장음표시 사용
181쪽
Boocui. THE DIVINE INSTITUTES 141 love os isdom. y What argument, then, cana prove that philosophyris no wisdom, ather than by that derived from thomeaning of the nam iraelia oras ho devotes himself tomisdom is manifesti not et Mise,aut devotes himself to tho
subjeci that he may bo wise. In the other aris it appear What this devotednes effecta, and to ha it tends for he any one flearning has attaine to these, hocis no called, no a devote tollo er of tho profession, but an artificer Bucit issaid it was on account o modest that the called themselves devote to isdom, and not Wise Nari in truth, Pythagoras, who iret invented this name, sinceae had aditu more isdomthan hos of early times, ho regarde themselves a Wise, understood that it was impossibio is an human sinis to attainto isdom, and theresors that a perfeci nam ought notrio beapplied is an incomprehensibi and imperfeci subjeci. And, thereiore, he he was asked hat was his profession, hoansWered that he was a philosopher, that is, a searcher alter Wisdom. Is thereiore philosophyraearches aster Wisdom, it isno wisdom iself, ecauso it mustis necessit bo ne thingwhich searches, and anothe whicli is earched for nor is thosearchiniitseli correct becauserit canind nothing. But Lam not prepareda concede even stat philosopher ars devoted to the purauit of wisdom,aecause by that purauit thereis no attaining to isdom. For is tho po eris findin thotruth mere connected with this purauit, and ii this ursuit ero a Lindis rotario isdom, it ould a longin e found. But since so much time and talent have been, ted in the searchior it, and it has notoe been gained, it is plain that iners is nomisdom there Theresors the who appinthemselves in phil sophy domo devote themselves to tho purauit os isdom; ut the themselves imagine that the do so, ecausis the kno not here that is hicli the ars earchinisor, or o what character icis. Whether, thereiare they devote themselves toste purauit, Wisdomo no the aris no wishaecauso that can neve bo discovered hic is either Aought in an impropermanner, o not ought at all. et u loo to this very thing,
hester icis possibis sorinnythinctois discovered by this hindos purauit, or nothing.
182쪽
142 LACTANTIUS. Boo III. AP. III.-Ofwhae subseeta philosophisons ista, and whowacti, ehies Duniar of the Aeademio ML Philosopli appears to consis o tW subjecis, knowledgean conjectum, and of nothin more. noMedge cannot como hom in underetanding, nori apprehended by thought; becauso in have no ledge in onmelios a peculiar pro- per Hoes notaeson to man, but in God But tho natur os mortes does no receivo knowledge, excepi that hic comes hom ithout For istis account the divine intelligenco has opene in vis and ear an other senses in theiody that bythes enuances Howledge tot fio throuo to tho ind. Forno investigat o misit in know the cause of natural things, hether the sun is a great ascit appears to e or is many times greater than ins hole of this earth also hether themoon bis spherical or concave and whether the star aro fixedis in heaven or are borno it tres course throuo the air; of hat magnitudo the heaven itfelicis, of What materia it is composed; hester it is at res and immoveable or is turnedround wit incredibis swifinem; ho great is the thichnes of the arth, ori What foundationarit is polsed and suspenderito is in comprehend thes things, I say, is disputation and conjectures, is a though, should Wis to discussistat ema suppos to e the character of a est in somo ver remotecounto, hic We hos neve seen, and of hic π have hear nostin more stan the ame. I Wo inould laim too selves knowle e in a matter of thia land whicli cannotas known inould, no appea toto mad in venturin to assimina in Which, may be refuteda o much more aro invi 'o judged mad an se elem Who imagine that themiso natura things, hic cannot be Hown is mani Righuytherelam di Socrates, and the Academim .ho followed iam,tae aWV knowledge, hic is no sto partis a disputant, butos a divinis. It remiana that therocis in philosopli conjectum
183쪽
cupie is conjectum. For very one conjectures that of te horis ignoranti ut the who discus natura subjecis, conjectum stat therare a they discus them Thereiore in do not know the truth, bemus knowle o is concerne missistat whichris certain conjecture missi in uncertain. Letis return to the example besor mentioned Come, letus conjecture about the state and character of that cit whichi unknown torus in ali respecti excepi in name. t is probablethat it is siluated on a plain, Wit Walis of stone, tot Quilsings, an streela, magnificent an hight adorne temples. Dus describe, ii ou plerae, the customa an deporiment of the citigens. ut When, inali have described these another Wil mae opposite statemenis and whe hs also hes have concluded a thir Will arise, and thera alter his and thymill mata very disserent conjectures to thos os urs. Whichthemtoreis ali is more true Perhaps non of them Butat thius havo been mentioned hic the natur of the ci
cumstances admira, so that sommone of them must necessaribbe true. ut it illiso beanown ho has spolien the truth. It ma possibbae stat ali have in some degre errod in their description , and that ali hau in som degre attaine to the truth. Theresore Wo arctoolisti is, see this is disputation;
sor ome ne a presen himself ho manderide ur comjectures, and sinemus as ad since me is to coniectumine character of that hic me do notanow. ut it is umnecessunt M in quest os remote cases, hom hic perhus no on may comerio refute M. Come, letrus conjectum halis nomgoing on in the forum, hat in the senat ho e. Thatatio is to distanti et u say What ictain placo Wit thointerpositionis a singio all4 no no can know his but ho
this, hecauso he wil immediately bo refuted no by mords, butis tho presenco of the fac itseli. ut this is tho very thing hic philosophera do, ho discus What is inhin placo in heaven, ut hin stat the do that illi impunit' eca ethere is no ne to refute their errore But ii the were totain stat ome ono mas about o descend who ould provothem to e ma an false, the would neve discum hom
184쪽
144 LACTANTI US. Boo III. subjecta at ali hic the cannot possibi lino . Nor, how
Zeno and the Stoics, then, ere right in repudiatin conjecture For o conjectum that ouanow that whicli ou dono know, is no the partis a ise,aut ratheris a ras and foolis man. heresore it nothingian eanown, as Socrates
taught, or oughtrioae conjectured, a Zeno taught philosophyis entires removed. Why hoes Usa that it is no onboverthrown by these Wo, Who ere the chiel o philosophy, but is ali, so that it no appearcto have been long agora stroyed by iis οὐ arms Philosoplis has beon divide intoman secis and the at enteriai Various sentimenta. In
others, to confirm itfel and iis Wn doctrines) no does itallo Wisdom to any other, test it should conses inacit is itsolis listi; ut ascit tines a Vithera, socis it tinen inanitieis by ali iners. For the are evertheles philosophera hoaccus it os folly. Whateve feci ou hali pratis and pr nounc true, that is censured by philosophora a false. halime therelare belleve ono hicli presses itfel and iis doctrine, orthe man which lamo the ignorance of eata ther Thalmus o necessityio etter hicli is held by great numbers,than stat hic is held by one onj. For no ne can rightly judge concerning himseli, as in renowned post testifies; sor
185쪽
Is therelare, in secis individuali are convicte os tolt by the jud ent of many secis it solion that ali ars found tobe ain and emptT; and thus philosopli consumes and destroysitself And since Arcesilas the founder of the Academ unde stood this, he collected together the mutuat censures of all, and the confessioni ignorance madeandistinguished philosophers, an armed himself against all. lius e stablished a ne*philosophrofio philosophiging. Fromethis Dunder, therofore, there egan to b two kind of philosophy one the old one, whiel etiam to itsol knowledge the ther a nemone, Opposed to the former, and whicli detracta minit BetWeen these twohind os philosoplis se that there is disagreement, and ascit mere civit War On whicli side stati, place Wisdom, Whicli cannotae tor Munder the natur of things canaeano n, this troomo recruit mill peristi is it cannot the veterans illbe destroyed is the shal bo equat, neveriheles philosophy,
tho uide os ali, ill stili peristi, beeaus it is divided sor
186쪽
146 LACTANTIUS. Boo III. Various courses of the sun and oon, and the motions of thostare, and the computationis times have been discovered, and the natur os odies, and tho strenn of herbs by student of medicine and by the cultivator of the land the naturo os solis, and signa o future rians and tempens have been collected lashori, them is no ari Whic is no dependent o knowledge.
Theroforo Arcesilas ought i he had an migdom, to have di tinguished the things,hic mere cap te faeinganown and thom hic mere incapable Bucit he had dono this, he would
have reducta himself to the common herd. For the commonpmple have ometimes more isdom, because the are ni sotar Wis ascis necessary Andris o inquiro of them hether theyano mythin or nothing the vili say that theyanowtho hings hic the kno' and wil confos that the are norant of What the are ignorant. Η Was right theres 'in ahing Way the system os thera, butae a not right in laying tho oundations of his o n. For ignorance of at things cannotae Wisdom, the peculia properi of Which ichnowledge. d thus, Whena overcam in philosophers, and tauot stat thesknow nothing, he himsol also tost themameis philosopher, cause his system is o no nothing. For he whoatames
stat Duino nothing hat progress, there re, did Arcesilasmahe excepi that havin despalched ali in philosophera, hepteroe himself also illi the samois ori
187쪽
the earin Whenco me me omething in common it God, and wit tho animal creation Thus, since mare composed of
toriis away knowledg only didio se stat there movi beplacod in tho mides that whicli mi dimide them to isdom. But Arcesilas, who teaches that there is no knowledge, whenhe was detractinifrom Zeno the clites of the Stoics that homight altogether overthro philosophy on the auctorit of crates, underreo this opinion to assirm that nothin couldbeanown And thusae disprove in judment of the philosophers, Who Mythought that the truth wastaram sortii, and found ut is thei talenis, amely because that Wisdom Wasmortes, and haring been institute a se ages elare, ad
188쪽
148 LACTANTIUS. Boo litithe old age, ascit mere, o philosophy, hicli micti despatch it
knowledge of the truth, introduced a hin os philosophy,hichwe ma cail unstabie or inconstant. For, stat nothing may boknown it is necessar that omething e known. For is you knownothingis ali, the very knowledge that nothin ca beknown illa tahen away. Theresoreae ho pronounces Misentiment that nothiniis nown professes, ascit ere, Some conclusio Hready arrivexat and known theratore it is possibio sor somethingrio beano n. Ο a simila character to thicis that hichris accustomed tob proposed in the school as an examplo os the kind of fallacycalled asystaton that some ne had dream that he should not
stem, then i follows that he ought to belleve them Thus, is nothin ca be nown it is necessis that this fac must boknown that nothiniis lino n. ut init sanown that nothingcanae known the statement that nothing an e known mustas a consequencs e false Thus there is introduce a tenet opposed to itself, and destructis of itself. ut the evasive 'man wished in tali away leaminifrom the ther philosophers, that he might concea it at his homo. For trulfheris no fori iniit rom himself,ho affrm anything that he manishoi homothera: ut he oes no suo ed forcit hoWs irael and betrays it piunderer. o much more isely an trulyhe would ac cis heraliould mine an exception, and in that themuses and systema of heavent thing only, o natural things, cause the ars hidden, cannot be known for there iam oneto tincti them; and ought notrioas inquired into, for thercan
iliis exception, he would both have admoniine tho naturalphilosopher notrio search into thos things,hich excisded tho
189쪽
himself also. For,ho ould Wish to labour test horahould knowanything o to underiake learning of this hind that ho mayeven lose ordinaryanowledgo For i this learning exista, it must necessarily consis of knowledge i it doea no exist, hois sodoolis a to thin stat that is orthymi sinitearned in whichiither nothiniis learned, or somethiniis even uniearned Wheresore, is ali ining cannotis known a the natura philosophera thought, nor nothing, a tho Academic taught phil sophyris altogether extinguished. CHAP. VII. O mora philosophy, and the hos good. Let u nompas to the other partis philosoplis, hic thythemselves cali morat, in hicli is containod the method of thowhole o philosophy, since in natura philosophy there is onjdelicti, in his there is utilit also. An sincerit is more
dangerous to commit a fauit in arranging the conditionis life an in sorining the character, greater diligence must e sed, that s mayano homwe ought is live For in the tormersubject somo indulgencs may bo granted ior hether theySV anything the besto no advantage orcii the foolishlyrave, thendo no injury. ut in this subject there is no oom for differencs of opinion, non for error Al mus entertianthe fame sentimenti, an philosopli iraeli must give instructions ascit Mere it one mouth; ecause is an error stat bocommitted life is altogether overthrown. In that forme par a there is les danger so there is more dissiculty because theobscurit of this subject compei us t entertain different and varion opinions. ut in this, a there is mors danger so there isdem dissicul ; ecauso the very use of tho subjecis and datly experimenta re abieri teac What is true and etter Letu See, thereiore, hether the agree o What assistancehtheygiveos for the eiter guidanceis life It is no necessar in enlarge on very potnt letis selectisne and speciali that
whic is tho hie an principat thing, in hic the whole of
190쪽
150 LACTANTIUS. Boo III. Wisdom centre and depends. Epicurus deems that the chios good consist in pleasuro os ind Aristippus in pleasure ofth body. Callipho an Dinomachus unite virtuo illi plemure, Diodorus illi the privation os ain Hieronymus placed the chie good in the absence of ain the Peripatetics, again, in the good of the ind the ody, and fortune. Thechie good o Herillus is nowledgo that o Zeno, o live agraeabi to nature that o certain Stoics, o fosso virtve. Misisti placed in chiet good in integrit an virtve Theseare in sentimenta os nearly all. In suta a disserence of opinions, hom do me tolloWl hom do, bellova mi adio equat authority. ΙΤ, ars able to selectahat whichris bellor, it follom stat philosoplinis not necessaritoris; ecause ear atready mise inasmuch as, judge respecting the opinionso the wiso. ut since o com for the ahe of earning Wisdom, hosca we udge, Who have notoetaeguit be ise 'especiali When tho Academicris clos at hand to drasus bach by the cloah, and orbidisset bellovo any one Withou bring gfomata that Whicli, may fosso . CHAP. VIII Ofth ehies good, and the plausures of the Oia and bo , and of virtve. What then remains, but that wo leave ravin and obstinate Wranglers, and come to the judge, horis in truth the overit simplo and iam isdom hic is able notisnlyrio movi us, and lead us into the way,aut also to pas an opinion o the
controversies of thos men This inaches a What is in truo
an highest good of man; ut elared beon to speis ominis subjeci, at thos opinion must e refuted that it ma appeartha non of thoso philosophersyWas mise. Since the inquiryis respecting the ut o man, in chie good of tho hies animal ought to e placed in that, hicli it cannot avo incommon missi insister animati But a laeth aro the peculiarproperuit Wild Masta, horas o caule, and wings of bitas, sommethin peculiarito himself uot o M attribuis to man, Without whic ho ould loso the fixed ordis of his condition. For that hic is oven to ali for the purpos o lite o gener tion, is indes a natura good; ut stilicit is no tho greates