Alexandria and Her Schools: Four Lectures Delivered at the Philosophical Institution, EdinburghKingsley, Charles
Philosophy
Alexandria and Her Schools: Four Lectures Delivered at the Philosophical Institution, Edinburgh
Kingsley, Charles
Alexandrian school
If they can be parted without injury to each other, let them be
parted; and till then let us suspend hard judgments on the Alexandrian
school of metaphysic, and also on the schools of that curious people the
Jews, who had at this period a steadily increasing influence on the
thought, as well as on the commercial prosperity, of Alexandria.
You must not suppose, in the meanwhile, that the philosophers whom the
Ptolemies collected (as they would have any other marketable article) by
liberal offers of pay and patronage, were such men as the old Seven Sages
of Greece, or as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. In these three last
indeed, Greek thought reached not merely its greatest height, but the
edge of a precipice, down which it rolled headlong after their decease.
The intellectual defects of the Greek mind, of which I have already
spoken, were doubtless one great cause of this decay: but, to my mind,
moral causes had still more to do with it. The more cultivated Greek
states, to judge from the writings of Plato, had not been an
over-righteous people during the generation in which he lived. And in
the generations which followed, they became an altogether wicked people;
immoral, unbelieving, hating good, and delighting in all which was evil.
And it was in consequence of these very sins of theirs, as I think, that
the old Hellenic race began to die out physically, and population
throughout Greece to decrease with frightful rapidity, after the time of
the Achæan league. The facts are well known; and foul enough they are.
When the Romans destroyed Greece, God was just and merciful. The eagles
were gathered together only because the carrion needed to be removed from
the face of God’s earth. And at the time of which I now speak, the signs
of approaching death were fearfully apparent. Hapless and hopeless
enough were the clique of men out of whom the first two Ptolemies hoped
to form a school of philosophy; men certainly clever enough, and amusing
withal, who might give the kings of Egypt many a shrewd lesson in
king-craft, and the ways of this world, and the art of profiting by the
folly of fools, and the selfishness of the selfish; or who might amuse
them, in default of fighting-cocks, by puns and repartees, and battles of
logic; “how one thing cannot be predicated of another,” or “how the wise
man is not only to overcome every misfortune, but not even to feel it,”
and other such mighty questions, which in those days hid that deep
unbelief in any truth whatsoever which was spreading fast over the minds
of men. Such word-splitters were Stilpo and Diodorus, the slayer and the
slain. They were of the Megaran school, and were named Dialectics; and
also, with more truth, Eristics, or quarrellers. Their clique had
professed to follow Zeno and Socrates in declaring the instability of
sensible presumptions and conclusions, in preaching an absolute and
eternal Being. But there was this deep gulf between them and Socrates;
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account