111. That a world of perishable things arises both in the second and
fourth period is distinctly stated by Empedokles (fr. 17), and it is
inconceivable that he himself had not made up his mind which of these
worlds is ours. Aristotle is clearly of opinion that it is the world
which arises when Strife is increasing. In one place, he says that
Empedokles “holds that the world is in a similar condition now in the
period of Strife as formerly in that of Love.”[598] In another, he tell
us that Empedokles omits the generation of things in the period of Love,
just because it is unnatural to represent this world, in which the
elements are separate, as arising from things in a state of
separation.[599] This remark can only mean that the scientific theories
contained in the poem of Empedokles assumed the increase of Strife, or,
in other words, that they represented the course of evolution as the
disintegration of the Sphere, not as the gradual coming together of
things from a state of separation.[600] That is only what we should
expect, if we are right in supposing that the problem he set himself to
solve was the origin of this world from the Sphere of Parmenides, and it
is also in harmony with the universal tendency of such speculations to
represent the world as getting worse rather than better. We have only to
consider, then, whether the details of the system bear out this general
view.
Footnote 598:
Arist _de Gen. Corr._ Β, 6. 334 a 6: τὸν κόσμον ὁμοίως ἔχειν φησίν ἐπί
τε τοῦ νείκους νῦν καὶ πρότερον ἐπὶ τῆς φιλίας.
Footnote 599:
Arist. _de Caelo_, Γ, 2. 301 a 14: ἐκ διεστώτων δὲ καὶ κινουμένων οὐκ
εὔλογον ποιεῖν τὴν γένεσιν. διὸ καὶ Ἐμπεδοκλῆς παραλείπει τὴν ἐπὶ τῆς
φιλότητος· οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἠδύνατο συστῆσαι τὸν οὐρανὸν ἐκ κεχωρισμένων μὲν
κατασκευάζων, σύγκρισιν δὲ ποιῶν διὰ τὴν φιλότητα· ἐκ διακεκριμένων
γὰρ συνέστηκεν ὁ κόσμος τῶν στοιχείων (“our world consists of the
elements in a state of separation”), ὥστ’ ἀναγκαῖον γενέσθαι ἐξ ἑνὸς
καὶ συγκεκριμένου.
Footnote 600:
It need not mean that Empedokles said nothing about the world of Love
at all; for he obviously says something of both worlds in fr. 17. It
is enough to suppose that, having described both in general terms, he
went on to treat the world of Strife in detail.
[Sidenote: Formation of the world by Strife.]
112. To begin with the Sphere, in which the “four roots of all things”
are mixed together, we note in the first place that it is called a god
in the fragments just as the elements are, and that Aristotle more than
once refers to it in the same way.[601] We must remember that Love
itself is a part of this mixture,[602] while Strife surrounds or
encompasses it on every side just as the Boundless encompasses the world
in earlier systems. Strife, however, is not boundless, but equal in bulk
to each of the four roots and to Love.
Footnote 601:
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