网聚青年力量:积极把握"疫后春天"

85r0N-news 发布时间: 2020-07-11 09:49:45

“飞艇开奖结果历史【S7vBG】”Thales,ofMiletus,anIoniangeometricianandastronomer,aboutwhoseageconsiderableuncertaintyprevails,butwhoseemstohaveflourishedtowardsthecloseoftheseventhcenturybeforeourera,isbygeneralconsentregardedasthefatherofGreekphysicalphilosophy.Othersbeforehimhadattemptedtoaccountfortheworld’sorigin,butnonelikehimhadtraceditbacktoapurelynaturalbeginning.AccordingtoThalesallthingshavecomefromwater.That8theearthisentirelyenclosedbywateraboveandbelowaswellasallroundwasperhapsacommonnotionamongtheWesternAsiatics.ItwascertainlybelievedbytheHebrews,aswelearnfromtheaccountsofthecreationandthefloodcontainedinGenesis.TheMilesianthinkershowedhisoriginalitybygeneralisingstillfurtheranddeclaringthatnotonlydidwatersurroundallthings,butthatallthingswerederivedfromitastheirfirstcauseandsubstance,thatwaterwas,sotospeak,thematerialabsolute.Neverhavemorepregnantwordsbeenspoken;theyactedlikeafermentontheGreekmind;theywerethegrainwhencegrewatreethathasovershadowedthewholeearth.Atonestroketheysubstitutedacomparativelyscientific,becauseaverifiableprinciplefortheconfusedfanciesofmythologisingpoets.NotthatThaleswasanatheist,oranagnostic,oranythingofthatsort.Onthecontrary,heisreportedtohavesaidthatallthingswerefullofgods;andthereportsoundscredibleenough.Mostprobablythesayingwasaprotestagainstthepopularlimitationofdivineagenciestocertainspecialoccasionsandfavouredlocalities.Atruethinkerseeksaboveallforconsistencyandcontinuity.HewillmorereadilyacceptaperpetualstreamofcreativeenergythanaseriesofarbitraryandisolatedinterferenceswiththecourseofNature.Fortherest,Thalesmadenoattempttoexplainhowwatercametobetransformedintoothersubstances,norisitlikelythatthenecessityofsuchanexplanationhadeveroccurredtohim.Wemaysuspectthatheandothersafterhimwerenotcapableofdistinguishingveryclearlybetweensuchnotionsasspace,time,cause,substance,andlimit.ItisalmostasdifficultforustoenterintothethoughtsoftheseprimitivephilosophersasitwouldhavebeenforthemtocomprehendprocessesofreasoningalreadyfamiliartoPlatoandAristotle.Possiblytheformsunderwhichwearrangeourconceptionsmaybecomeequallyobsoleteatamoreadvancedstageofintellectualevolution,andoursharpdistinctionsmayprovetobenot9lessartificialthantheconfusedidentificationswhichtheyhavesuperseded.ThereisnoreasontobelievethatHippiasusedhisdistinctionbetweenNatureandconventionasanargumentfordespotism.Itwouldratherappearthat,ifanything,heandhisschooldesiredtoestablishamorecompleteequalityamongmen.Others,however,bothrhetoriciansandpracticalstatesmen,werenotslowtodrawanoppositeconclusion.Theysawthatwherenolawwasrecognised,asbetweendifferentnations,nothingbutviolenceandtherightofthestrongerprevailed.Itwasoncebelievedthataggressionswhichhumanlawcouldnotreachfoundnofavourwiththegods,anddreadofthedivinedispleasuremayhavedonesomethingtowardsrestrainingthem.Butreligionhadpartlybeendestroyedbythenewculture,partlypervertedintoasanctionforwrong-doing.Bywhatright,itwasasked,didZeushimselfreign?Hadhenotunlawfullydethronedhisfather,Cronos,anddidhenotnowholdpowersimplybyvirtueofsuperiorstrength?Similarreasoningsweresoonappliedtotheinternalgovernmentofeachstate.Itwasallegedthattheablestcitizenscouldlayclaimtouncontrolledsupremacybyatitleolderthananysocialfiction.Rulesofrightmeantnothingbutapermanentconspiracyoftheweaktowithdrawthemselvesfromthelegitimatedominionoftheirbornmaster,andtobamboozlehimintoavoluntarysurrenderofhisnaturalprivileges.Sentimentsbearingasuperficialresemblancetothesehaveoccasionallyfoundutteranceamongourselves.Nevertheless,itwouldbemostunjusttocompareCarlyleandMr.FroudewithCritiasandCalliclês.Webelievethattheirpreferenceofdespotismtorepresentativegovernmentisanentiremistake.Butweknowthatwiththemaswithusthegoodofthegovernedisthesoleenddesired.ThegentlemenofAthenssoughtaftersupremepoweronlyasameansforgratifyingtheirworstpassionswithoutletorhindrance;andforthatpurposetheywerereadytoallythemselveswitheveryforeignenemyinturn,ortoflatterthecapricesoftheDêmos,ifthatpolicy85promisedtoanswerequallywell.Theantisocialtheoriesofthese‘younglions,’astheywerecalledbytheirenemiesandsometimesbythemselvesalso,donotseemtohavebeensupportedbyanypublicteacher.IfwearetobelievePlato,P?lus,aSicilianrhetor,didindeedregardArchelaus,theablerLouisNapoleonofhistime,withsympathyandenviousadmiration,butwithoutattemptingtojustifythecrimesofhisherobyanappealtonaturallaw.Thecorruptionoftheoreticalmoralityamongthepaidteacherstookamoresubtleform.Insteadofopposingoneprincipletoanother,theyheldthatalllawhadthesamesource,beinganemanationfromthewillofthestronger,andexclusivelydesignedtopromotehisinterest.Justice,accordingtoThrasymachusintheRepublic,isanother’sgood,whichistrueenough,andtopractiseitexceptundercompulsionisfoolish,which,whateverGrotemaysay,isagrosslyimmoraldoctrine.

Amortalsoul:sinceneitherman

Nottothetownsmen’sbane,

Thegreatreligiousmovementofthesixthandfifthcenturies—chieflyrepresentedforusbythenamesofPythagoras,Aeschylus,andPindar—wouldinallprobabilityhaveentirelywonovertheeducatedclasses,andgivendefinitenesstothehalf-articulateutterancesofpopulartradition,haditnotbeenarrestedprematurelybythedevelopmentofphysical236speculation.WeshowedinthefirstchapterthatGreekphilosophyinitsearlieststageswasentirelymaterialistic.Itdiffered,indeed,frommodernmaterialisminholdingthatthesoul,orseatofconsciouslife,isanentitydistinctfromthebody;butthedistinctionwasonebetweenagrosserandafinermatter,orelsebetweenasimplerandamorecomplexarrangementofthesamematter,notbetweenanextendedandanindivisiblesubstance.Whatevertheories,then,wereentertainedwithrespecttotheonewouldinevitablycometobeentertainedalsowithrespecttotheother.Now,withtheexceptionoftheEleates,whodeniedtherealityofchangeandseparationaltogether,everyschoolagreedinteachingthatallparticularbodiesareformedeitherbydifferentiationorbydecompositionandrecompositionoutofthesameprimordialelements.Fromthisitfollowed,asanaturalconsequence,that,althoughthewholemassofmatterwaseternal,eachparticularaggregateofmattermustperishinordertoreleasetheelementsrequiredfortheformationofnewaggregates.Itisobviousthat,assumingthesoultobematerial,itsimmortalitywasirreconcilablewithsuchadoctrineasthis.Acombinationoffourelementsandtwoconflictingforces,suchasEmpedoclessupposedthehumanmindtobe,couldnotpossiblyoutlasttheorganisminwhichitwasenclosed;andifEmpedocleshimself,byaninconsistencynotuncommonwithmenofgenius,refusedtodrawtheonlylegitimateconclusionfromhisownprinciples,thediscrepancycouldnotfailtoforceitselfonhissuccessors.StillmorefataltothebeliefinacontinuanceofpersonalidentityafterdeathwasthetheoryputforwardbyDiogenesofApollonia,thatthereisreallynopersonalidentityeveninlife—thatconsciousnessisonlymaintainedbyaperpetualinhalationofthevitalairinwhichallreasonresides.Thesoulveryliterallyleftthebodywiththelastbreath,andhadapoorchanceofholdingtogetherafterwards,especially,asthewitsobserved,ifahighwindhappenedtobeblowingatthetime.

ItwasaconsequenceoftheprinciplejuststatedthatinformallogictheStoicsshouldgiveprecedencetothehypotheticaloverthecategoricalsyllogism.40FromonepointofviewtheirpreferenceforthismodeofstatinganargumentwasanadvanceonthemethodofAristotle,whosereasonings,ifexplicitlysetout,wouldhaveassumedtheformofdisjunctivesyllogisms.FromanotherpointofviewitwasareturntotheolderdialecticsofSocratesandPlato,whoalwayslookedontheirmajorpremisesaspossessingonlyaconditionalvalidity—conditional,thatistosay,ontheconsentoftheirinterlocutor.WehavefurthertonotethatboththedisjunctiveandthehypotheticalsyllogismwerefirstrecognisedassuchbytheStoics;adiscoveryconnectedwiththefeaturewhichmostprofoundlydistinguishestheirlogicfromAristotle’slogic.Weshowed,indealingwiththelatter,thatitisbasedonananalysisoftheconcept,andthatallitsimperfectionsareduetothatsinglecircumstance.ItwastheStoicswhofirstbroughtjudgment,sofatallyneglectedbytheauthoroftheAnalytics,intoproperprominence.Havingoncegraspedpropositionsasthebeginningandendofreasoning,theynaturallyandundertheguidanceofcommonlanguage,passedfromsimpletocomplexassertions,andimmediatelydetectedtheargumentstowhichtheselatterserveasafoundation.Andifweproceedtoaskwhytheyweremoreinterestedinjudgmentthaninconception,weshallprobablyfindtheexplanationtobethattheir17philosophyhaditsrootintheethicalandpracticalinterestswhichinvolveacontinualprocessofinjunctionandbelief,thatistosay,acontinualassociationofsuchdisparatenotionsasanimpressionandanaction;whiletheAristotelianphilosophy,beingultimatelyderivedfromearlyGreekthought,hadforitsleadingprinciplethecircumscriptionofexternalobjectsandtheirrepresentationundertheformofaclassifiedseries.Thusthenaturalisticsystem,startingwiththeapplicationofscientificideastohumanlife,ultimatelycarriedbackintosciencethevitalideaofLaw;thatis,offixedrelationssubsistingbetweendisparatephenomena.Andthisinturnledtothereinterpretationofknowledgeasthesubsumptionoflessgeneralundermoregeneralrelations.

TheglowingenthusiasmofPlatois,however,notentirelyderivedfromthepoetictraditionsofhisnativecity;orperhapsweshouldrathersaythatheandthegreatwriterswhoprecededhimdrewfromacommonfountofinspiration.Mr.Emerson,inoneofthemostpenetratingcriticismseverwrittenonourphilosopher,129haspointedouttheexistenceoftwodistinctelementsinthePlatonicDialogues—onedispersive,practical,prosaic;theothermystical,absorbing,centripetal.TheAmericanscholaris,however,aswethink,quitemistakenwhenheattributesthesecondofthesetendenciestoAsiaticinfluence.ItisextremelydoubtfulwhetherPlatoevertravelledfarthereastthanEgypt;itisprobablethathisstayinthatcountrywasnotoflongduration;anditiscertainthathedidnotacquireasinglemetaphysicalideafromitsinhabitants.Helikedtheirrigidconservatism;helikedtheirinstitutionofadominantpriesthood;helikedtheirsystemofpopulareducation,andtheplacewhichitgavetomathematicsmadehimlookwithshameonthe‘swinishignorance’ofhisowncountrymeninthatrespect;130butonthewholeheclassesthemamongtheracesexclusivelydevotedtomoney-making,andinaptitudeforphilosophyheplacesthemfarbelowtheGreeks.VerydifferentweretheimpressionsbroughthomefromhisvisitstoSicilyand204SouthernItaly.Therehebecameacquaintedwithmodesofthoughtinwhichthesearchafterhiddenresemblancesandanalogieswasapredominantpassion;theretheexistenceofacentralunityunderlyingallphenomenawasmaintained,asagainstsenseandcommonopinion,withtheintensityofareligiouscreed;therealonespeculationwasclothedinpoeticlanguage;therefirsthadanattemptbeenmadetocarrythoughtintolifebyassociatingitwithareformofmannersandbeliefs.There,too,theartsofdanceandsonghadassumedamoreorderlyandsolemnaspect;thechorusreceiveditsfinalconstitutionfromaSicilianmaster;andtheloftieststrainsofGreeklyricpoetrywerecomposedforrecitationinthestreetsofSiciliancitiesoratthecourtsofSiciliankings.Then,withtheriseofrhetoric,GreekprosewaselaboratedbySicilianteachersintoasortofrhythmicalcomposition,combiningrichimagerywithstudiedharmoniesandcontrastsofsenseandsound.AndastheholdofAsiaticcivilisationoneasternHellasgrewweaker,theattentionofherforemostspiritswasmoreandmoreattractedtothisnewregionofwonderandromance.Thestreamofcolonisationsetthitherinasteadyflow;thescenesofmythicaladventurewererediscoveredinWesternwaters;anditwasimaginedthat,bygraspingtheresourcesofSicily,anempireextendingoverthewholeMediterraneanmightbewon.Perhaps,withoutbeingtoofanciful,wemaytracealikenessbetweenthedaringschemesofAlcibiadesandthemoreremotebutnotmorevisionarykingdomsuggestedbyananalogousinspirationtotheidealisingsoulofPlato.Eachhadlearnedtopractise,althoughforfardifferentpurposes,theroyalartofSocrates—themasteryovermen’smindsacquiredbyaclosestudyoftheirinterests,passions,andbeliefs.Buttheambitionoftheonedefeatedhisownaim,tothedestructionofhiscountryandofhimself;whiletheotherdrewintoAthenianthoughtwhateverofWesternforceandfervourwasneededfortheaccomplishmentofits205imperialtask.WemaysayofPlatowhathehassaidofhisownTheaetêtus,that‘hemovessurelyandsmoothlyandsuccessfullyinthepathofknowledgeandinquiry;alwaysmakingprogresslikethenoiselessflowofariverofoil’;131buteverywherebesideorbeneaththatplacidlubricatingflowwemaytracetheactionofanothercurrent,wherestillsparkles,freshandclearasatfirst,thefierySicilianwine.

TheoldreligionsofGreeceandItalywereessentiallyoracular.Whileinculcatingtheexistenceofsupernaturalbeings,andprescribingthemodesaccordingtowhichsuchbeingsweretobeworshipped,theypaidmostattentiontotheinterpretationofthesignsbywhicheitherfutureeventsingeneral,ortheconsequencesofparticularactions,weresupposedtobedivinelyrevealed.Oftheseintimations,someweregiventothewholeworld,sothathewhoranmightread,otherswerereservedforcertainfavouredlocalities,andonlycommunicatedthroughtheappointedministersofthegod.TheDelphicoracleinparticularenjoyedanenormousreputationbothamongGreeksandbarbariansforguidanceaffordedunderthelatterconditions;andduringaconsiderableperioditmayevenbesaidtohavedirectedthecourseofHelleniccivilisation.ItwasalsounderthisformthatsupernaturalreligionsufferedmostinjuryfromthegreatintellectualmovementwhichfollowedthePersianwars.MenwhohadlearnedtostudytheconstantsequencesofNatureforthemselves,andtoshapetheirconductaccordingtofixedprinciplesofprudenceorofjustice,eitherthoughtitirreverenttotroublethegodaboutquestionsonwhichtheywerecompetenttoformanopinionforthemselves,ordidnotchoosetoplaceawell-consideredschemeatthemercyofhispossiblyinterestedresponses.ThatsucharevolutionoccurredaboutthemiddleofthefifthcenturyB.C.,seemsprovedbythegreatchangeoftoneinreferencetothissubjectwhichoneperceivesonpassingfromAeschylustoSophocles.Thatanyoneshouldquestiontheveracityofanoracleisasuppositionwhichnevercrossesthemindoftheelderdramatist.Aknowledgeofaugurycountsamongthegreatestbenefits222conferredbyPrometheusonmankind,andtheTitanbringsZeushimselftotermsbyhisacquaintancewiththesecretsofdestiny.Sophocles,ontheotherhand,evidentlyhastodealwithascepticalgeneration,despisingpropheciesandneedingtobewarnedofthefearfulconsequencesbroughtaboutbyneglectingtheirinjunctions.

NeithercanweadmitGrote’sfurthercontention,thatinnoGreekcitybutAthenswouldSocrateshavebeenpermittedtocarryonhiscross-examiningactivityforsolonga168period.Onthecontrary,weagreewithColonelMure,113thatinnootherstatewouldhehavebeenmolested.XenophanesandParmenides,HeracleitusandDemocritus,hadgivenutterancetofarbolderopinionsthanhis,opinionsradicallydestructiveofGreekreligion,apparentlywithoutrunningtheslightestpersonalrisk;whileAthenshadmorethanoncebeforeshownthesamespiritoffanaticalintolerance,thoughwithoutproceedingtosuchafatalextreme,thanks,probably,tothetimelyescapeofherintendedvictims.M.ErnestRenanhasquiterecentlycontrastedthefreedomofthoughtaccordedbyRomandespotismwiththenarrownessofoldGreekRepublicanism,quotingwhathecallstheAthenianInquisitionasasampleofthelatter.Thewordinquisitionisnottoostrong,onlythelecturershouldnothaveledhisaudiencetobelievethatGreekRepublicanismwasinthisrespectfairlyrepresentedbyitsmostbrillianttype,forhadsuchbeenthecaseverylittlefreethoughtwouldhavebeenleftforRometotolerate.

文章推荐:

第七届数字电视中国峰会及政策宣贯会在京开幕

山西投资项目在线审批监管平台获评全国“示范平台”

终身学习让人焕发活力(观沧海)

国家卫健委:对所有入境人员进行14天集中医学观察非常有必要

45.6%受访青年做过或在做自媒体 自媒体当职业靠谱吗

工伤保险参保人数已达2.39亿

刘树成:中国进入新一轮经济周期 (4)

网友评论

  • 雨花郡主PQxxw

     

  • 雪灵芝M5vjU

  • 如萱紫儿3YZty

  • 但法国RRCVl

     

  • 大笨蛋zS6ry

    v

  • 扒皮成V5eMP

     Thewordslastquoted,whichinaChristiansensearetrueenough,leadusovertothecontrastingviewofAristotle’stheology,tothefalsetheoryofitheldbycriticslikeProf.St.GeorgeMivart.TheStagiriteagreeswithCatholictheisminacceptingapersonalGod,andheagreeswiththeFirstArticleoftheEnglishChurch,thoughnotwiththePentateuch,insayingthatGodiswithoutpartsorpassions;buttherehisagreementceases.Excludingsuchathingasdivineinterferencewithnature,histheologyofcourseexcludesthepossibilityofrevelation,inspiration,miracles,andgrace.Noristhisamereomission;itisanecessityofthesystem.Iftherecan353benoexistencewithouttime,notimewithoutmotion,nomotionwithoutunrealiseddesire,nodesirewithoutanideal,noidealbuteternallyself-thinkingthought—thenitlogicallyfollowsthatGod,inthesenseofsuchathought,mustnotinteresthimselfintheaffairsofmen.Again,AristotelianismequallyexcludestheargumentsbywhichmoderntheologianshavesoughttoprovetheexistenceofGod.Herealsothesystemistruetoitscontemporaneous,statical,superficialcharacter.TheFirstMoverisnotseparatedfromusbyachainofcausesextendingthroughpastages,butbyaninterveningbreadthofspaceandthewheelswithinwheelsofacosmicmachine.Aristotlehadnodifficultyinconceivingwhatsomehavesincedeclaredtobeinconceivable,aseriesofantecedentswithoutanybeginningintime;itwasratherthebeginningofsuchaseriesthathecouldnotmakeintelligibletohimself.Nor,aswehaveseen,didhethinkthattheadaptationinlivingorganismsofeachparttoeveryotherrequiredanexternalexplanation.Farlessdiditoccurtohimthattheproductionofimpressionsonoursenseswasduetotheagencyofasupernaturalpower.ItisabsolutelycertainthathewouldhaverejectedtheCartesianargument,accordingtowhichaperfectbeingmustexistifitbeonlyconceivable—existencebeingnecessarilyinvolvedintheideaofperfection.252Finally,notrecognisingsuchafacultyasconscience,hewouldnothaveadmittedittobethevoiceofGodspeakinginthesoul.

  • 草莓果b2yV9

     

  • 绿卡纸SGkVa

    Forequityislaw,lawequity;

     

标签列表