The difficulty appears clearly in Adam’s note on _Republic_, 617 b
(vol. ii. p. 452). There the ἀπλανής appears rightly as the νήτη,
while Saturn, which comes next to it, is the ὑπάτη. It is
inconceivable that this should have been the original scale. Aristotle
touches upon the point (_de Caelo_, Β, 10. 291 a 29 sqq.); and
Simplicius sensibly observes (_de Caelo_, p. 476, 11), οἱ δὲ πάσας τὰς
σφαίρας τὴν αὐτὴν λέγοντες κίνησιν τὴν ἀπ’ ἀνατολῶν κινεῖσθαι καθ’
ὑπόληψιν (ought not the reading to be ὑπόλειψιν?), ὥστε τὴν μὲν
Κρονίαν σφαῖραν συναποκαθίστασθαι καθ’ ἡμέραν τῇ ἀπλανεῖ παρ’ ὀλίγον,
τὴν δὲ τοῦ Διὸς παρὰ πλέον καὶ ἐφεξῆς οὕτως, οὗτοι πολλὰς μὲν ἄλλας
ἀπορίας ἐκφεύγουσι, but their ὑπόθεσις is ἀδύνατος. This is what led
to the return to the geocentric hypothesis and the exclusion of earth
and ἀπλανὴς from the ἁρμονία. The only solution would have been to
make the earth rotate on its axis or revolve round the central fire in
twenty-four hours, leaving only precession for the ἀπλανής. As we have
seen, Boeckh attributed this to Philolaos, but without evidence. If he
had thought of it, these difficulties would not have arisen.
Footnote 839:
_Tim._ 39 a 5-b 2, especially the words τὰ τάχιστα περιιόντα ὑπὸ τῶν
βραδυτέρων ἐφαίνετο καταλαμβάνοντα καταλαμβάνεσθαι (“they appear to be
overtaken, though they overtake”).
Footnote 840:
Plato, _Laws_, 822 a 4 sqq. The Athenian says of the theory that he
had not heard of it in his youth nor long before (821 e 3). If so, it
can hardly have been taught by Philolaos, though it may have been by
Archytas.
[Sidenote: Things likenesses of numbers.]
153. We have still to consider a view, which Aristotle sometimes
attributes to the Pythagoreans, that things were “like numbers.” He does
not appear to regard this as inconsistent with the doctrine that things
_are_ numbers, though it is hard to see how he could reconcile the
two.[841] There is no doubt, however, that Aristoxenos represented the
Pythagoreans as teaching that things were _like_ numbers,[842] and there
are other traces of an attempt to make out that this was the original
doctrine. A letter was produced, purporting to be by Theano, the wife of
Pythagoras, in which she says that she hears many of the Hellenes think
Pythagoras said things were made _of_ number, whereas he really said
they were made _according to_ number.[843] It is amusing to notice that
this fourth-century theory had to be explained away in its turn later
on, and Iamblichos actually tells us that it was Hippasos who said
number was the exemplar of things.[844]
Footnote 841:
Cf. especially _Met._ Α, 6. 787 b 10 (R. P. 65 d). It is not quite the
same thing when he says, as in Α, 5. 985 b 23 sqq. (R. P. _ib._), that
they perceived many likenesses in things to numbers. That refers to
the numerical analogies of Justice, Opportunity, etc.
Footnote 842:
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