[94] This breaking away of the barriers between the teaching of various schools was, doubtless, largely due to the increasing importance which they universally attached to Ethics. The fact, at any rate, is indisputable. Every history of Greek philosophy, from the Third Century onward, is freely scattered with such phrases as these from Ueberweg:—“The new Academy returned to Dogmatism. It commenced with Philo of Larissa, founder of the Fourth School.... His pupil, Antiochus of Ascalon, founded a Fifth School, by combining the doctrines of Plato with certain Aristotelian, and more particularly with certain Stoic theses, thus preparing the way for the transition to Neo-Platonism.”—“In many of the Peripatetics of this late period we find an approximation to Stoicism.” [95] As regards Epicureanism, see the _Adversus Coloten_, the _De latenter vivendo_, and the _Non posse suaviter viri secundum Epicurum_. Plutarch’s polemic against Stoicism is specially developed in the three tracts, _Stoicos absurdiora Poetis dicere_, _De Stoicorum Repugnantiis_, and _De communibus Notitiis_. Plutarch’s attitude is purely critical: he is by no means constructive. His criticism has been severely dealt with by H. Bazin in his dissertation, _De Plutarcho Stoicorum Adversario_. It is worthy of note that Plutarch deals entirely with the founders of the two schools, not with the later developments of their teachings. [96] Thiersch, who regards Plutarch as the inaugurator of that moral reformation which, as we attempt to show in the next chapter, was operating before he was born, asserts that at the time when Plutarch began his work, the prevailing manner of life was based upon an Epicurean ideal. (_Der Epikureismus war die Popularphilosophie des Tages, denn in ihr fand die herrschende Lebensweise ihren begrifflichen Ausdruck._—THIERSCH: _Politik und Philosophie in ihrem Verhältniss, etc._, Marburg, 1853.) If this be so, and we willingly make the admission, there was little need for reform here, although, as Seneca found (_Ad Lucilium_, xxi. 9), it may have been necessary to explain to a misunderstanding world what Epicureanism really was. Whatever Plutarch, as nominal Platonist, may polemically advance against Epicureanism, the ideal of Epicurus and Metrodorus is realized in the conduct of the group of people whose manner of life is represented in the _Symposiacs_. [97] For some considerations on this subject see the concluding chapter.