It is the opening of the negative vein which imparts from this time forward a new character to Grecian philosophy. The positive and negative forces, emanating from different aptitudes in the human mind, are now both of them actively developed, and in strenuous antithesis to each other. Philosophy is no longer exclusively confined to dogmatists, each searching in his imagination for the Absolute Ens of Nature, and each propounding what seems to him the only solution of the problem. Such thinkers still continue their vocation, but under new conditions of success, and subject to the scrutiny of numerous dissentient critics. It is no longer sufficient to propound a theory,[33] either in obscure, oracular metaphors and half-intelligible aphorisms, like Herakleitus--or in verse more or less impressive, like Parmenides or Empedokles. The theory must be sustained by proofs, guarded against objections, defended against imputations of inconsistency: moreover, it must be put in comparison with other rival theories, the defects of which must accordingly be shown up along with it. Here are new exigencies, to which dogmatic philosophers had not before been obnoxious. They were now required to be masters of the art of dialectic attack and defence, not fearing the combat of question and answer--a combat in which, assuming tolerable equality between the duellists, the questioner had the advantage of the sun, or the preferable position,[34] and the farther advantage of choosing where to aim his blows. To expose fallacy or inconsistency, was found to be both an easier process, and a more appreciable display of ingenuity, than the discovery and establishment of truth in such manner as to command assent. The weapon of negation, refutation, cross-examination, was wielded for its own results, and was found hard to parry by the affirmative philosophers of the day. [Footnote 33: The repugnance of the Herakleitean philosophers to the scrutiny of dialectical interrogation is described by Plato in strong language, it is indeed even caricatured. (Theætêtus, 179-180.)] [Footnote 34: Theokritus, Idyll, xxii. 83; the description of the pugilistic contest between Pollux and Amykus:-- [Greek: e)/ntha polu/s sphisi mo/chthos e)peigome/noisin e)tu/chthê, o(ppo/teros kata\ nô=ta la/bê| pha/os ê)eli/oio; a)ll' i)dri/ê| me/gan a)/ndra parê/luthes ô)= Polu/deukes; ba/lleto d' a)kti/nessin a(/pan A)mu/koio pro/sôpon]. To toss up for the sun, was a practice not yet introduced between pugilists.] APPENDIX. To illustrate by comparison the form of Grecian philosophy, before Dialectic was brought to bear upon it, I transcribe from two eminent French scholars (M. Barthélemy St. Hilaire and Professor Robert Mohl) some account of the mode in which the Indian philosophy has always been kept on record and communicated.