house constructed for a definite purpose, or whether it is simply an
undesigned result of natural forces.
[(β) Theological views of the Stoics attacked.]
Not content with attacking the conclusiveness of the arguments upon
which the Stoics built their belief in a God, the scepticism of the
Academy sought to demonstrate that the idea of God itself is an
untenable one. The line of argument which Carneades struck out for this
purpose is essentially the same as that used in modern times to deny
the personality of God. The ordinary view of God regards Him as an
infinite, but, at the same time, as a separate Being, possessing the
qualities and living the life of an individual. To this view Carneades
objected, on the ground that the first assertion contradicts the
second; and argues that it is impossible to apply the characteristics
of personal existence to God without limiting His infinite nature.
Whatever view we may take of God, we must regard Him as a living Being;
and every living being is composite, having parts and passions, and is
therefore destructible. [1479] Moreover, every living being has a
sense-nature. Far, therefore, from refusing such a nature to God,
Carneades attributed to Him, in the interest of omniscience, other
organs of sense than the five we possess. Now, everything capable of
impressions through the senses is also liable to change, sensation,
according to the definition of Chrysippus, being nothing more than a
change of soul. Every such being must therefore be capable of pleasure
and pain, without which sensation is inconceivable. Whatever is capable
of change is liable to destruction; whatever is susceptible to pain is
also liable to deterioration, pain being caused by deterioration, and
is also liable to destruction. [1480] As the capacity for sensation, so
too the desire for what is in harmony with nature, and the dislike of
what is opposed to nature, belong to the conditions of life. Whatever
has the power of destroying any being is opposed to the nature of that
being, everything that lives being exposed to annihilation. [1481]
Advancing from the conception of a living being to that of a rational
being, all virtues would have to be attributed to God as well as bliss.
But how, asks Carneades, can any virtue be ascribed to God? Every
virtue supposes an imperfection, in overcoming which it consists. He
only is continent who might possibly be incontinent, and persevering
who might be indulgent. To be brave, a man must be exposed to danger;
to be magnanimous, he must be exposed to misfortunes. A being not
feeling attraction for pleasure, nor aversion for pain and
difficulties, dangers and misfortunes, would not be capable of virtue.
Just as little could we predicate prudence of a being not susceptible
of pleasure and pain; prudence consisting in knowing what is good, bad,
and morally indifferent. But how can there be any such knowledge where
there is no susceptibility to pleasure or pain? Or how can a being be
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