Mind Association

The Relation of Greek Philosophy to Modern Thought

Author(s): Alfred W. Benn
Source: Mind, Vol. 7, No. 25 (Jan., 1882), pp. 65-88
Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the Mind Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2246807 .
Accessed: 23/02/2015 13:34
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Oxford University Press and Mind Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Mind.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

IV.-THE

RELATION OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY

TO

MODERN THOUGHT.
I.
ADEQUATELY to exhibitthe relationof Greek philosophy
to
modernthoughtwould requirea volume. The object of the
presentdiscussionis merelyto show in whatways thatrelation
has been most clearly manifested,
and what assistanceit may
affordus in solving some importantproblemsconnectedwith
the development
of metaphysicaland moralspeculation.
Historiansoftenspeak as if philosophytook an entirelyfresh
startat different
epochs of its existence. One stuchbreak is
variouslyassociatedwith Descartes,or Bacon, or some one of
of
theirItalian predecessors. In like manner,the introduction
Christianity,
coupledwiththe closingof the Athenianschools
as once was the suppressionof the
by Justinian,is considered,
West-RomanCsesarateby Odoacer,to mark the beginningof
a new regime. But there can be no morea real breakin the
continuityof intellectualthan in the continuityof political
history,beyond what sleep or inactivitymay simulatein the
life of the organicaggregateno less than in the lifeof the
organic individual. In each instance the threadis taken up
where it was dropped. If the rest of the world has been
advancingmeanwhile,new tendencieswill comeintoplay,but
onlyby firstattachingthemselvesto olderlines of movement.
Sometimes,again,what seemsto be a revolutionis, in truth,the
revivalor liberationof an earliermovementthroughthe decay
or destruction
ofbeliefswhichhave hithertocheckeditsgrowth.
Thus the systems of Plato and Aristotle,aftercarryingall
before them for a briefperiod,were found unsuitable,from
to the undetheir vast comprehension
and high spirituality,
veloped consciousnessof their age, and were replaced by
popularisedversionsof the scepticalor naturalisticphilosophies
which they had endeavouredto suppress. And when these
were at length left behind by the forwardmovementof the
human mind,speculativereformers
spontaneouslyrevertedto
the two great Socratic thinkersfor a bettersolutionof the
a teacher
problemsin debate. Aftermany abortiveefforts,
appearedpossessingsufficient
geniusto fusetheirprinciplesinto
a seeminglycoherentand comprehensive
whole. By combining
the Platonicand Aristotelianspiritualismwith some mystical
elementsborrowedfrom Stoicism,Plotinus did foran age of
intellectualdecadencewhathis modelshad done in vain for an

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

66

to ModernThought.
The Relationof GreekPhilosophy

age ofintellectualgrowth. The relationin whichhe stands to

Stoicism and Epicureanismreproducesthe relationin wlhich
theystoodto the variousphysicaland sophisticschools of their
time; but the silentexperienceof six centurieswon for him a
muchmoreenduringsuccess.
was the formunder which Greekphilosophy
Neo-Platoniism
passed intoChristianteaching; and the transitionwas effected
because Christianityhad already absorbed
withless difficulty
some of its most essentialelementsfromthe originalsystemof
had given
Plato himself. Meanwhilethe revivalofspiritualism
an immenseimpulseto the studyofthe classicwritingswhence
it was drawn; and the moretheywere studiedthe moreproquestions
minentlydid their antagonismon certainimportant
come intoview. Hence no soonerdid the two systemsbetween
come
whichPlotinushad establisbeda provisionalcompromise
than'they
out victoriousfromtheirstrugglewith materialism,
began to separate and draw offinto opposing camps. The
principal subject of dispute was the formunderwhichideas
theoriesof Realismand Nominalismare
exist. The conflicting
already set forthwith perfectclearness by Porphyryin his
to the Organon; and his statementof the case, as
introduction
VictorCousinhas pointedout,gave the signalfora controversy
the centralinterestof Scholasticismduringthe entire
forming
periodofits duration. Now,it is a remarkablefact,and one as
attendedto,that a metaphysicalissue first
yet not sufficiently
raised between the Platonistsand Aristotle,and regarded,at
least by the latter,as of supremeimportanceforphilosophy,
should have been totallyneglectedat a time whenabundant
and taken
documentson bothsides were open to consultation,
up withpassionateeagernessat a timewhennot morethan one
or two dialoguesofPlato and two or three tractsof Aristotle
continuedto be read in the westernworld. Various explanationsofthis singularanomalymay be offered. It may be said,
forinstance,that after Everymoral and religiousquestionon
whichthe schoolsofAthens were divided -hadbeen closed by
the authoritaitive
ruling of Catholicism,nothingremained to
quarreloverbut pointstoo remoteor too obscureforthe Church
in theirdecision; and that these were accordingly
to interfere
seized upon as the only field wherehumanintelligencecould
exerciseitselfwithany approachto freedom. The truth,however,seemsto be that to take any interestin the controversy
between Realism and Nominalism,it was firstnecessarythat
Europeanthoughtas a whole should rise to a level with the
comnmon
standpointof theirfirstsupporters. This revolution
faith.
was effectedby the general adoptionof a monotheistic
morethanfigments
Moreover,the Platonicideasweresomething

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Relationof GreekP4ilosophytoModernThought. 67

of an imaginativedialectic. They were now beginningto
appearin theirtrueliglit,and as what Plato had alwaysunderbut
stood them to be-no mere abstractionsfromexperience,
spiritualforcesbywhichsensuousrealitywas tobe reconstituted
and reformed. The Church herselfseemed somethingmore
than a collectionof individualsholding common convictions
aTndobeyinga commondiscipline; she was, like Plato's own
Republic,the visible embodimentof an archetypelaid up in
Heaven. And the Church'steachingseemedalso to assumethe
independentrealityof abstractideas. Does not the Trinity
involvebeliefin a God distinctfromany of the Divine Persons
taken alone? Do not the Fall, the Incarnation,and the
Atonementbecome more intelligibleif we imagine an ideal
humanitysinningwiththe firstAdamand purifiedby becoming
unitedwiththe secondAdam ? Such,at least,seems to have
been the dimly conceivedmetaphysicsof St. Paul, whatever
in
doctrineof Rome. It'was therefore
may now be the official
orderthat,duringthe firsthalfofthe MiddleAges,fromCharlernagneto theCrusades,Realismshouldhave beenthe prevailin1g
doctrine; the more so because Plato's Tima3us,which'was
studiedin the schoolsthroughthat entireperiod,furnishesits
readerswitha completetheoryof the universe;whileonly the
by such of
formalside of Aristotle'sphilosophyis represented
his logicaltreatisesas werethenknownto WesternChristendom.
Yet Realismconcealeda dangerto orthodoxywhichwas not
of indilong in makingitselffelt. Just as the substantiality
viduals disappearedin thatof theircontainingspecies,so also
did everysubordinatespecies tend to vanish in thesumqmum
genuts
of absoluteBeing. Now such a conclusionwas nothing
less thanfull-blown
Pantheism;and Pantheismwag,in fact,the
ofthefirstgreatSchoolman,JohnScotusErigena;while
systemn
otherRealistswereonlypreventedfromreachingthe same goal
by the restrainteither of Christianfaith or of ecclesiastical
authority. But if theyfailedto drawthe logicalconsequences
of their premisses,it was drawn for them by others; and
Abelarddid not failto twit his opponentswiththe formidable
the
heresyimpliedin theirrealisticprinciples.'As yet,howevQr,
inclinedtowardsPlato's side; and theperseweightofauthority
cutionsuffered
by Ab6lardhimself,as comparedwith thevery
mild treatmentaccorded to his contemporary,
Gilbertde la
Porr6e,when each was arraignedon a chargeof heresy,shows
the
thatwhilethe Nominalismof the one was an aggravation,
ofhis offence.2
Realism ofthe otherwas an extenuation,
2

lHaureau,Histoirede la Philosophie
I. 372.
Scolastique,
For Gilbertde la Porreesee Haurdau,I., chap.xviii.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TheRelationof GreekPhilosophy
toModernThought.

68

So mattersstood whentheintroduction
of Aristotle'sentire
systeminto WesternEuropebroug
ht abouta revolutioncomparable to that effectedtwo cenituries
later by the complete
recoveryofancientliterature.It was throughLatin translations
fromtheArabic,accompaniedby Arabiccommentaries,
thatthe
Peripateticphilosophywas firstrevealed in its entirety;and
even AlbertusMagnus,living in the thirteenth
century,
seems
to have derived his knowledgeof the subject from these
exclusively. But in 1209, a few years afterthe captureof
Constantinopleby the Crusaders,the Greek manuscriptsof
Aristotlewerebrought
to Paris,and towardsthe middle of the
centurya new Latin versionwas made fromtheseunderthe
of St. Thomas Aquinas.' The triumphofAristotle
supervision
was now,at least for a time,secured. For,while in the first
periodoftheMiddle Ageswe findonlya singlegreatname,that
of Ab6lard,among the Nominalists,
againsta strongarrayof
Realists,in the secondperiodthe proportions
are reversed,
and
Realismhas onlya single.worthychampion,
Duns Scotus,to pit
againstAlbertus,Aquinas,andWilliamof Ockham,eachofthem
oneof theprincipalEuropeannations. The human
representing
confined
intellect,
hitherto
withinthenarrowboundsoflogic,now
rangedover physics,metaphysics,'
and ethiQs;and
psychology,
althoughall these subjects were studied only at second-hand
and with very limited opportunitiesfor criticism,still the
benefitreceivedmusthave beenimmense.The pricelessservice
of the'laterSchoolmenis to have appropriated
and successfully
upheld, against Platonismon the one hand and theological
mysticismon the other,a philosophywhich,howeversuperderivedall
ficial,tookin thewholerangeofnaturalphenomena,
knowledgefromexternalobservation,
and set an example of
admirableprecisionin the systematic
expositionof its results.
If no positive additionwas made to that vast storehouseof
factsand ideas,theblamedoes notlie with Aristotle'smethod,
but withtheforciblesuppressionof freementalactivityby the
fieldsby the studyof
Church,or its diversionto moreprofitable
Roman jurisprudence. Even as it was,Aristotlecontributed
largelyto thedownfallof ecclesiasticalauthority
in twoways;
directlyby accustomingmen to use theirreason,and indirectly
by throwing
back mysticism
on its properoffice-therestoration
ofa purelypersonalreligion.
But beforethe dissolvingaction of Nominalismhad become
its ascendancywas once more challenged;and
fullymanifest,
thistime,also,thephilosophicalimpulse came fromConstantinople. Greekscholars,seekinghelp in theWest,broughtwith
I

Jourdain,
Recherches
surlesTracuctions
latinesd'Aristote.
critiques

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Relationof GreekPhilosophyto ModernThought. 69

themto Florencethe completeworks of Plato,and these were
shortlymade accessible to a wider public throughthe Latin
translationof Ficino. Their influenceseems at firstto have
told in favourof mysticism,for this was -the contemporary
tendencyto which theycould be most readilyaffiliated;and,
besides,in swingingback fromAristotle'sphilosophyto the
rival formof spiritualism,
men's minds naturallyrevertedin
the firstinstanceto whathad once linkedthemtogether-the
systemofPlotinus. Thus Platonismwas studiedthroughan
Alexandrianmediumand as the Alexandrianshad looked at
it, thatis to say,chieflyunder its theologicaland metaphysical
aspects. As such it became,the accepted philosophyof the
Renaissance,and muchofwhatwe mostadmirein theliterature
at leasttheEnglishliterature-ofthatperiod,is directlytraceable to Platonicinfluence.That the Utopiaof Sir ThomasMore
was inspiredbythe-Republic
and the Critiasis, ofcourse,obvious;
and thegreatpartplayedby the ideal theoryin Spenser'sFaery
Queen,thoughless evident,is still sufficiently
clear. As Mr.
Greenobservesin his Historyof the English People (II. 413),
in fact,the delicateand refinedformsof the
"Spenser borrows,
Platonicphilosophyto expresshis own moralenthusiasm.
Truthare no mere namesto him,but real
Justice,Temperance,
'existencesto which his whole nature clings with a rapturous
affection." Now it deservesobservation.,
as illustrating
a great
revolutionin European thought,
that the relationof Plato to
the epic of the English Renaissanceis preciselyparalleled by
the relationofAristotleto the epic of mediLevalItaly. Dante
than his cosmographyfromthe Stagirite. The
borrowsmnore
successive circles of Hell, the spirals of Purgatory,and the
in whichthe charactersof
spheresof Paradise,are a framework
the poem are exhibited,not as individualactorswhomwe trace
througha life's history,but as types of a class and representatives of a single mental quality, whether vicious or
virtuous. In other words,the historicalarrangementof all
previous poems is abandonedin favourof a logical arrangement. For the order of contiguityin timeis substitutedthe
in idea. How thoroughly
orderof resemblanceand difference
Aristotelian,indeed,were the lines within which media-wal
imaginationmovedis provedby the possibilityof tracingthem
in a work utterlydifferent
fromDante's-the Decameronof
thiscollectionare so arranged
Boccaccio. The tales constituting
that each day illustratessome one special class of adventures;
only,to make good Aristotle'sprinciplethat earthlyaffairsare
not subjectto invariablerules,a single departurefromthe prescribedsubject is allowed in each decade; while during one

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

70

to ModernThought.
TheRelationof GreekPhilosophy

are left freeto choose a subject at

entireday the story-tellers
theirown discretion.
Now whatdistinguishes
SpenserfromDante is that,whilehe
artificial
also dispQseshis inventionsaccordingto an extremely'
with him,as with Plato, abstractions
and abstractschematism,
acquirea separateindividualexistence,being,in fact,embodied
as so many persons; while Dante, followingAristotle,never
separateshis fromthe concretedata of experience. And it may
be notedthat,in this respectat least,Englishliteraturehas not
desertedthe philosophywhich presided overits secondbirth.
It has ever since been more proneto realise abstractionthan
any other literature,whetherunder the form of allegories,
parables, or mere casual illustrationsdrawn from material
objects. Even at this day English writerscrowdtheirpages
with dazzling metaphorswhich to Continentalreaders must
have sometimes.aratherbarbariceffect.
Another and profoundercharacteristicof Plato, as disoppositionof
tinguishedfromAristotle,is his thoroughgoing
reality to appearance; his distrustof sensuous perception,
imagination,and opinion; his continual appeal to a hidden
worldof absolutetruthand justice. We findthisprofounder
principlealso graspedand applied to poetical purposesin our
Elizabethan literature,not only by Spenser,but by a still
greatermaster-Shakespeare. It is by no meansunlikelythat
oftheDialogues;
Shakespearemayhave lookedintoa translation
at any rate, the intellectualatmospherehe breathedwas so
saturatedwiththeirspiritthathe could easily absorbenoughof
it to inspirehim withthe theoryof existencewhichalonegives
consistencyto his dramaticwork fromfirstto last. For the
essence of his cQnedies is that they representthe ordinary
and
world of sensible experienceas a scene of bewilderment
delusion, where there is nothingfixed,nothing satisfying,
nothingtrue; as somethingwhich,becauseof its veryunreality,
by the drarna,thoughnot withoutmysterious
is best represented
of a realitybehindthe veil. In themwe have the
intimations
"

Fallingsfromus,vani,shings,
ofa creature
Blankmisgivilngs
Movingaboutin worldsnotrealised;"

while in his tragedieswe have the realisationof those worlds

- the workingsof an eternaljustice whichalone remainsfaiththe infiniteflux of passion and of
ful to one purposetlhrough
sense.
Besides the revival of Platonism,three causes had conspired
the supremacyof Aristotle. The literaryRenaisto overthrow
sance withits passionforbeauty of form'was alienatedby the
theologyof
barbarous dialect,of Scholasticism;the mnystical

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

to Mlodern
Tho-ught. 71
ITheRelationof GreekPhilosophy
Luthersaw in it an ally both-of ecclesiasticalauthorityand of
humanreason; and the new spiritof passionaterevoltagainst
all traditionattackedthe accepted philosophyin cominonwith
university
curriculum. Before
everyotherbranchof the official
long,however,a reactionset in. The innovatorsdiscredited
an ignorance,a credulity,and
themselvesby an extravagance,
an intoleranceworse than anythingin the teachingwhichthey
organisedas a positive
decried. No soonerwas the Reformation
doctrinethan it fell back for suipporton the only model of
systematicthinkingat thattimeto be found. The Humanists
were conciliatedby having,the originaltext of Aristotleplaced
beforethem,and theyreadilybelieved,whatwas not true,that
it containeda wisdom which had eluded mediaevalresearch.
But the great scientificmovementof the sixteenthcentury
more than any other impulse,to bringabout an
contributed,
Aristotelianreaction. After winning immortaltriumphsin
the Italian intellectthrew
everybranchof art and literature,
itself with equal vigour into the investigationof physical
phenomena. Here Plato could give little help, whereas
of the wholefield
Aristotlesupplied a methodiseddescription
value towards
of extraordinary
to be explored,and contributions
the understandingof some at least amongits infinitedetails.
And we may measurethe renewedpopularityof his systemnot
only by the fact that Cesalpinus,the greatestnaturalistof the
age, professedhimselfits adherent,but also by the bitternessof
homage
the criticismsdirectedagainst it, and the involuntary
offeredby rival systemswhich were little morethan meagre
excerptsfromthe Peripateticontologyand logic.
Ofall testimonies
totherestored
supremacyofAristotelianism,
thereis none so remarkableas thatafforded
by thethinkerwho,
morethanany other,has enjoyed the creditof its overthrow.
will seem to mostreaders
To call FrancisBacon an Aristoteliana paradox. Such an appellationwould, however,be much
bestowedon the
nearerthe truththan werethe titles formerly
authorof the NovnumOrganunm. The notion,indeed, that he
was in any sense the fatherof modernscienceis rapidlydisthe creedof educatedpersons. Its long conappearingfriom
tinuance was due to a coalition of literarymen who knew
nothingaboutphysicsand ofphysicistswho knewnothingabout
historyor philosophy. It is certainthatthegreatdiscoveries
made bothbeforeand duringBacon'slifetimewerethe startingpointof all futureprogressin the same direction. It is equally
certain that Bacon himselfhad eithernotheardof those discaveriesor thathe scornfully
rejectedthem. But it mightstill
be contendedthat he divinedand formulatedthe onlymethod
by which these and all othergreat additionsto humanknow-

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

72

The Relationof GreekPhilosophy

to ModernThought.

ledge have been made,had not the delusionbeen dispelledby

recentinvestigations,
more especially those of his own editors,
Messrs. Ellis and Spedding. Mr. Spedding has shown that
Bacon's method never was applied to physicalscience at all.
Mr. Ellis has shownthatit was incapableof application,being
foundedon a complete misconceptionof the problemto be
solved. The factscould,in truth,have hardlybeen otherthan
what they are. Had Bacon succeeded in laying down the
lines of futureinvestigation,it would have been a telling
argumentagainsthis own implied belief thatall knowledgeis
derived fromexperience. For, grantingthe validityof that
belief,a truetheoryof discoverycan only be reachedby an
inductionfromthe observedfacts of scientifi6practice. It
would have been still more extraordinary
had he furnisheda
clue to the labyrinthof naturewithouteverhavingexploredits
mazes on his own account. Even as it is, fromBacon's own
pointof view the contradiction
remains. If ever any systemn
was constructed
a priorithe [nstauratioMagna was. But there
is reallyno such thingas a priori speculation. Apart from
observationthe keenest and boldest intellectcan do no more
than rearrangethe materialssupplied by tradition,or give a
highergeneralisation,
to the,principlesof other philosophers.
This was preciselywhat Bacon did. The wealth of aphoristic
wisdom and ingeniousillustrationscatteredthroughhis writ.ingsbelongsentirelyto himself;but his dreamof usingscience
as an instrument
foracquiringunlimitedpower over natureis
inhlerited
fromthe astrologers,
alchemists,and magiciansof the
Middle Agres;and his philosophicalsystem,with which alone
we are here concerned,is partly a modification,
partly an
extension,of Aristotle's. An examinationofits leadingfeatures
will at once make thisclear.
Bacon beginsby demandingthatthroughout
the wholerange
of experiencenew factsshouldbe collectedon the largestscale,
in orderto supplymaterialsforscientific
gelieralisation.There
can be no doubt that he is here guided by the example of
Aristotle,and of Aristotlealone. Such a storehouseofmaterials
is still extantin the HistoryofAnimals, which evidentlysuggestedthe use of the word " History" in this sense to Bacon,
and which,by the way, is imlmensely
superiorto anythingthat
he everattemptedin the same line. The facts on which Aristotle'sPoliticsis basedwerecontainedin anothervast descriptive
workofthesame kind,now unhappilylost. Even theStagirite's
moresystematictreatisescomprisea multitudeof observations,
cAtaloguedaccordingto a certain order,but not reduced to
scientific
principles. What Bacon did was to carryout, or to
bid otherscarryout,the plan so suggestedin everydepartmient

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Relationof GreekPhilosophyto ModernThought. 73

of inquiry. But if we ask by what methodhe was guidedin
his surveyofthe wholefieldto be explored,how he came by a
completeenumeration
of thesciencesarrangedaccordingto their
logicalorder,the answer is still that he borrowed-itfromthe
Peripateticencyclopcedia.
One need onlycomparethe catalogue of particularhistories
subjoined to the Parasceve,l with a table of Aristotle's
works, to understand how closely Bacon follows in the
footstepsof his predecessor. We do indeed find sundry
subjects enumeratedon which the older student had not
touched,but they are only such as wotu-ld
naturally suggest
themselvesto a man of comprehensiveintelligence,coming
nearly two thousand years after his original; while they
are mostlyof no philosophicalvalue whatever. Bacon's merit
was to bringthe distinctionbetweenthe descriptivesciences
and the theoreticalsciences into clearerconsciousness,and to
give a view of the formercorresponding
in completenessto that
alreadyobtainedofthe latter.
The methodicaldistinction
betweenthematerialsforgeneralisationand generalisationitself,is derivedfromthe metaphysical
distinctionbetween Matter and Form in nature.2 This distinctionis the next great featureof Bacon's philosophy,and
it is taken,still more obviouslythan the first,
fromAristotle,
the most manifestblots of the originalbeing faithfully
reproducedin thecopy. The Formsof simplesubstanceswere,according to the Stagirite,their sensible qualities. The Forms of
aggregates
werethe vwhole
complexoftheirdifferential
characteristics. And althoughthe formalcause or idea of a thingwas
carefullydiscriminated
fromits efficient
and finalcauses,it was
foundimpossiblein practiceto keep the threefrom running
intoone. Again, the distinctionbetweensingle conceptsand
thejudgmentscreatedbyputtingtwoconceptstogether,
although
clearlyconveyedby the logical distinctionbetweentermsand
propositions
was no soonerperceivedthan lost sightof,thanks
to the unfortunate
theoryof essentialpredicatioii. For it was
thoughtthat the import of universal propositionsconsisted
eitherin statingthe totalconceptto which a given mark belonged,or in annexinga new markto a givenconcept. Hence
in Aristotle'ssystemthe study of natural law means nothing
but the definitionand classificationof natural types; and the
whole universeis conceivedas an arrangementof concentric
spheres,each receivingits impulsefromthatimmediatelyabove
I. 405 in Ellis & Spedding'sEd.
Works
"iistoria naturalis . . . materiaprimaphilosophiwe."
De Agq.
II. iii.
1

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

74

to ModernThought.
TheBelationof GreekPhilosophy

it. Precisely the same confusionof Form, Cause, and Law

reignsthroughout
'Bacon~s theoryof nature. We do, indeed,
find mentionmade of axiomata or general propositionsto a
greaterextentthan in the O?qanon,but theyare neverclearly
distinguishedfromForms, nor Forms fromfunctions.' And
and material'c4usesare assignedto physics,
althoughefficient
while formaland final causes ate reservedfor metaphysicsan apparentrecognitionof the wide differencebetween the
forces which bring'a thing into existence and the actual
conditionsof its stability,-this arrangementis a departure
from the letter rather than from the spirit of Aristotle's
answer
causesoftheDe Auxgmentis
philosophy. For the efficient
roughlyto the variouskindsof motiondiscussedin the Physic.s
and Corruption;while its
and in the treatiseOnsGenewation
Formsare, as we have seen, identifiedwith natural causes or
laws in the mostgeneralsense.
Accordingto Bacon, the object of science is to analysethe
complexof Formsmakingup an individualaggregateinto its
the object of art to superinduceone or
separate constituents,
more such Forms on a givenmaterial. Hence his mannerof
respectfromAristotle's.
in one important
regardingthemdiffers
The Greek naturalistwas before,all thingsa biologist. His
of animal
interestlay with the distinguishingcharacteristics
species. These are easily discoveredby the unassisted'eye; but
theyare also comparasuperficial,
while theyare comparatively
beingprimarily
fivelvunalterable. The English experimenter,
concernedwithinorganicbodies,whose propertieshe desiredto
utiliseforindustrialpurposes,was led to considerthe attributes
of an object as at once penetratingits inmosttexture,and yet
capable of being separated fromit. But, like every other
thinkerofthe age,if he escapes fromthe controlof Aristotleit
of anotherGreekmaster-in
is onlyto fall underthe dominiion
fortha
this instanceIDemocritus.Bacon had a greatadmiration
Atomists,and althoughhis inveteratePeripatetibproclivities
preventedhim from embracingtheir theory as a whole,he
wentalongwith it so far as to admit the dependenceof the
secondaryon the primaryqualitiesofmatter.
The next step was to create a methodfor determiningthe
on which any given propertyof miatter
particularconfiguration
depends. If such a problemcould be solved at all, it would be
by some new systemof.practicalanalysis. Bacon did not see
this because he was a Schoolman,emancipated,indeed,from
of Learning
',The "notions and conceptions"of the Advancement
(I. 567),
by " axiomata" in theDe Augmentis
(Works,III. 356) is rendered
about Forims. Cp. ? 8 of
wherein bothinstancesthequestionis entirely
totheNovumOgcanum.
Fowler'sIntroduction
Professor

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Belationof GreekPhilosophytoMWodern,

Thought. 75
ecclesiasticalauthority
but retaininga blindfaithin the power
oflogic. Aristotle'sOrganonhad been the greatstorehouseof
aids to verbal disputation;it should now be turnedinto an
instrumentfor the more successfulprosecutionof physical
researches.What definitions
wereto the one,thatFormsshould
be to the other; thereforeboth could be determined
by much
the same process. Now Aristotlehimselfhad emphatically
declaredthat tlneconceptsout of which propositionsare constructedwerediscoverableby indaLction
and by inductionalone.
With himr,
inductionmeant comparinga numberof instances
and abstracting
the one circumstance,
if any, in which they
agreed. When the object is to establisha proposition
inductively,he has recourseto a methodof elimination,
and bids us
searchforinstanceswhich,differing
in everything
else,agreein
the associationoftwoparticularmarks. (Prior Analyt.II. xxx.)
In the Topicshe goes stillfurther
and suppliesus witha variety
of testsforascertainiing
the relationbetweena givenpredicate
and a,givensubject. AmongtheseMill's MethodsofDifference,
Residues,and ConcomitantVariationsare very clearlystated.'
But he does not call such modesofreasoningInduction. So far
as he has anygeneralnameforthemat all, it is Dialectic,thatis
Syllogismofwhichthepremissesare not absolutelycertain;and
as a matterof nomenclature
he seemsto be right. Thereis undoubtedlya processby which we arriveat generalconclusions
fromthe comparisonof particularinstances; but thisprocessin
its purityis nothingmore nor less than inductionby simple
enumeration.All otherreasoningreqqiresthe aid of universal
propositions,and is therefore,
to that extent,deductive. The
methodsof eliminationor, as they are now called, of experiment,involveat everystep the assumptionof generalprinciples.
'duly specifiedin that chapterof Mill's Logic where they are
analysed. And whereverwe can rise immediately
froma single
instance to a general law, it is because the examinationof'
that single instancehas been precededby a chain of deductive
*reasoiiing.
The confusionof Inductionproperlyso called and Elimination'
undera singlename is largelydue to the bad example set by
Bacon. He foundit stated in the Analyticsthatall concepts
and generalpropositionsare establishedeitherby syllogismor
by induction; and he found sorneveryuseful rules laid down
in the Topics not answeringto what he understoodby the
I ProfessorBain after mentioning that the second book of the
Topioc
" sets forthin a crule conditionthe principal canons of inductive log,ic,"
goes on to say that, "these statements canno.tbe called germs forthey
never germinated" (Grote's Minor Works,p. 14). May they not have
germinatedin the Novum Organun ?

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

-76

lhe Relationof GreekPhilosophy

toModernThought.

formermethod; he thereforesummarilydubbedthemwiththe
namne
of Inductionwhichtheyhave kept eversinceto theincaleculableconfusionof thought.
In workingout h'istheoryof logic,the pointon whichBacon
lays moststressis the use of negativeinstances. He seemsto
thinkthattheirapplicationto reasoningis an originaldiscovery
of his own. But on examinationno moreseems-to be meantby
it thanthat,beforeacceptinigany particulartheory,we should
considerwhat otherexplanationsof the same fact mightconceivably be offered.In other words,we should follow the
examplealreadyset by Aristotleand nearlyeveryotherGreek
philosopherafterSocrates. But thisis not induction;it is rea.soningdown froma disjunctiveproposition,
generallyassumed
withoutany close scrutiny,
withthe help of sundryconditional
propositions,
untilwe reachour conclusionby a sortofexhaustive process. Eitherthis,that,or the otheris the explanation
of something. But if it wereeitherthator the other,so and so
would follow,which is impossible; therefore
it mustbe this.
No otherlogic is possiblein the infancyof inquiry; but one
greatadvantageof experimentand matheinaticalanalysisis to
relieveus fromthe necessityof employinait.
The value of experimentation
as such had, however,scarcely
dawned on Bacon. His famousPrerogative
Instancesarein the
main a guide to simple observation,supplemented
ratherthan
replaced by direct interference
with the phenomena under
examination,comparableto that noderateuse of the rack which
lhewould have countenanced-in
criminalprocedure. Therewas
perhapsa deepermeaningin Harvey'sremarkthatBacon wrote
about naturelike a Lord Chancellorthanthe greatphysiologist
himselfsuspected. To Bacon the statesmall,sciencewas somethingto be largelyendowedout of the public treasuryin the
sure hope that it would far more than repay the expenditure
incurredby inventionsofpricelessadvantageto humanlife. To
Bacon thelawyer,naturewas a personin possessionof important
ofthe
secretsto be wrestedfromher by employingeveryartifice
spy,thedetective,
thecross-examiner,
andtheinquisitorial
judge;
to Bacon the courtier,
she was a sovereignwhosepolicymightbe
,discovered,
and,if need be, controlled,
by payingjudiciousattention to herhumoursand caprices. And forthisveryreasonhe
would feeldrawnby a secretaffinity
totheAristotelian
dialectic,
,derivedas it was throughSocratesand Plato fromthe practice
of the Athenianlaw-courtsand the debates of the Athenian
assembly. No doubt the Topicswas intendedprimarilyfora
manual of debate rather than of sQientificinquiry; and the
English Chancellor showed true philosophic genius in his
attemptto utilise it for the latterpurpose. Neverthelessthe

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

to Miodern
The Relationof CreekPhilosophy
1hought. 77Z
adaptationproved a mistake. The Socraticdialecticwas reand almostexclusively
served exclusivelyby its greatfounder,
by his successors,forthosehuman interestsfromthe discussion
who in
of which it was firstderived. And the discoverers,
Bacon's *ownlifetimewere laying the foundationsof physical
fromhis,because
science,employeda methodtotallydifferent
conceptlonofthe universe.
theystartedwitha totallydifferent
To themit was not a living whole,a FormofForms,but a sum
in factor in
of forcesto be analysed,isolated and recombined,
idea, with a sublimedisregardfor the conditionsunderwhich
theywerepresentedto ordinaryexperience. That veryexten-sion ofhumanpoweranticipatedbyBacon came in a mannerof
whichhe had neverdreamed. It was gained by studying,not
the Formsto which he attachedso much importance,buitthe
modesofmotionwhich he had relegatedto a subordinateplace
of naturalcauses.1
in his classification
It has been said that,whatevermay be the value ofhis logic,
1 Descartesshoweda muchdeeperinsightintothe scientific
conditions
une
than Bacon. His wordsare, " On peuttrouver
progress
ofindulstrial
la forceet les actionsdu feu,
pratiqueparlaquelleconnoissant
philosophie
de l'eau, de l'air,des astres,des cieux,et de tousles autrescorpsqui nous
les diversmestiers
que nous connoissons
aussi distinctement
environnent,
fagona tousles usages
enmenme
employer
nousles pouvrions
de nosartisans,
auxquels ils sontpropres,et ainsi nous rendrecommemaistreset pos-sesseursde la Nature." Discoursde la Methode Sixieme Partie. This
Definitionof
quotedby Dr. Bridges(" Coomte's
passagehas been recently
whatseemsa
ReviewforJune1881,p. 684) to illustrate
Life,"Fortnightly
very questionableposition. lie says that the Copernicanastronomy,
ofthe universe,made mendespairofcomprethe infinitude
by revealing
hendingnaturein-hertotality,and thusthrewthembackon inquiriesof
more directlyhuman interestand practicalapplicability;particularly
of the NovumOrganumand of the
"the loftyutilitarianism
specifying
" " ofthisintelas " oneofthefirstconcomitants
Discoursde la Me'thode,"
here: for,
lectualrevolution."Thereseemsto be a doublemisconception
by a theory
in the firstplace,Bacon could hardlyhave been influenced
Baconnor
rejected;and in the nextplaceneithe&
whichhe persistently
to despairofattaining
Descartesshoweda traceof thePositivisttendency
absoluteand universalknowledge.Bothof theniexpectedto discoverthe
inmostessen&softhings; and neitherof themimaginedthata different
ofthevisible
mightcomeintoplayoutsidetheboundaries
setofconditions
universe. In facttheybelievedthemselvesto be enlarginginsteadof
thefieldofmentalvision; and it was fromthis veryenlargerestricting
practicalresults. It was
mentthattheyanticipatedthemostmomentous
thatthe scepticaloragnosticmovewithLocke,as we shallsee hereafter,
onComte's
probably
mentbegan. In thissamearticleDr. Bridgesrepeats,
priests
that" ThalestaughttheEgyptian
statement
theincredible
authority,
which
truthsas to the laws of triangles,
thosetwoor threeelementary
its shadow."
enabledthemto telltheheightof thepyramidbymeasuring
in relatingthisstoryas a well-attested
Comte'signoranceor carelessness
by Grote. (Life of George
fact was long ago noticedwithastonishment
p. 204.)
Grote,

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

78

The Relationof GreekPhlilosopAy

to Iloderml
ThougAt.

of baselesstheoriesto
Bacon recalledmen fromthe construction
the studyof facts. But here also he merelyechoes Aristotle,
withrmuch greater
who said the same thinglong,beforehirm,
ofone who teachesby
terseness,and withthe superiorauthority
,exampleas well as by precept; while the merit of revivino
Aristotle'sadvice when it had falleniintooblivionbelongs to
another Bacon, the author of the OputsAlajzts;the meritof
actingon it,to the savantsof the Renaissance,to such men as
Vesalius, Cesalpinus;and TychoBrahe.
But towardsthe close of the sixteenthcenturythe time for
was past,no furtherprogressbeingposamassingobservations
sible until the observationsalready recordedwere interpreted
aright. The just instinctof science perceivedthis; and for
nearlya centuryafterCesalpinusno additionof any magnitude
was made to what Bacon called " History,"while,men's conceptionsof natural law were undergoinga radical transformation.1 To choose such a time for developingthe Aiistotelian
philosophywas peculiarlyunfortunate;forthatphilosophyhad
become,both on its good and on its bad side,an obstacleto
studieswhichwerenot wanted,and by
by encouraging
progress,
a spiritofoppositionto the Copernicanastronomy.
fostering
The merefactthatAristotlehimselfhad pronouncedin favour
of the geocentricsystemdid not countformuch. The misfortune was thathe had constructedan entirephysicalphilosophy
in harmonywithit; thathe hadlinkedthisto his metaphysics;
.and thatthe sensible experienceon whoseauthorityhe laid so
muchstress,seemedto testifyin its favour. The consequence
was that those thinkerswho, withoutbeing professedAristotelian partisans,still remainedprofoundlyaffectedby the
Peripateticspiritcould not see theirway to acceptinga theory
wereboundup.
withwhichall the hopesofintellectualprogress
will enableus to understandthe attitudeof
These considerations
his position
Bacontowardsthenewastronomy;while,conversely,
in thisrespectwill serve to confirmthe view of his character
set forthin the precedingpages. The theory,shared by him
withAristotle,thatnatureis throughout
composedof Formand
in the suppositionthat the great
Matter reached its clinmax
elementarybodiesare massed togetherin a seriesof concentric
spheres disposed accordingto some principle of graduation,
or contrast;and this seemed incompatible
withany
symmetry,
but a geocentricarrangement.It is truethatBacon quarrelled
withthe particularsystemmaintainedby Aristotle,and,under
1 This "StationaryInterval"is noticedby Whewell(Historyof the
Bk. XVI., chapteriii., sect.3), butwithoutdetermining
InductiveSciences,
itsjust limitsor itsreal cause.
,either

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Relationof GreekPhilosophy

toModernThought. 79
the guidanceof Telesius,fell back on a much cruderformof
cosmography;but his mind still remaineddominatedby the
fanciednecessityof conceivingthe universeunderthe formof
a stratified
sphere; and thosewho persistin lookingon him as
the apostleof experiencewill be surprisedto findthathe treated
the subjectentirelyfroman a_priori
pointofview. The truthis
every
that Bacon exemplified,
in his own intellectualcharacter,
one of'the fundamental
fallacieswhichhe has so picturesquely
described. The unwillingnessto analyse sensible appearances
into theirideal elementswas his Idol of the Tribe; the thirst
formaterialutilities was his Idol of the Cave; the uncritical
acceptanceofAristotle'smetaphysics,his Idol of the Theatre;
and the undefined
notionsassociatedwithinduction,his Idol of
the Market.
We may considerit a fortunate
circumstance
thatthe philodefinition,
classifisophyof Form,thatis to say,of description,
cation,and sensuousperception,as distinguishedfrommathematicalanalysisand deductivereasoning,was associatedwitha
demonstrablyfalse cosmology,as it thus became much more
have been possible.
thoroughly
discredited
thanwouldotherwise
At this juncturethe firstto perceiveand point out how ptomen's
foundlyan acceptanceoftheCopernicantheorymustaffect
beliefs about nature and the whole universe,was Giordano
Bruno; and thisalone would entitlehimto a greatplace in the
historyofphilosophy. The conceptionof a single finiteworld
surroundedby a series of eternal and unchangeablecrystal
spheres must, he said, be exchanged for the conception-of
infiniteworldsdispersedthroughillimitablespace. Once grant
that the earthhas a double movementroundits own axis and
roundthe sun, and Aristotle'swhole systemoffiniteexistence
collapses at once, leaving the ground clear for an entirely
different
orderof ideas.' But in this respect whateverwas
bstablishedby the new science had,alreadybeen divinedby a
still olderphilosophythan Aristotle's,as Brunohimselfgladly
and the immediateeffectof his reasoningwas to
acknowledged,2
revive-the Atomic theory. The assumptionof infinitespace,
now
cbnsideredan insuperableobjectionto thattheory,
formerly
became one of its chief recommendations;the argumentsof
Lucretiusregainedtheirfull force,whilehis fallacieswere let
drop; Atomismseemed not only possible but necessary; and
onceassociatedwithit was equallyrevived. But
thematerialism
1 Compresoche sara il miotodi quest' astro mondanoin cui siamo
. . . . s'aprirAla portade l'intelligenzade Ii principjveri di cose
Universo
e Mondi,p. 51,Wagner'sEd.
'naturali. De l'Inftnito
2 "1
son cose antichecherivegSono amputateradiciche germogliano,
nono." lb., p. 82.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

80

The Relationof GreekPhilosophyto ModernThought.

Aristotelianism,
as we have seen,was not alone in the field,and
on thefirstsymptomsof a successfulrevoltits old rival stoodin
readinessto seize the vacantthrone. The questionwas how far
its claimwouldbe supported,
and how fardisputedby the new
invaders. It mightbe supposed thatthe olderformsof Greek
philosophy,thusrestoredto light afteran eclipse of morethan
a thousandyears,wouldbe not less hostileto the poeticPlatonism than to the scientificAristotelianismof the Renaissance.
Such, however,was not the case; and we have to showhow
an alliancewas establishedbetweenthese apparentlyopposite
lines of thought,eventuallygiving birthto the highestspeculationof the followingcentury.
Bruno himselfacted as a mediatorbetweenthe two philosophies. H-is sympathieswith Platonism were stronglypronounced,he lookedwithadmirationon its mediaevalsupporters,
especially David of Dinan; and regrettedthe time when
Oxfordwas a focusof realisticteaching,insteadof beingwhat
he foundher,devotedto the pedantichumanismof the Renaissance.' He fully accepted the pantheisticconclusionstowards
an absolute
whichPlatonismalwaystended; but in proclaiming
are evolved,he is careful
principlewhenceall specificdifferences
to showthat,whileit is neitherFormnorMatterin theordinary
sense,it may be called Matter in the more refinedsignification
attachedto thattermby Plotinusand indeedby Aristotlehimself. There is a common substance underlyingall abstract
essences,just as thereis a commonsubstanceleftbehindwhen
bodies are strippedoff; and
the sensible qualities of different
bothare at bottomthe same. Thus Monismbecamethebanner
round which the older formsof Greek speculationrallied in
their assault on Aristotle'sphilosophy,thoughwhat it meant
understood.
was as yetveryimperfectly
Meanwhilea new and powerfulagencywas aboutto interpose
with decisive effectin the doubtfulstruggle. This was the
study of mathematics. Revived by the Arabians and never
whollyneglectedduringthe Middle Ages,it had profited
by the
generalmovementoftheRenaissance,and was finallyappliedto
the cosmicalproblemby Galileo. In thisconnexiontwo points.
of profoundphilosophicalinterestmust be noted. The firstis
influencesurvived,to some
that,even in its fall,the Aristotelian
extent,both forgood and for evil. To Aristotlebelongs the
meritof having been the firstto base astronomyon physics.
on experimentalno less
He maintainsthe earth'simmobility
than on speculativegrounds. A stonetlhrown
straightup in
1 Principio
et Uno,p. 225. For David of Dinan,whoseopinions.
Cctusca
and Aquinas,see Iaureau,
ofAlbertusthereports
are knownonlythrough
II., iv.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

to ModernThought. 81
ITheRelationof GreekPhilosoOhy
the air returnsto its startingpoint instead of fallingto the
west of it; and the absence of stellarparallax seemsto show
to the heavenly
thatthereis no changein ourpositionrelatively
bodies. Aftersatisfyinghimselfon empiricalconsiderations
is true,he proceedsto show thatit
thatthe popularastronomy
must be true by considerationson the nature of matterand
motion,which,althoughmistaken,are conceivedin a genuinely
scientificspirit. Now Galileo saw that, to establish the
Copernicansystem)he must firstgrapplewith the Peripatetic
metaphysics,and replace them by a new dynamicaltheory.
This, which he could hardly have effectedby the ordinary
mathematicalmethods,he did by borrowingthe analytical
method of Atomismand applyingit to the measurementof
motion. The law of fallingbodieswas ascertainedby resolving
its rate
and determining
theirdescentintoa seriesof moments,
of velocity at successive intervals; and curvilinearmotions
of an impulsive
were similarlyresolved into the comnbination
withan acceleratingforce,a methoddiametricallyopposed to
thatof Bacon who would not even acceptthe roughanalysisof
the apparentcelestialmotionsproposedby Greekastronomers.
It seems strangethat Galileo, having gone so far,did not
and perceivethatthe planetaryorbits,being
go a step further
curvilinear,mustresult fromthe combinationof a centripetal
witha tangentialforce. But the truthis thathe neyerseems
to have grasped his own law of inertiain its full generality.
He understoodthat the planets could not have been set in
motionwithouta rectilinearimpulse; but his idea was that it
continuedonlyso long,aswas necessary,in orderto give them
their presentvelocityinstead of actingon them for ever as a
tangentialforce. The explanationof thisstrangeinconsequence
in the
mustbe soughtin a survivalof Aristotelianconceptions,
persistentbeliefthat rectilinearmotionwas necessarilylimited
while circularmovementwas natural,perfect
and temporary,
and
and eternal.' Now such conceptionsas nature,perfection,
eternityalways rebel against an analysis of the phenomena
whereintheyare supposedto reside. The same prejudicewill
ignoredKepler's
explainwhyGalileoshouldhave so persistently
Laws, for we can hardlyimagine that theywere not brought
underhis notice.
The philosophicalaffinitiesof the,new science were not
exhausted by the atomisticanalysis of Democritusand the
regulativemethodof Aristotle. Platonismcould hardlyfail to
1 Galileo'swordsare:-" II motocirculared naturaledel tuttoe delle
partimentresono in ottimadisposizione."Dialoghisui MassimiSistemi.
Vol I. p. 265; see also p. 38.
Opere,

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

82

The Relationof CreekPhilosophy

to ModernThought.

benefitby the greatimpulse givento mathematicalstudies in

the latter half of the sixteenthcentury. The passionatelove
of its founderforgeometrymust have recommendedhim as
muchto the mostadvancedmindsof the periodas his religious
mysticismhad recommendedhim to the theologiansof the
earlier Renaissance. And the increasingascendancyof the
heliocentricastronomy
withits splendiddefianceof sense and
opinion was indirectlya triumphfor the philosophywhich,
more than any other,had assertedthe claims of pure reason
against both. We see this distinctly
in Galileo. In express
adhesionto Platonism,he throwshis teachinginto a conversationalform,
endeavouring
to extractthe truthfromhisopponents
fatherthanconveyit intotheirmindsfromwithout;and the
theoryof reminiscenceas the source of demonstrative
knowledge seems to meet with his approval.' He is always ready
with proofs drawn from observationand *experiment; but
nothingcan be more in Plato's spirit,nothingmore unlike
Aristotleand Bacon,than his encomiumon the sublimegenius
of Aristarchusand Copernicusforhavingmaintaineda rational
hypothesisagainst what seemed to be the evidenceof their
senses.2 And he elsewhereobserveshow muchless wouldhave
been the gloryof Copernicushad he known the experimental
verification
ofhis theory.3
The Platonic influence told even' more efficaciously
on
Galileo's still greatercontemporary
Kepler. With him,as with
the author of the Republic,mysticismtook the directionof
seekingeverywherefor evidenceof mathematicalproportions.
With what brilliant success the search was attended,it is
needlessto relate. What interestsus.here is the factvouched
forby Arago,thatthe Germanastronomer
was guidedby an idea
of Plato's,thattheworldmusthave been createdon geometrical
principles.4 Had Bacon known anythingabout the work on
which his adventurouscontemporary
was engaged,we may be
surethatit wouldhave afforded
himanotherillustration
forhis
idOla,the onlydifficulty
beingwhetherit shouldbe referred
to
the illusionsof the Tribe,the Den, or the Theatre.
Meanwhile Atomismcontinuedto exercisea powerfulinflnDialoghi,p. 211.
mia comeabbiapossuto
"Non possotrovartermineall' ammirazione
in Aristarcoe nel Copernicofarla ragionetanta violenzaal sensoche
controa questoella si sia fattapadronadella lorocredulitA."Dialoghi,
p. 358.
3 lb., p. 370.
4 "Kepler etait persuadede P'existence
de ces lois en suivantcette
pensee de Platon: que Dieu, en creantle monde,avait dc fairede la
geometrie."Arago,cEuvres
III., 212.
1

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TheRelationof GreekPAilosophy
toModernThoug7t. 83
ence on the,methodeven morethanon the doctrinesof science.
The analytical mode of treatment,applied by Galileo to.
dynamics,was applied, with equal success, by other mathematicians,to the study of discreteand continuousquantity.
It is to the divisionof numbersand figuresinto infinitesimal
parts-a directcontravention
of Aristotle'steaching,--thatwe
owe logarithms,
algebraicgeometry,
and the differential
calculus.
Thus was establisheda coninexionbetween spiritualismand
materialism,the philosophyof Plato and the philosophyof
Democritus. Out of these elementstogetherwith what still
survived of Aristotelianismwas constructedthe system of
Descartes.
To understand Descartes aright we must provisionally
disregardthe account given in his work on Method of the
processby whichhe arrivedat a inewtheoryof the world; for,
in truth,therewas nothingnew about it except the proportion
in whichfragments
taken fromoldersystemswere selectedand
recombined. As we have already noticed,there is no such
thingas spinningphilosophiesout of one's own head; and in
Descartes' case even the belief that he was so doingcame to
him fromPlato; foralono withAristotle'sdogmaticerrorshis
sound teachingwithregardto the derivationof knowledgehad
fallen into oblivion. The initial doubt of the Discourse on
Methodand the Meditationsis also Platonic; only it is manifestedunderan individualand subjective,insteadof a universal
of
and objective form. But to find the real starting-point
Descartes' inquirieswe must look forit in his mathematical
studies. A geometriciannaturallyconceivesthe visibleworld'
under the aspect of figuredextension;and if he thinksthe.
figuresaway,nothingwill remainbut extensionas the ualtimate
materialout of whichall determinate
bodies are shaped. Such
was the resultreached by Plato in his Tlimceus.He identifiedc
matterwithspice, viewingthisas the receptacleforhis eternal
and self-existent
Ideas, or ratherthe plasticmediumon which
theirimagesare impressed. The simplestspatial elementsare
it is with these that he constructshis
triangles;accordingly
solid bodies. The theoryof triangularelementswas probably
betweenthe
suggestedby Atomism;it is, in fact,a compromise
purelymathematicaland the materialisticmethods. Like all
Plato's fancies,this theoryof matterwas attackedwith such
convincingargumentsby Aristotlethat,so long as his physics
remainedin the ascendant,it did not find a single supporter.
Even now,at the momentof his fall,it mighthave failed to
attractattentionhad not the conditionsunder which it first
arose been almostexactlyrepeated. Geometricaldemonstration
had again becomethe typeof all reasoning;therewas again a

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

84

The Belationof GreekPhilosophy

to ModernThought.

sceptical spirit abroad forcingmen to fall back on the most

elementaryand universalconceptions;an atomisticmaterialism
again threatened
to claim at least the whole fieldof physical
inquiryfor its own. That Descartes followedthe Timcvusin
identifying
matterwithextensioncannotbe doubted;especially
when we see that he adopts Plato's analysis of body into
elementarytriangles;but the theoryagreed so well with his
intellectualpredispositions
that he may easily have imagined
it to be a necessarydeductionfromhis own a priori ideas.
Moreover,after the firsttwo steps,he parts companywith
Plato, and giveshimselfup, so faras his rejectionof a vacuum
will permit,to the mechanicalphysics of Democritus. Much
praise has recentlybeen bestowedon his attemptto interpret
all physical phenomenain termsof matterand motion,and to
.deduce themfromthe unaidedoperationof 'natural
-causes; but
this is no morethanhad been doneby the earlyGreekthinkers,
fromwhom, we may observe,his hypothesisof an initial
vortexwas also derived. His cosmogony
is betterthan theirs,
only in so far as it is adapted to scientificdiscoveriesin
astronomyand physiologynot made by Descartes himself;
forwhere his conjecturesgo beyond these theyare'entirelyat
fault.
Descartes'theoryoftheuniverseincluded,however,something
morethanextension(or matter)and motion. If we ask whence
this somethingmore came,our philosopherwill answerthatit
was obtainedbylookingintohimself. It was,in reality,obtained
by lookinginto Aristotle. To understandthis,we must once
more turn'to the Tluim6us.Plato made up his universefrom
space and Ideas. But the Ideas were too vague or too unintelligiblefor scientific
purposes. Even mediaevalRealistswere
contentto replacethemby Aristotle'smuchclearerdoctrineof
Forms. On the otherhand,Aristotle'sFirst Matter was anythingbut a satisfactory
conception. It was a mereabstraction;
the unknowableresiduumleftbehindwhenbodieswerestripped,
in imagination,
of all theirsensible and cogitablequalities. In
other words,there was no matteractually existingwithout
neverso absolutely
form;whereasformwas neverso trulyitself,
existent,as when completelyseparated-frommatter:it then
as in God, or the reasonable
became simple self-consciousness,
part of the human soul The revolutionwroughtby substitutingspace for Aristotle'sFirst Matter will now become
apparent. Corporealsubstancecould at once be conceivedas
existingwitho{utthe co-operationof Form; and at the same
stroke,Form,liberatedfromits material bonds,sprang back
into the subjectivesphereto live henceforward
only as pure
self-conscious
thought.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Belationof GreekPhilosophy

to ModernThought. 85
This absoluteseparationofFormand Matter,undertheirnew
namesof Thoughtand Extension,once grasped,variousprinciples of Cartesiainism
will followfromit by logical necessity.
First comes the exclusionof final causes fromphilosophy,or
rather from nature. There was not, as with Epicurus,any
anti-theologicalfeeling concernedin their rejection. With
Aristotle,againstwhomDescartesis alwaysprotesting,
the final
cause was not a mark of designingintelligenceimposed on
matterfromwithout;it was onlya particularaspectof Form,
the realisationof what Matter was always strivingafterby
virtueof its inherentpotentiality. When Formwas coinceived
only as pure thoughtthere could be no question of such a
process; the most highlyorganisedbodiesbeing onlymodes of
figuredextension. The revival of Atomismhad, no doubt,a
greatdeal to do withthis result. Aristotlehad himselfshown
with masterlyclearness the differencebetween his view of
natureand that taken by Democritus;thus indicatingbeforehand the directionin which an alternativeto his own teaching
with
mightbe sought; and Bacon had,in fact,alreadyreferred
approval to the example set by Democritusin dealing with
teleological inquiries. Nevertheless Bacon's own attitude
towards final causes differsessentially,
fromDescartes'. The
French mathematician,
had he spoken his whole mind,would
probablyhave deniedtheir existencealtogether. The English
reformerfully admits their reality,as, with his Aristotelian
theoryof Forms,he could hardlyavoid doing; and we findthat
he actually associatesthe studyof final with that of formal
causes,assigningbothto metaphysicsas its peculiar province.
This being so, his comparativeneglect of the formeris most
easily explained by the famous comparisonof teleological
inquiriesto vestal virgins,dedicatedto the serviceof God and
clear
bearingno offspring;forMr. Ellis has made it perfectly
that the barrennessalluded to is not scientificbut industrial.
Our knowledgeis extendedwhenwe trace the workingsof a
divine purpose in nature; but it is not a kind of knowledge
whichbearsfruitin usefulmechanicalinventions.' Bacon probablv felt thatmen would not be veryforwardto improveon
natureif theybelieved in the perfectionof her worksand in
theirbeneficent
adaptationto ourwants. The teleologicalspirit
was as strongwithhim as with Aristotle,but it tooka different
direction. Instead of studyingthe adaptationofmeansto ends
whereit alreadyexisted,he wishedmento createit forthemselves.
withBacon,was
But theutilitarian
whichpredominated
tendency,
he desired
quite exceptionalwithDescartes. Speakinggenerally,
1 De Aug. III. v. Works
I. 571.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

86

The Jelcattion
of GreekPhilosophytoModernThbought.

knowledge for its own sake, not as an instrumentfor the

of otherwants; and this intellectualdisinterestedgratification
between
-effected
ness was perhapsanotheraspectof theseverance
thoughtand matter.
The celebratedCartesianparadox that animals are unconscious automatais anotherconsequenceof the same principle.
developing
the'doctrineof potentiality
In Aristotle'sphilosophy,
itself into act througha series of ascendingmanifestations,
supplieda link connectingthe highestrationalwiththe lowest
of Formwithpure thoughtput
vegetallife. The identification
an end to the conceptionof aniysuch.intermediategradations.
Brutes musteitherhave a mindlike ours or none at all. The
formeralternativewas not even taken into consideration;probably, among other reasons,because it was not easily reconcilable withChristianity;so thatnothingremainedbut to deny
sensibilitywherethoughtwas believednot to exist.
Finally, in man himself-thoughtis not distinguishedfrom
feeling; it is, in fact,the essenceof mind,just as extensionis
the essenceof body; and all spiritualphenomenaare modesof
thoughtin the same sense that all physical phenomenaare
modes of space. It was then rathera happy chance than
genuinephysiologicalinsightwhichled Descartesto makebrain
the organ of feelingno less than of intellection;a view, as
ProfessorHuxley has observed,much in advanceof that,held
by Bichat a hundred and fiftyyears later. For whoever
froma commonessence
deducedall the mental manifestations
was bound in consistencyto locate them in the same bodily
organ; what the metaphysicianhad joined the physiologist
could not possiblyput asunder.
We are now in a positionto understandthe full forceof
Descartes' Cogitoerdostum. It expressesthe substantialityof
self-consciousForm,the equal claim of thoughtwith extension
to be recognisedas an elementof the universe. This recognias the surestrealitywas, indeed,far,
tion of self-consciousness
frombeing new. The G$reeksceptics had never gone to the
length of daubting their own personal existence. On the
theyprofesseda sortof subjectiveidealism. Refusing
contrary,
theyfoundin its undisto go beyondtheirown consciousness,
turbed self-possessionthe only absolute satisfactionthat life
could afford. But knowledge and reality had become so
independentof mind,and
intimatelyassociatedwithsomething
of'reality,that the denial of
rmind
itselfwitha mere reflection
an external world seemed to the vulgar a denial of existence
itself. And althoughAristotlehad foundthe highest,if not the
he projectedit
sole absolute,actualityin self-thinking
thougght,
to such a distancefromhuman personalitythat its bearingon

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Relationof GreekPhilosophy

to ModernThotught. 87
the sceptical controversy
had passed unperceived. Descartes
at the point where all the ancient
began his demonstration
systemshad converged,
but failed to discoverin what direction
the coliditionsof the problemrequiredthat they should be
prolonged. No mistakecan be greaterthanto regardhim as the
precursorof Germanphilosophy. The latter originatedquite
independently
ofhis teaching,
thoughnotperhapsofhis example,
in the combinationof a much profounderscepticismwith a
muchwider knowledgeof dogmaticmetaphysics. His method
is the very reverseof trueidealism. The Cogitoergosumnis
not a taking up of existenceinto thought,
but rathera conversionof thoughtintoone particulartypeof existence. Now,
as we have seen,all otherexistencewas conceivedas extension,
and howevercarefullythoughtmight be distinguishedfrom
this as absolutelyindivisible,it was speedilyreducedto the
same general patternof inclusion,limitation,and expansion.
WhereasKant,Fichte,and Hegel afterwards
dweltolnthe form
of thought,
Descartesattendedonlyto its contentor to thatin
whichit was contained. In otherwords,he beganby considering not how he thoughtbut what he thoughtand whenceit
canme-his ideas and theirsupposed derivationfroma higher
sphere. Here again the Platonictendencyis apparent. Having
rejectedthe later Schoolmen,insteadof makingan advanceon
theirteaching,he fellback on the realisticfanciesof the earlier
Schoolmen,especially St. Anselrn. The mediaevaldoctorhad
inferredthe existenceof a supremebeing (quo nihil majus
cogitaripotest) from the idea of such a being, througha
quantitativecomparisonof the two,than which nothing,
more
franklymaterialistic
can be conceived. Descartes,followingon,
the same track,seeks, with still blinder confusion,to infer
existencefromthe idea of perfection,
just as the propertiesof a
fromitsdefinition,
or againbyassumingthat
triangleareinferred
the dynamicalequivalence of a mechanicaleffectto its cause
must obtain in a world where spatial relationsand therefore
measurementare presurnablyunknown. Such fallacies were
impossibleso long as Aristotle'slogic continuedto be carefully
studied, and they gradually disappeared with its revival.
Meanwhile the cat was away and the mice used their
opportunity.
That the absolute disjunctionof thoughtfrommatterinvolvedthe impossibility
of theirinteractionwas a consequence
not drawnby Descarteshimselfbut by his immediatefollowers.
Here also Greek philosophyplayed its part in hasteningthe
developmentof modern ideas. The fall of Aristotle had
incidentallythe effectof revivingnot onlythe systemswhich
preceded,but also those which followedhis. Chief amorng

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

88

The Relationof GreekPhilosophyto ModernThought.

these were Stoicismand Epicureanism. Differingwidely in

most otherrespects,theyagreedin teachingthatbodyis acted
on abybody alone. The Cartesiansaccepted this principleto
the fullestextentso far as human perceptionsand volitions
were concerned;and to a great extent in dealing with the
problemsof physicalscience. But insteadof arguingfromthe
laws of mechaniicalcausationto the materiality
of mind,they
argued fromits immateriality
to the total absence of communicationbetween consciousnessand motion. There was,
however,one thinkerof thatage who wentall lengthswiththe
later Greek materialists. This was ThomasHobbes. But the
influenceof ancient ideas on his theoriesand on those of his
successors,downto the timewhen it becomesindistinguishably
mingledwithotherelements,mustbe reservedfora secondand
concludingpaper.
ALFRED W. BENN.

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Mon, 23 Feb 2015 13:34:22 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions