170. The most remarkable fragment of Melissos is, perhaps, the last (fr.
8). It seems to be directed against Anaxagoras; at least the language
used seems more applicable to him than to any one else. Anaxagoras had
admitted (§ 137, _fin._) that, so far as our perceptions go, they do not
entirely agree with his theory, though he held this was due solely to
their weakness. Melissos, taking advantage of this admission, urges
that, if we give up the senses as the ultimate test of reality, we are
not entitled to reject the Eleatic theory. With wonderful penetration he
points out that if we are to say, with Anaxagoras, that things are a
many, we are bound also to say that each one of them is such as the
Eleatics declared the One to be. In other words, the only consistent
pluralism is the atomic theory.
Melissos has long been unduly depreciated owing to the criticisms of
Aristotle; but these, we have seen, are based mainly on a somewhat
pedantic objection to the false conversion in the early part of the
argument. Melissos knew nothing about the rules of conversion; and if he
had, he could easily have made his reasoning formally correct without
modifying his system. His greatness consisted in this, that not only was
he the real systematiser of Eleaticism, but he was also able to see,
before the pluralists saw it themselves, the only way in which the
theory that things are a many could be consistently worked out.[919] It
is significant that Polybos, the nephew of Hippokrates, reproaches those
“sophists” who taught there was only one primary substance with “putting
the doctrine of Melissos on its feet.”[920]
Footnote 919:
Bäumker, _op. cit._ p. 58, n. 3: “That Melissos was a weakling is a
_fable convenue_ that people repeat after Aristotle, who was unable to
appreciate the Eleatics in general, and in particular misunderstood
Melissos not inconsiderably.”
Footnote 920:
Περὶ φύσιος ἀνθρώπου, c. 1, ἀλλ’ ἔμοιγε δοκέουσιν οἱ τοιοῦτοι ἄνθρωποι
αὐτοὶ ἑωυτοὺς καταβάλλειν ἐν τοῖσιν ὀνόμασι τῶν λόγων αὐτῶν ὑπὸ
ἀσυνεσίης, τὸν δὲ Μελίσσου λόγον ὀρθοῦν. The metaphors are taken from
wrestling, and were current at this date (cf. the καταβάλλοντες of
Protagoras). Plato implies a more generous appreciation of Melissos
than Aristotle’s. In _Theaet._ 180 e 2, he refers to the Eleatics as
Μέλισσοί τε καὶ Παρμενίδαι, and in 183 e 4 he almost apologises for
giving the pre-eminence to Parmenides.
CHAPTER IX
LEUKIPPOS OF MILETOS
[Sidenote: Leukippos and Demokritos.]
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