Between Heathenism and Christianity: Being a translation of Seneca's De Providentia, and Plutarch's De sera numinis vindicta, together with notes, additional extracts from these writers and two essays on Graeco-Roman life in the first century after Christ.Plutarch
Religion
Between Heathenism and Christianity: Being a translation of Seneca's De Providentia, and Plutarch's De sera numinis vindicta, together with notes, additional extracts from these writers and two essays on Graeco-Roman life in the first century after Christ.
Plutarch
Ethics -- Greece; Ethics -- History; Stoics
ground, in spite of the aversion of the one to the other. Of course the
canvas on which the historian paints is much larger; the interests he
discusses are much more momentous; but he does not treat them with
greater seriousness than does the biographer and moralist.
Perhaps the most succinct statement of Plutarch’s creed is a passage in
Isis and Osiris. He says: “For God is not a being that is without
intelligence, without a soul, and subject to men, but we regard these as
gods who constantly and in sufficient measure furnish us these fruits,
and there are neither different gods among different peoples, some
barbarian some Greek, some northern, some southern; but just as the sun
and moon, heaven and earth and sea are common to all, but are
differently designated by different peoples, so there is but one
intelligence that arranges all those things about us in order and one
Providence to which other powers that direct all things are made
subordinate, some of which have, by custom, received different honors
and appellations among different peoples. The initiates also employ
different symbols, some clearer, others more obscure, that lead the mind
to what is divine, though not without risk (of being misunderstood). For
some, being altogether led astray, fall into superstition; others again,
having steered clear of superstition, as if it were a bog, fall into
atheism as from a precipice. On this account it is especially important
to take reason that is born of philosophy, as a guide through these
mysteries, in order that we may comprehend rightly everything that is
said and done, in its true significance.”
Plutarch is a philosopher in the sense that every man of sound mind may
be a philosopher; but he is not, strictly speaking, a philosophical
thinker. He does not hold to any carefully elaborated and consistent
system. While he has much to say about character and conduct, he rarely
attempts to fathom the motives that underlie and influence conduct. He
is at times inconsistent with himself because his views on
transcendental problems have not been systematically wrought out and
firmly fixed. If he can quote the authority of some great name in
support of a position he takes, it generally suffices him. Not
unfrequently he cites contradictory authorities both for facts and
opinions, then declares which he prefers without giving a reason for his
preference.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account