COMPREHENSIVENESS OF THE AIM OF DEMOCRITUS, 108
THE ENRICHED PHYSICS OF DEMOCRITUS――HYLOZOISM BECOMES
MATERIALISM, 109
THE MATERIALISTIC PSYCHOLOGY OF DEMOCRITUS, 111
DEMOCRITUS’ THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE――THE WORLD OF TWOFOLD
REALITY, 114
THE ETHICAL THEORY OF DEMOCRITUS, 116
CHAPTER VII. PLATO, 119
ABDERA AND ATHENS, 119
THE DIFFICULTIES IN UNDERSTANDING THE TEACHING OF PLATO, 120
THE LIFE AND WRITINGS OF PLATO, 121
1. Plato’s Student Life, 121
2. Plato as Traveler, 122
3. Plato as Teacher of the Academy, 124
CONCERNING THE DIALOGUES OF PLATO, 126
THE FACTORS IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF PLATO’S DOCTRINE, 128
1. His Inherited Tendencies, 128
2. His Philosophical Sources, 130
THE DIVISIONS OF PLATO’S PHILOSOPHY, 131
SUMMARY OF PLATO’S DOCTRINE, 132
THE FORMATION OF PLATO’S METAPHYSICS, 132
THE DEVELOPMENT OF PLATO’S METAPHYSICS――THE DEVELOPMENT
OF PLATO’S IDEAS IN THE TWO DRAFTS, 136
BRIEF COMPARISON OF THE TWO DRAFTS OF THE IDEAS, 137
COMPARISON OF THE TWO DRAFTS OF IDEAS IN MORE DETAIL, 137
1. The Number of Ideas in the Earlier and Later Drafts
compared, 137
2. The Relation of the Ideas and the World of Nature in
the Two Drafts compared, 138
3. The Relation among the Ideas in the Two Drafts
compared, 140
PLATO’S CONCEPTION OF GOD, 141
PLATO’S CONCEPTION OF PHYSICAL NATURE, 142
PLATO’S CONCEPTION OF MAN, 144
PLATO’S DOCTRINE OF IMMORTALITY, 146
1. The Immortality of Pre-Existence, 146
2. The Immortality of Post-Existence, 149
THE TWO TENDENCIES IN PLATO, 150
PLATONIC LOVE, 151
PLATO’S THEORY OF ETHICS, 153
1. Development of Plato’s Theory of the Good, 153
2. The Four Cardinal Virtues, 154
3. Plato’s Theory of Political Society, 155
APPENDIX――JOWETT’S SELECTION OF PASSAGES FROM PLATO FOR
ENGLISH READERS, 158
CHAPTER VIII. ARISTOTLE, 166
ARISTOTLE IN THE ACADEMY AND LYCEUM, 166
BIOGRAPHY OF ARISTOTLE, 168
BRIEF CHRONOLOGICAL SKETCH OF ARISTOTLE’S LIFE, 168
ARISTOTLE’S BIOGRAPHY IN DETAIL, 169
1. First Period――Early Influences, 169
2. Second Period――Traveler and Collector, 171
3. Third Period――Administrator of the Lyceum, 172
THE WRITINGS OF ARISTOTLE, 173
1. The Popular Writings, published by Aristotle himself, 174
2. The Compilations, 175
3. The Didactic Writings, 175
ARISTOTLE’S STARTING-POINT, 176
THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE IN ARISTOTLE’S PHILOSOPHY, 177
ARISTOTLE’S LOGIC, 180
ARISTOTLE’S METAPHYSICS, 185
1. Development is Purposeful, 185
2. Aristotle’s Two Different Conceptions of Purpose, 187
3. Aristotle’s Conception of God, 190
4. Aristotle’s Conception of Matter, 191
5. Aristotle’s Conception of Nature, 192
THE MECHANICAL SERIES,――ARISTOTLE’S THEORY OF PHYSICS, 194
THE TELEOLOGICAL SERIES: THE QUALITATIVE CHANGES OF
PHENOMENA, 196
1. The Psychology of Aristotle, 196
2. The Ethics of Aristotle, 199
(a) The Practical Virtues, 200
(b) The Dianoetic Virtues, 201
THE POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF ARISTOTLE, 202
CHAPTER IX. THE HELLENIC-ROMAN PERIOD, 204
ITS TIME LENGTH, 204
THE FALL OF THE GREEK NATION AND THE PERSISTENCE OF ITS
CIVILIZATION, 204
MAP OF THE EMPIRE OF ALEXANDER, SHOWING THE EXTENSION OF
HELLENISM, 205
THE TWO PARTS OF THE HELLENIC-ROMAN PERIOD, 208
1. The Ethical Period, 208
2. The Religious Period, 208
THE UNDERCURRENT OF SKEPTICISM IN THE HELLENIC-ROMAN
PERIOD, 209
THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM OF THE HELLENIC-ROMAN PERIOD, 211
THE CENTRES OF HELLENISM, 213
1. Athens, 213
2. Alexandria, 215
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ETHICAL PERIOD, 215
1. The Abandonment of Metaphysical Speculation, 216
2. The Growth of Science, 216
3. Ethics became the Central Interest, 217
THE SCHOOLS, 218
MAP OF ATHENS, SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE FOUR SCHOOLS, 219
THE OLD SCHOOLS――THE ACADEMY AND THE LYCEUM, 220
1. The Academy, 220
2. The Lyceum, 221
THE NEW SCHOOLS――THE EPICUREANS AND THE STOICS, 222
A SUMMARY OF THE AGREEMENTS AND DIFFERENCES OF THE STOICS
AND EPICUREANS, 225
CHAPTER X. EPICUREANISM, 227
THE LIFE OF EPICURUS, 227
THE EPICUREANS, 228
SOME TYPES OF HEDONISM,――ARISTIPPUS, EPICURUS, AND
ROUSSEAU, 228
THE EPICUREAN IDEAL, 230
THE PLACE OF VIRTUE IN EPICUREANISM, 233
THE EPICUREAN WISE MAN, 234
THE EPICUREAN WISE MAN IN SOCIETY, 235
THE GREAT OBSTACLES TO HAPPINESS, 236
EPICURUS’ CONCEPTION OF THE PHYSICAL WORLD.――QUALIFIED
ATOMISM, 238
CHAPTER XI. STOICISM, 241
THE POSITION OF STOICISM IN ANTIQUITY, 241
THE THREE PERIODS OF STOICISM, 242
1. Period of Formulation of the Doctrine, 242
2. Period of Modified Stoicism, 242
3. Period of Roman Stoicism, 243
THE STOIC LEADERS, 243
THE STOIC WRITINGS, 246
THE STOICS AND CYNICS, 246
THE TWO PROMINENT STOIC CONCEPTIONS, 247
THE CONCEPTION OF PERSONALITY, 248
1. The Stoic Psychology, 248
2. The Highest Good, 250
THE CONCEPTION OF NATURE, 251
1. Nature is an All-pervading World-Being, 253
2. Nature is an All-compelling Law, 253
3. Nature is Matter, 254
THE CONCEPTIONS OF NATURE AND PERSONALITY SUPPLEMENT EACH
OTHER, 256
THE STOIC AND SOCIETY, 257
DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITY, 259
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL AND THE PROBLEM OF FREEDOM, 260
THE MODIFICATIONS OF THE STOIC DOCTRINE AFTER THE FIRST
PERIOD, 261
CHAPTER XII. SKEPTICISM AND ECLECTICISM, 264
THE APPEARANCES OF PHILOSOPHIC SKEPTICISM, 264
THE THREE PHASES OF PHILOSOPHIC SKEPTICISM, 265
1. The First Phase of Philosophic Skepticism is called
Pyrrhonism, 265
2. The Second Period of Philosophic Skepticism――The
Skepticism of the Academy, 266
3. The Third Period of Philosophic
Skepticism――Sensationalistic Skepticism, 268
THE LAST CENTURY AND A HALF OF THE ETHICAL PERIOD,
ECLECTICISM, 269
CHAPTER XIII. THE RELIGIOUS PERIOD, 273
THE TWO CAUSES OF THE RISE OF RELIGIOUS FEELING, 273
THE NEED OF SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY, 275
THE RISE OF THE CONCEPTION OF SPIRITUALITY, 277
THE REVIVAL OF PLATONISM, 279
THE DIVISIONS OF THE RELIGIOUS PERIOD, 280
THE HELLENIC RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHIES, 282
THE INTRODUCTORY PERIOD OF HELLENIC RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY.
THE TURNING TO THE PAST FOR SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY, 282
1. The Greek-Jewish Philosophy of Philo, 282
2. Neo-Pythagoreanism, 285
THE DEVELOPMENT PERIOD OF HELLENIC RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY.
THE TURNING TO THE PRESENT FOR SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY.
PLATONISM AND NEO-PLATONISM, 287
NEO-PLATONISM AND THE TWO INTRODUCTORY PHILOSOPHIES, 288
NEO-PLATONISM AND CHRISTIANITY, 288
THE PERIODS OF NEO-PLATONISM, 290
THE ALEXANDRIAN SCHOOL. THE SCIENTIFIC THEORY OF
NEO-PLATONISM. THE LIFE AND WRITINGS OF PLOTINUS, 290
THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE TEACHING OF PLOTINUS, 291
THE MYSTIC GOD, 292
1. The Supra-Consciousness of God, 292
2. The Conception of Dynamic Pantheism, 293
THE TWO PROBLEMS OF PLOTINUS, 293
THE WORLD OF EMANATIONS.――THE METAPHYSICAL PROBLEM OF
PLOTINUS, 294
THE SPIRIT, 294
THE SOUL, 295
MATTER, 295
THE RETURN OF THE SOUL TO GOD.――THE ETHICAL PROBLEM OF
PLOTINUS, 297
THE SYRIAN SCHOOL.――THE SYSTEMATIZING OF
POLYTHEISMS.――JAMBLICHUS, 298
THE ATHENIAN SCHOOL.――RECAPITULATION.――PROCLUS, 299
CHAPTER XIV. PATRISTICS.――THE HELLENIZING OF THE GOSPEL, 302
THE EARLY SITUATION OF CHRISTIANITY, 302
THE PHILOSOPHIES INFLUENCING CHRISTIAN THOUGHT, 305
THE PERIODS OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY, 306
THE APOLOGISTS, 307
THE GNOSTICS, 310
THE REACTION AGAINST GNOSTICISM.――THE OLD CATHOLIC
THEOLOGIANS, 312
ORIGEN AND THE SCHOOL OF CATECHISTS, 314
BOOK II. THE MIDDLE AGES
(476–1453)
CHAPTER XV. CHARACTERISTICS AND CONDITIONS OF THE MIDDLE
AGES, 319
COMPARISON OF THE HELLENIC-ROMAN PERIOD AND THE MIDDLE
AGES, 319
THE MEDIÆVAL MAN, 320
HOW THE UNIVERSE APPEARED TO THE MEDIÆVAL MAN, 322
MAPS OF THE PTOLEMAIC COSMOGRAPHY, 323, 325
THE MEDIÆVAL MAN AT SCHOOL, 325
A MEDIÆVAL LIBRARY, 326
1. Books most commonly read, 327
2. Books that the scholars might use, 327
3. The Books most influential philosophically upon the
time, 328
THE THREE PERIODS OF THE MIDDLE AGES, 328
SUMMARY OF THE POLITICAL AND EDUCATIONAL WORLDS OF THE
MEDIÆVAL MAN, 330
CHAPTER XVI. THE EARLY PERIOD OF THE MIDDLE AGES, 334
THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE EARLY PERIOD, 334
AN EARLY MEDIÆVAL GEOGRAPHICAL MAP, 335
THE HISTORICAL POSITION OF AUGUSTINE, 335
THE SECULAR SCIENCE, 339
THE LIFE OF AUGUSTINE, 339
THE TWO ELEMENTS IN AUGUSTINE’S TEACHING, 340
THE NEO-PLATONIC ELEMENT: THE INNER CERTAINTIES OF
CONSCIOUSNESS, 341
THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH ACCORDING TO AUGUSTINE, 345
THE DARK AGES, 347
THE REVIVAL OF CHARLEMAGNE, 349
JOHN SCOTUS ERIGENA: LIFE AND TEACHING, 350
THE GREEK PRINCIPLE WHICH ERIGENA FORMULATED FOR THE
MIDDLE AGES, 352
THE LAST CENTURY OF THE EARLY PERIOD, 353
CHAPTER XVII. THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD, 354
THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD, 354
WHAT IS SCHOLASTICISM? 355
ANSELM: LIFE AND POSITION IN MEDIÆVAL PHILOSOPHY, 359
ANSELM’S ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD, 361
ROSCELLINUS: LIFE AND TEACHING, 361
STORM AND STRESS, 362
THE LIFE OF ABELARD, 363
ABELARD’S CONCEPTUALISM. UNIVERSALS EXIST IN THE
PARTICULARS, 364
ABELARD’S RATIONALISM.――THE RELATION BETWEEN REASON AND
DOGMA, 365
CHAPTER XVIII. THE PERIOD OF CLASSIC SCHOLASTICISM, 368
THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THIS LAST PERIOD, 368
THE TWO CIVILIZATIONS, 369
MAP SHOWING THE GROWTH OF MOHAMMEDAN CIVILIZATION IN THE
MIDDLE AGES, 370
THE FIRST CONTACT OF THE TWO CIVILIZATIONS, 372
THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE TWO CIVILIZATIONS.――THE CRUSADES, 374
THE REVIVAL OF LEARNING, 375
DIAGRAM OF DANTE’S POETIC CONCEPTION OF THE UNIVERSE, 376
THE STRENGTH AND BURDEN OF ARISTOTLE TO THE CHURCH, 378
1. The Strength of Aristotle to the Church, 378
2. The Burden of Aristotle to the Church, 379
THE PREDECESSORS OF AQUINAS, 379
THE LIFE OF THOMAS AQUINAS.――THE FOUNDER OF THE DOMINICAN
TRADITION, 380
THE CENTRAL PRINCIPLE OF THOMAS’S DOCTRINE――THE TWOFOLD
TRUTH, 381
THE PROBLEM OF INDIVIDUALITY――THE RELATION OF PARTICULARS
AND UNIVERSALS, 383
THE PRIMACY OF THE WILL OR THE INTELLECT, 385
DUNS SCOTUS, THE FOUNDER OF THE FRANCISCAN TRADITION――LIFE
AND PHILOSOPHICAL POSITION, 386
DUNS SCOTUS’S CONCEPTION OF THE TWOFOLD TRUTH.――THE
SEPARATION OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION, 387
THE INSCRUTABLE WILL OF GOD, 388
THE PROBLEM OF INDIVIDUALITY, 389
AFTER DUNS SCOTUS, 390
WILLIAM OF OCKAM: LIFE AND TEACHING, 391
AFTER OCKAM, 393
INDEX, 395
ILLUSTRATIONS
SOCRATES, _Frontispiece_
MAP SHOWING WHERE THE COSMOLOGISTS LIVED, 21
THE EMPIRE OF ALEXANDER, 205
MAP OF ATHENS SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE FOUR SCHOOLS, 219
PTOLEMAIC COSMOGRAPHY SHOWING THE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSE
INTO SPHERES, 323
PTOLEMAIC COSMOGRAPHY SHOWING THE EPICYCLIC MOVEMENTS OF
THE PLANETS, 325
MEDIÆVAL GEOGRAPHY. THE COSMAS MAP, A. D. 547, 335
GROWTH OF MOHAMMEDANISM DURING THE MIDDLE AGES, SHOWING
ITS CONTACT WITH CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION, 370
DIAGRAM OF DANTE’S POETIC CONCEPTION OF THE UNIVERSE, 376
A BEGINNER’S HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY
INTRODUCTION
THE THREE GENERAL PERIODS OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY
=The Comparative Lengths of the Three General Periods:=
Ancient Philosophy, 625 B. C.–476 A. D.
Mediæval Philosophy, 476 A. D.–1453 A. D.
Modern Philosophy, 1453 A. D.–the present time.
These are the three general periods into which the history of
philosophy naturally falls. The two dates that form the dividing lines
between these three periods are 476, the fall of old Rome, and 1453,
the fall of new Rome (Constantinople). From this it will be seen that
1000 years of mediæval life lie between antiquity on the one side and
450 years of modern times on the other. Whatever value may be put upon
the respective intellectual products of these three periods, it is
important to note the great difference in their time-lengths. It is
2500 years since philosophical reflection began in Europe. Only 450 of
these years belong to modern times. In other words, after the European
man grew to reflective manhood, two fifths of his life belong to what
is known as ancient civilization, two fifths to mediæval, and only one
fifth to modern civilization.
=The Real Differences of the Three General Periods.= The differences
between these three periods of the reflective life of the European
have been very real. They are not to be explained by merely political
shiftings or economic changes; nor are they fully expressed as
differences in literary or artistic productions. Their differences
lie deeper, for they are _differences of mental attitude_. The history
of philosophy is more profound, more difficult, and more human than
any other history, because it is the record of human points of view.
A good deal of sympathetic appreciation is demanded if the student
takes on the attitude of mind of ancient and mediæval times. One cannot
expect to be possessed of such appreciation until one has traversed
the history of thought through its entire length.
The history of philosophy is an organic development from an objective
to a subjective view of life, with a traditional middle period in which
subjective and objective mingle. Ancient thought is properly called
_objective_, the mediæval _traditional_, the modern _subjective_.
Can we briefly suggest what these abstract terms mean? By the
_objectivity of ancient thought_ is meant that the ancient, in making
his reflections upon life, starts from the universe as a whole. From
this outer point of view he tries to see the interconnections between
things. Nature is reality; men and gods are a part of nature. Man’s
mental processes even are a part of the totality of things. Even
ethically man is not an independent individual, but the member of a
state. When the ancient came to make distinctions between mind and
matter, he did not think of man as the knower in antithesis to matter
as the object known, but he thought of mind and matter as parts of one
cosmos. The antithesis in ancient thought is rather between appearances
and essence, between non-realities and realities with differing
emphasis. The ancient attempts speculatively to reconstruct his world,
but it is always from the point of view of the world.
By the _traditionalism of mediæval thought_ is meant that men are
controlled in their thinking by a set of authoritative doctrines
from the past. In the Middle Ages, as the mediæval period is called,
the independent thinking of antiquity had ceased. Men reflected and
reflected deeply, but they were constrained by a set of religious
traditions. Authority was placed above them and censored their thinking.
The objective Christian church and its authority took the place of the
objective Greek cosmos. That church had certain infallible dogma, and
thinking was allowed only in so far as it clarified dogma.
On the other hand, when we say that _modern thought is subjective_, we
refer to an entire change in the centre of intellectual gravity. The
starting-point is not the world, but the individual. The universe is
set over against mind (dualism), or is the creation of mind (idealism).
In any case the modern man looks upon the universe as his servant, the
standard of truth to be found in himself and not in something external.
The subject as knower is now placed in antithesis to the object
as known, and the object is not independent of the human thinking
process. Reality is man rather than the cosmos. The political state
is justifiable so long as it enforces the rights of the individual;
religious authority is the expression of the individual conscience;
physical nature is a human interpretation.[1]
Plato, Dante, and Goethe are good representatives of these three
different historical periods of the human mind. How can they be
understood without a philosophical appreciation of the periods in
which they lived?
=Table of the Subdivisions of the Three General Periods
of Philosophy=
┌ ┌
│ │ Cosmological, 625–480 (to
│ Greek, 625–322 │ Persian Wars).
│ B. C. (to │
│ death of ┤ Anthropological, 480–399 (to
│ Aristotle). │ death of Socrates).
│ │ Systematic, 399–322 (to death
│ │ of Aristotle).
│ └
1. Ancient 625 ┤ ┌
B. C.–476 A. D. │ Hellenic-Roman │
│ 322 B. C.–476 │ Ethical, 322 B. C.–1 A. D.
│ A. D. (from │ (to beginning of Christian
│ death of ┤ era).
│ Aristotle to │
│ fall of old │ Religious, 100 B. C.–476 A. D.
│ Rome). │
└ └
┌
│ Early Mediæval, 476–1000 (from the fall of old
│ Rome to the beginnings of modern Europe).
│
2. Mediæval ┤ Transitional Mediæval (1000–1200), (from
476–1453 │ beginnings of modern Europe to Crusades).
│
│ Classic Mediæval, 1200–1453 (from the Crusades
│ to the fall of new Rome or Constantinople).
└
┌ ┌
│ Renaissance, │
│ 1453–1690 │ Humanistic, 1453–1600.
│ (to Locke’s │
│ Essay and ┤
│ the English │ Natural Science, 1600–1690.
│ Revolution). │
3. Modern │ └
1453–modern ┤
times │ Enlightenment, 1690–1781 (from Locke’s Essay to
│ Kant’s Critique).
│
│ German Idealism, 1781–1831 (from Kant’s Critique
│ to the death of Hegel).
│
│ Evolution, 1820 to the present time.
└
BOOK I
ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY (625 B. C.–476 A. D.)
CHAPTER I
THE EARLY GREEK IN ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY
=The Divisions of Ancient Philosophy.= The history of ancient
philosophy falls naturally into two large divisions: pure Greek
philosophy and Hellenic-Roman philosophy (or Greek philosophy in
the Roman world). The date, 322 B. C., the death of Aristotle, which
marks the line between these two periods, is one of the milestones of
history. Alexander the Great had died in 323 B. C. The coincidence of
the deaths of Aristotle and Alexander not only suggests their intimate
relations as teacher and pupil during their lives, but it throws into
contrast Greek civilization before and after them. Before Aristotle and
Alexander culture was the product entirely of the pure Greek spirit;
after them ancient culture was the complex product of many factors――of
Greek and Roman civilizations, and many Oriental religions, including
Christianity. Before Aristotle and Alexander, ancient culture was
characterized by a love of knowledge for its own sake, by freedom from
ulterior ends either of service or of use; after these great makers of
history, culture became attenuated to work in the special sciences and
enslaved to practical questions. Before Aristotle and Alexander, the
Greek city-states had arisen to political power; after Aristotle and
Alexander, Greece declined politically and was absorbed into the Roman
empire.
=The Literary Sources of Ancient Philosophy.[2]= The literary sources
of ancient philosophy are three: (1) the primary sources, or original
writings; (2) the secondary sources, or reports of the original writers
obtained indirectly, or through other writers; (3) the interpretations
of reliable modern historians of philosophy. The specialist in
philosophy will, of course, go to the first two sources for his
information. Other students will find many accurate modern histories
of ancient philosophy. The student should have at hand the translations
of the histories of Zeller, Windelband, Weber, Eucken, Ueberweg; those
of the Englishmen, Burnet and Fairbanks; of the Americans, Rogers and
Turner.
“The writings of the early Greek philosophers of the pre-Socratic
period exist now only in fragments. The complete works of Plato are
still extant; so also are the most important works of Aristotle, and
certain others which belong to the Stoic, Epicurean, Skeptic, and
neo-Platonic schools. We possess the principal works of most of the
philosophers of the Christian period in sufficient completeness.”[3]
The secondary sources include quotations and comments upon earlier
philosophers found in the writings of Plato, Aristotle, the
Stoics, Skeptics, neo-Platonists, and the so-called doxographers.
Doxography――the commentating upon and collating of the works of former
times――developed enormously in Alexandria, Pergamos, and Rhodes just
after Aristotle. The founder of this work was Theophrastus, who was
a disciple of Aristotle and his successor in the Lyceum. Among the
important doxographers were Plutarch, Stobæus, and Aetios.
=The Environment of the Early Greek.= The biologist seeks to explain a
living creature by its previous environment and inherited instincts. So
if we know the environment and inherited instincts of the early Greek,
we shall be able to understand better firstly, why European philosophy
began with the Greeks and not with some other people; and secondly, why
Greek philosophy took certain lines that it did take.
(1). _His Geographical Environment._ The Greece into which philosophy
was born was much larger than the Greece of to-day. Ancient Greece
consisted of all the coasts and islands which were washed by the
Mediterranean Sea from Asia Minor to Sicily and southern Italy, and
from Cyrene to Thrace. The motherland, the peninsula of Greece, at
first played an insignificant rôle. The leadership was in the hands of
the Ionians, who had colonized the coasts of Asia Minor. In the seventh
century B. C., when the first Greek philosophy appears, these Ionians
commanded the world’s commerce among the three continents. Over the
coasts of the entire Mediterranean they had extended their trade and
established their colonies. Miletus became the wealthiest of these
colonies and the cradle of Greek science. Its wealth afforded leisure
to its people and therefore the opportunity for reflection.
(2). _His Political Environment._ An understanding of the Greek
political world, in which its first philosophy appeared, requires an
historical explanation of its rise. It takes us back four centuries to
the age of the Epic (1000–750 B. C.). During more than two centuries of
the age of the Epic two changes occurred which were to influence future
Greek civilization: (1) The oligarchy which had supplanted the ancient
patriarchal monarchy became firmly established; and (2) the Epic was
formed. The importance of the Epic of Homer lies not so much in the
fact that a great poem was constructed, as that it was the formulation
of the Greek religion, the Greek æsthetic polytheism. Its writing
indicates that the earlier unorganized, primitive, and savage forms
of religion had given way, among the ruling classes at least, to an
æsthetic polytheism, which in a general way was fixed by the Epic
itself.
The period of more than a century, from 750 to 625 B. C., lying
between the age of the Epic and Greek philosophy, may be called an
age of political disturbances. The oligarchy had become oppressive
to the rich and poor alike. There had grown up in Greece, especially
in the colonies, a class of citizens who had become wealthy through
commerce. The result of the misgovernment by the oligarchy was that
(1) migrations took place, and (2) many revolutions occurred. This was
particularly true of the colonies where the proletariat was powerful
and the cities were full of adventurers. Plutocracy was at war with
aristocracy, and this was the opportunity for bold men. These political
troubles took form from 650 B. C. on, and the history of the Greek
cities consists of the endeavor to establish popular government. About
the time of the first Greek philosophers there arose here and there
from the ruins of these civil struggles the so-called tyrants, of whom
Thrasybulus at Miletus, Pittacus at Lesbos, Periander at Corinth, and
Pisistratus at Athens are examples. The courts of these tyrants became
centres of intellectual life. They patronized poets, writers, and
artists. The universalism of the Epic had vanished, and in its place
came the individualism of the lyric and the satire. In many places the
aristocrat went into gloomy retirement, and often cultivated poetry,
science, and philosophy.
=The Native Tendencies of the Early Greek.= Why were the Greeks
the first philosophers of Europe? Their geographical surroundings
of sea and land had something to do with it. The passionate party
strife between the old, ruling ♦families of nobles and the newly rich
trading-class, which took place during the seventh century B. C.,
no doubt cultivated an early independence of opinion and strength of
personality. But, after all, genius was in the blood of the race, and
who can say that the true cause was not in the mixing of the blood
of the virile Aryan invaders with that of the aboriginal inhabitants?
Whatever may be the answer to that question, the Greek race in the
seventh century B. C. had an extraordinary curiosity about the world
of nature. It loved the concrete fact as no other race of the time
loved it, and it loved to give a clear and articulate expression to the
concrete fact that it saw. It had an artistic nature that was hostile
to all confusion. Let us point out three ways in which the Greek was
even in this early time organizing his experiences, reflecting upon the
workings of social and nature forces, and thus preparing the way for
consideration of the more ultimate questions of philosophy.
(1) This can be seen first in the development of his religion. The
first step in the organization of his religion we have already seen,
for the Homeric epic was the expression of a well-defined, poetic, and
æsthetic polytheism developed out of a primitive savage naturalism.
The Greek’s sense of measure was shown in the way both gods and men
were placed as a part of the world of nature. He could accomplish this
the more freely because he had no hierarchy of priests and no dogma of
belief to cramp his imagination. The Greek priests did not penetrate
into the private life nor teach religion. “They were not theologians
but sacristans and liturgical functionaries.” In the fifty years
before philosophy appeared, this tendency toward scientific religious
organizing showed the beginning of another advance. Monistic belief,
of which signs may be found even in the earlier Greek writings,
came to the surface. This monism[4] was expressed or implied by the
Gnomic poets, “wise poets,” so called, because they made sententious
utterances upon the principles of morality.
(2) The early genius of the Greek is shown in his reflections upon
physical events. The Greek had been accumulating for a long time
many kinds of information, but, what is more important, he had been
reflecting upon this information. The Ionian was a sea-faring man. He
had had much practical experience and had made many true observations
about the things he had seen. In his travels he had come in contact
with the Orientals and the Egyptians, and although his scientific
conceptions were probably in the main his own, his knowledge was
undoubtedly increased by his travels. In the seventh century B. C.,
the Greeks had a respectable body of physical science. It was mostly
inorganic science, however,――astronomy, geography, and meteorology.
The early Greek knowledge of organic phenomena was very meagre, as,
for example, medical and physiological knowledge. They also showed
little genuine research in the field of mathematics, although they had
picked up mathematical information here and there. Many of the first
philosophers were scientists.
(3) Not only did the Greek early bring a religious system out of the
chaos of his naturalism, not only did he early throw his physical
information into scientific form; but also early did he show an
especial interest in human conduct. This can be seen first in Homer
(800 B. C.), in a more developed form in Hesiod (700 B. C.), and with
still deeper reflection in the Gnomic poets. Although the Iliad is
a descriptive poem, it abounds in ethical observations. For example,
Hector says, “The best omen is to fight for one’s country”; and Nestor
in council says, “A wretch without the tie of kin, a lawless man
without a home, is he who delights in civil strife.” The poem by Hesiod
(_Works and Days_) is intended to teach morals. It is distinctly a
didactic poem. Hesiod stands at the beginning of a long line of Greek
ethical teachers. His moral observations are, however, incoherently
expressed. They are not wide generalizations, but are only comments
upon single experiences. The Gnomic poets appeared at the end of the
seventh century B. C., as the moral reformers in the age of political
disturbances. This period was called by the Greeks the age of the
Seven Wise Men; for among the men who were then exhorting the age to
come back to its senses, tradition early selected seven of the most
notable.[5] The spirit of Gnomic poetry was prominent in their reported
sayings. They were fearful because of the common disregard of the
conventions of the previous age, and because of the present excesses.
Their watchword was “moderation,” and they were ever repeating “nothing
too much.” By apothegm, riddle, epigram, and catchwords they tried to
reform society. The names of all seven are not certain, and only four
of them are known,――Thales, Solon, Pittacus, and Bias. Their ethical
reflections are not concerned, as in Hesiod, with the home, the village,
and the rules of convention, but with the individual’s general relation
to society. Their knowledge of ethical matters is remarkable for their
time. Some of their sayings are as follows:――
“No man is happy; all are full of trouble.” “Each thinks to do the
right, yet no one knows what will be the result of his doings, and no
one can escape his destiny.” “The people by their own injustice destroy
the city, which the gods would have protected.” “As opposed to these
evils the first necessity is law and order for the state, contentment
and moderation for the individual.” “Not wealth, but moderation, is the
highest good.” “Superfluity of possessions begets self-exaltation.”
=The Three Periods of Greek Philosophy=, 625–322 B. C. These are
1. The Cosmological Period, 625–480 B. C.
2. The Anthropological Period, 480–399 B. C.
3. The Systematic Period, 399–322 B. C.
1. _The Cosmological Period_ begins with the birth of Greek
philosophical reflection (625 B. C.) and has a nominal ending with the
Persian wars (480 B. C.). This does not mean that the interest of the
Greeks in cosmology stopped in 480 B. C., but that it was no longer
their prominent interest. Cosmology is the study of the reality of the
physical universe (the cosmos). The particular cosmological question
occupying the minds of the Greeks in this period may be stated thus:
What, amid the changes of the physical world, is permanent? This will
be seen to be a philosophical question and not the same as a question
in natural science. The theatre of philosophical activity was the
colonies and not the motherland. Two important aspects of this period
must be considered besides the philosophical,――the political situation
and the religious mysteries.
2. _The Anthropological Period_ begins in the motherland before
the cosmological movement ended in the colonies. It starts with a
great social impulse just after the victories of the Persian wars
(480 B. C.) and ends with the death of Socrates (399 B. C.). Athens is
the centre. This period includes the most productive intellectual epoch
of Greece as a whole, although not its greatest philosophers. Socrates
is the most striking personality in the period. The period is called
anthropological, because its interest is in the study of man and not of
the physical universe. The word anthropology means the study of man.
3. _The Systematic Period_ begins with the death of Socrates (399
B. C.) and ends with the death of Aristotle (322 B. C.). Alexander
the Great died 323 B. C. The period is called systematic because
it contains the three great organizers or systematizers of Greek
philosophy. These were Democritus, Plato, and Aristotle. The spread of
Greek culture beyond its own limits through the conquests of Alexander
is of great importance for the history of thought in the Hellenic-Roman
Period, which follows this period.