Ante-Nicene Christian Library; Translations Of The Writings Of The Fathers Down To A.D. 325, Volume 12: The Writings Of Clement Of Alexandria, Volume 2

발행: 1869년

분량: 562페이지

출처: archive.org

분류: 미분류

501쪽

a mixture os frui, aring and fruitiess trees, since the composition aims at concealment, on account of those that have

The Μiscellantes, then, study neither arrangement nordiction; since there ars even cases in Which the Greeis onpur se Wisti that ornato diction aliould bo absent, and imperceptibb cast in tho Med os domas, not according to the truth, rendering such as may read laborious and quich at discoVery. For many and various are the balis for the various hinds of fishes. And nori aster this foventii inscellany of Ours, We shallinus the account os What sollows in order hom another

502쪽

800K VIII.

IT tho most ancient of the philosophera mere noto arried aWay to disputing and doubling, much lessare me, Who are attached to the reatly true phil sophy, On Whom the Scripture enjoins examinationand investigation. For it is the more recent of tho Hellente

503쪽

ans ering, and besides considering the statemenis made. For it is incumbent, in applying ourselves not only to the divino Scriptures, but also to common notions, to institute investigations, the discovery ceasing at some useful end. For another place and croWd a ait turbulent peοple, and forensic sophistries. But it is sultable sor him, Who is at oncea lovor and disciplo os the truth, to be pacific even in investigations, advancing by scientific demonstration, Without love of self, but With love os truth, to comprehensive HOWledge.

THE NECESSITY OF PERSPICUOUS DEFINITION.

WHAT betier or clearer method, sor the commencement os instruction os this nature, can there bo than discussion os thetem advanced, so distinctly, that ali Who use the fame lan-

the orator,-no more does tho judge,-adduco demonstrationas a term that means nothing; nor is any of the contending parties ignorant of the faci, that the meaning does not exist lPhilosophere, in faci, present demonstration as haVing a substantiat existence, one in one Way, another in another.

Thoretare, is one Would treat aright os each question, hecannot carta bach tho discouras in another more generallyadmitted fundamental principio than what is admittod to bosignified by the term is ali os tho samo nation and language.

504쪽

Then, stariing smm this potat, it is necessary to inquire itilis proposition has this signification or not. Md nexi, is it is demonstrated is have, it is necessary to investigate ita nature accurately, of What hind it is, and whether it ever passes ovor the clam assigned. d is it suffices not to say, abs tutely, only that which ons thinis sor one's opponent mayequat ly allege, on the other fide, What he liues) ; thon what is stated must bo confirmed. Is the decision os it bo carried bach to What is lihewiso matter os dispute, and the decisionos that likowiso to another disputed potnt, it Will M on ad infnitum, and will M incap te os demonstration. But istho belles of a potnt that is not admitted bo carried bach toone admitted is ali, that is to be made the commenoementos instruction. Every tem, the fore, advanced for discussion is to be converted into an expression that is admitted by thoso that are parties in the discussion, in form the startingpoint for instruction, to lead the way to the discovery of the potnis under investigation. For example, tot it M thoterm sun ' that is in question. NoW the Stoica say thatit is an intolloetuat fim hindlod from the waters of thasea.' Is not the definition, consequently, obscurer than thetem, requiring another demonstration to prove is it M truo It is theroforo bellar to say, in the common and distinct formos spoech, that tho brightest of tho heavonly bodios isnamed the sun.' For this expression is more credibis and clearer, and is likeWise admitted by all.

SIΜILAR , also, ali men mill admit that demonstration is discourae, agrisable to Nason, producing belles in minis disputed, iram minis admitted.

505쪽

not only demonstration and belles and knowledge, bnt foreknowledge also, ars used in a tWosold manner. Thereis that which is scientific and certain, and that which is merelybased on hope. In strict propriet' then, that is called demonstration whicli produces in the fouis of learnem scientific belles. The othorkind is that whicli merely leads to opinion. As also, both hothat is reatly a man, possessing common judment, and hethat is invage and brutal, ach is a man. Thus also tho mic mei faid that man is gracesul, so long as he is man.' The fame holds With ox, horae, and dog, accordingto the goodnem or badnem of the animal. For is looking toste perfection of the genus, me come to those memings thatare strictly proper. For instance, We conceive os a physicianwho is deficient in no element of the pomer of healing, and a Gnostic Who is defective in no element of scientific knowledge. w demonstration differs from syllogism; inasmuch asine mini demonstrated is indicative os ono thing, Ming one and identicat; as me say that to bo with child is the proos of ing no longer a virgin. But What is apprehended by syllogism, though ons thing, follows from severat; as, formample, not one but severat prooti ars adduced os Pytholiaving Muayed the Byzantines, is such was the fact. Andio Maw a conclusion hom What is admitted is in syllogiae; hilo to dra. a conclusion hom What is true is to demon

aorate.

So that thero is a componnd advantage of demonstration : hom ita assuming, sor the proos os minis in question, trus premisses, and irom iis draming tho conclusion stat follows fram them. Is the fidit have no existence, but thesecond foll- Dom the frat, one has not demonstrared, but syllogized. For, to draW the proper conclusion hom thepremisses, is mereb to syllogize. But in have also eaoh of the premisses true, is not merely in hine syllogized, but also in

have demonstrat .

And to conclude, as is evident from the word, is to bring toste conclusion. And in every train os reas ing, the minisought to bo determinia is the ent Which is also called the

506쪽

494THE MISCELLANTES.

conclusion. But no simple and primary statement is termeda syllogism, although true; but it is compounded os thres such, at the least, s tWo as premisses, and one as conclusion. ΝοW, either est things require demonstration, or some of them are sel Levident. But is the fidit, by demanding the demonstration os each demonstration we shali go on ad infnitum; and so demonstration is subverted. But is thesecond, those things Whicli aro selnovident mill bocomo thostarting potnis fand iundamental mound os demonstration. In potnt of iaci, the philosophera admit that tho fidit principies os ali things aro indemonstrabie. So that is thoro isdemonstration at ali, there is an absolute necessity that therebe something that is set Levident, Whicli is called primary and indemonstrabie. Consequently ali demonstration is uaced up to indemonstrabie saith. It will also turn out that there are other starting potnis fordemonstrations, after the fource Which takes ira riso in faith, the things whicli appear clearly to sensation and undeditanti ing. For the phenomena os sensation are simple, and incapableos being decompounded; but those of understanding are simple, rationes, and primary. But those produced imm them arecompound, but no less clear and reliabie, and having moro todo with the reasoning faculty than the first. For there ore the peculiar native poWer of reason, Which me ali havo bynature, deals With agreement and disagreement. Is, then,

essence of demonstration.

Now it is inrmed that tho nature os demonstration, asthat os bellos, is twosold: that Which produces in tho fouis of the heisera persuasion mereb, and that Whicli produces knowledge. Is, then, One begins With the things Whicli ars evident tosensation and underatanding, and then dra the proper conclusion, he truly demonstrates. But ii 'o beginJ With thingswhich are onj probabie and not primary, stat is evident

507쪽

neither in sense nor understanding, and ii ho dram the right conclusion, he Will syllogize indeed, but not produce a scientiso demonstration; but is Oho draWJ not the right conclusion, ho mill not syllogize at all. Non demonstration differs imm analysis. For each oneos the potnis demonstrated, is demonstrated is means ospoinis that are demonstrated; those having been previouslydemonstrated by others; tili me get bach to thoso whicli arosetnevident, or to those evident to sense and to underatand-ing; Which is called Analysis. But demonstration is, When thepoint in question reaches us through ali the intermediate steps. The man, then, Who practi ses demonstration, Ought to give great attention to the truth, Whilo he disregards the terms of the premisses, Whether you cali them Gioms, or premiSSes, orassumptions. Similarly, also, speciat attention must be paidio What suppositions a conclusion is based on ; While ho may bequite caretess as to Whether one ch se to term it a conclusiveor syllogistic proposition. For I asseri that theso two things must be attended to bytho man who Would demonstrate-to assume true premiSSes,

and to Maw from them tho legitimato conclusion, Whichaome also cali the inserenco,' being What is inforred from

NoW in each proposition respecting a question, there mustbe different promisses, related, hoWever, to the propositioniaid do n; and what is advancta must bo reduced is d finition. And this definition must be admitted by all. But hen premisses irrelevant in the proposition to bo est lishedare assumed, it is impossibis to arrive at any right result; theentire proposition-whicli is also called the question os ita nature-being ignored. In ali questions, then, there is something Which is prevbousty known that which being solLevident is bellovod Without demonstration; Whicli must be made tho starting potnt in their investigation, and the criterion Oi apparent resulta.

508쪽

496 THE MISCELLANIES.

destres and affections of the wul,-and bo ignorant of thoessence, and mahe it the object os investigation. But in many instances, our underatanding having assumed ali these, tho question is, in Which os the essences do they thus inhero; sor it is aster forming conceptions os both -that is, both ofesseneo and Operation n our mind, that We pro ed to thequestion. And there are also some objecta, Whose operations, along With their essences, We kno' but ars ignorant of their modifications.

Such, then, is tho method of tho discove of truthJ.

For Wo must Mon With the knowledgo of the questions to discussed. For osten the form of the expression deceivos and confuses and disturbs the mind, so that it is not easy to di cover in What clam tho thing is in be referred; as, for example, .liother the foetus be an animal. For, having a conceptionos an animal and a scatus, we inquiro ii it the caso that thoscetus is an animal; that is, is tho substance Whicli is in thoscetat state possesses the poWer os motion, and of sensationbesides. So that the inquiry is regataing functions and wnsations in a substance preriousty known. Consequently theman who proposes the question is to be firat ashod, Whathe calis an animal. Especialty is this to bo done Whenovermo find the samo term applied is various p poses; and we must examine Whether What is signified by the term is

509쪽

disputed, or admitted by all. For mere one to say that hocalis Whatever grows and is sed an animal, me stiali have againto ash surther, Whether lio considered planis to bo animais; and then, after declaring himself to this effeci, he must sho what it is .hich is in the foetat state, and is nourished. For Ρlato calis planis animais, as parta hing the third species os life alone, that os appeten .' But Aristolle, whilohe thinks that planis are possessed os a life of vegetation and

nutrition, does not consider it proper to cali them animais; forinat alone, which possesses the oster lite-that os sensation he considera narrantable to be called an animal. Tho Stolos do not cali the poWer of Vegetation, lise. NoW, on the man Who proposes the question denying that planta are animais, Wo fhail shoW that he in s What contradicis himself. For, having defined the animal by tho factos ira nourishment and growth, but haring asserted that aptant is not an animal, it appears that he says nothing olso than that What is nourished and grows is both an animaland not arminimal. Lot him, then, say What he wanis to leam. Is it Whether .hat is in tho Womb groWs and is nourished, or is it whetherit possesses any sensation or movement is impulse For, according to Plato, the plant is animate, and an animal; butaecording to Aristolle, not an animal, for it Wanta sensation, but is animate. Theretare, according to him, an animal is an animate sentient belag. But according to the Stoic' aptant is neither animate nor an animal; for an animal is an animate Ming. Is, then, an animal is animato, and liso issentioni nature, it is plain that What is animato is sentient.

Is, then, he who has put the question, being again intere gatod is hs stili calis the animal in the foetat state an animalon account of ira Ming nourished and νοWing, he has got

But ero he to say that the question he asta is, Whether the foetus is atready sentient, or capable os moving itaeis in consequence of any impulse, the investigation of the matter

510쪽

498THE MISCELLANTES.

comes clear, the salta in the name no longer remaining. But is he do not reply to tho interrogation, and Will not sayWhat he means, or in respect of What consideration it is that hoapplies tho term animal in promunding the question, bulbills us define it ourseives, let him be noted as disputatious.

and the other the method os exposition, ii he declino tho former, tot him listen in us, While me expound ali that boara onthe problem. Then When We are done, he may treat os inchpoint in tum. But ii he attempt to interrupi the investigation by putting questions, he plainly does not want in hear. But is ho choose to reply, let him fidit be asked, To What thing ho applies the name, animal. And when he has ans erod this, let him M again asked, What, in his vie , thoscetus means, whether that Whicli is in the womb, or thingsiaready formed and living; and again, is the foetus means the foed deposited, or is it is only When members and a shapeare formod that tho name os embryos is to bo applied. Λndon his replying to this, it is proper that the potnt in hand boreasoned out to a conclusion, in due order, and taught.

and tho constellation in heaven, and of Diogenes too, and allthe other dogs in ordor. For I could not divino whothoryou inquire about ali or about somo one. What you shalldo subsequently is to learn no , and say distinctly What it is that your question is ab i. Νοπ is you are situm g about names, it is plain to everybody that the namo scelus ' isneither an animal nor a plant, but a name, and a found, and

SEARCH

MENU NAVIGATION