The first philosophers of Greece : $b An edition and translation of the remaining fragments of the pre-Sokratic philosophers, together with a translation of the more important accounts of their opinions contained in the early epitomes of their worksFairbanks, Arthur
Philosophy
The first philosophers of Greece : $b An edition and translation of the remaining fragments of the pre-Sokratic philosophers, together with a translation of the more important accounts of their opinions contained in the early epitomes of their works
Fairbanks, Arthur
Philosophy, Ancient
i.; 817 b 35. Empedokles said again that plants have their birth in an
inferior world which is not perfect in its fulfilment, and that when it
is fulfilled an animal is generated.
i. 3; 984 a 8. Empedokles assumes four elements, adding earth as a fourth
to those that have been mentioned; for these always abide and do not
come into being, but in greatness and smallness they are compounded and
separated out of one and into one.
i. 3; 984 b 32. And since the opposite to the good appeared to exist in
nature, and not only order and beauty but also disorder and ugliness,
and the bad appeared to be more than the good and the ugly more than the
beautiful, so some one else introduced Love and Strife, each the cause
of one of these. For if one were to follow and make the assumption
in accordance with reason and not in accordance with what Empedokles
foolishly says, he will find Love to be the cause of what is good, and
Strife of what is bad; so that if one were to say that Empedokles spoke
after a certain manner and was the first to call the bad and the good
first principles, perhaps he would speak rightly, if the good itself were
the cause of all good things, and the bad of all bad things.
_Met._ i. 4; 915 a 21. And Empedokles makes more use of causes than
Anaxagoras, but not indeed sufficiently; nor does he find in them what
has been agreed upon. At any rate love for him is often a separating
cause and strife a uniting cause. For whenever the all is separated into
the elements by strife, fire and each of the other elements are collected
into one; and again, whenever they all are brought together into one by
love, parts are necessarily separated again from each thing. Empedokles
moreover differed from those who went before, in that he discriminated
this cause and introduced it, not making the cause of motion one, but
different and opposite. Further, he first described the four elements
spoken of as in the form of matter; but he did not use them as four but
only as two, fire by itself, and the rest opposed to fire as being one in
nature, earth and air and water.
i. 8; 989 a 20. And the same thing is true if one asserts that these
are more numerous than one, as Empedokles says that matter is four
substances. For it is necessary that the same peculiar results should
hold good with reference to him. For we see the elements arising from
each other inasmuch as fire and earth do not continue the same substance
(for so it is said of them in the verses on nature); and with reference
to the cause of their motion, whether it is necessary to assume one or
two, we must think that he certainly did not speak either in a correct or
praiseworthy manner.
i. 9; 993 a 15. For the first philosophy seems to speak inarticulately in
regard to all things, as though it were childish in its causes and first
principle, when even Empedokles says that a bone exists by reason, that
is, that it was what it was and what the essence of the matter was.
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