按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
y deepest questions of theology itself。 And in the meanwhile； these Alexandrians' worthless criticism has been utterly swept away； while their real work； their accurate editions of the classics； remain to us as a precious heritage。 So it is throughout history： nothing dies which is worthy to live。 The wheat is surely gathered into the garner； the chaff is burnt up by that eternal fire which； happily for this universe； cannot be quenched by any art of man； but goes on forever； devouring without indulgence all the folly and the falsehood of the world。
As yet you have heard nothing of the metaphysical schools of Alexandria； for as yet none have existed； in the modern acceptation of that word。 Indeed； I am not sure that I must not tell you frankly； that none ever existed at all in Alexandria； in that same modern acceptation。 Ritter； I think； it is who complains naively enough； that the Alexandrian Neoplatonists had a bad habit； which grew on them more and more as the years rolled on； of mixing up philosophy with theology； and so defiling； or at all events colouring； its pure transparency。 There is no denying the imputation； as I shall show at greater length in my next Lecture。 But one would have thought； looking back through history； that the Alexandrians were not the only philosophers guilty of this shameful act of syncretism。 Plato； one would have thought； was as great a sinner as they。 So were the Hindoos。 In spite of all their logical and metaphysical acuteness； they were； you will find； unable to get rid of the notion that theological inquiries concerning Brahma； Atma； Creeshna； were indissolubly mixed up with that same logic and metaphysic。 The Parsees could not separate questions about Ahriman and Ormuzd from Kant's three great philosophic problems： What is Man？What may be known？What should be done？ Neither； indeed； could the earlier Greek sages。 Not one of them； of any school whatsoeverfrom the semi…mythic Seven Sages to Plato and Aristotlebut finds it necessary to consider not in passing； but as the great object of research； questions concerning the gods：… whether they are real or not； one or many； personal or impersonal； cosmic； and parts of the universe； or organisers and rulers of it； in relation to man； or without relation to him。 Even in those who flatly deny the existence of the gods； even in Lucretius himself； these questions have to be considered； before the question； What is man？ can get any solution at all。 On the answer given to them is found to depend intimately the answer to the question； What is the immaterial part of man？ Is it a part of nature； or of something above nature？ Has he an immaterial part at all？in one word； Is a human metaphysic possible at all？ So it was with the Greek philosophers of old； even； as Asclepius and Ammonius say； with Aristotle himself。 〃The object of Aristotle's metaphysic；〃 one of them says； 〃is theological。 Herein Aristotle theologises。〃 And there is no denying the assertion。 We must not then be hard on the Neoplatonists； as if they were the first to mix things separate from the foundation of the world。 I do not say that theology and metaphysic are separate studies。 That is to be ascertained only by seeing some one separate them。 And when I see them separated； I shall believe them separable。 Only the separation must not be produced by the simple expedient of denying the existence of either one of them； or at least of ignoring the existence of one steadily during the study of the other。 If they can be parted without injury to each other； let them be parted； and till then let us suspend hard judgments on the Alexandrian school of metaphysic； and also on the schools of that curious people the Jews； who had at this period a steadily increasing influence on the thought； as well as on the commercial prosperity； of Alexandria。
You must not suppose； in the meanwhile； that the philosophers whom the Ptolemies collected （as they would have any other marketable article） by liberal offers of pay and patronage； were such men as the old Seven Sages of Greece； or as Socrates； Plato； and Aristotle。 In these three last indeed； Greek thought reached not merely its greatest height； but the edge of a precipice； down which it rolled headlong after their decease。 The intellectual defects of the Greek mind； of which I have already spoken； were doubtless one great cause of this decay： but； to my mind； moral causes had still more to do with it。 The more cultivated Greek states； to judge from the writings of Plato； had not been an over… righteous people during the generation in which he lived。 And in the generations which followed； they became an altogether wicked people； immoral； unbelieving； hating good； and delighting in all which was evil。 And it was in consequence of these very sins of theirs； as I think； that the old Hellenic race began to die out physically； and population throughout Greece to decrease with frightful rapidity； after the time of the Achaean league。 The facts are well known； and foul enough they are。 When the Romans destroyed Greece； God was just and merciful。 The eagles were gathered together only because the carrion needed to be removed from the face of God's earth。 And at the time of which I now speak； the signs of approaching death were fearfully apparent。 Hapless and hopeless enough were the clique of men out of whom the first two Ptolemies hoped to form a school of philosophy； men certainly clever enough； and amusing withal； who might give the kings of Egypt many a shrewd lesson in king…craft； and the ways of this world； and the art of profiting by the folly of fools； and the selfishness of the selfish； or who might amuse them； in default of fighting…cocks； by puns and repartees； and battles of logic； 〃how one thing cannot be predicated of another；〃 or 〃how the wise man is not only to overcome every misfortune； but not even to feel it；〃 and other such mighty questions； which in those days hid that deep unbelief in any truth whatsoever which was spreading fast over the minds of men。 Such word…splitters were Stilpo and Diodorus； the slayer and the slain。 They were of the Megaran school； and were named Dialectics； and also； with more truth； Eristics； or quarrellers。 Their clique had professed to follow Zeno and Socrates in declaring the instability of sensible presumptions and conclusions； in preaching an absolute and eternal Being。 But there was this deep gulf between them and Socrates； that while Socrates professed to be seeking for the Absolute and Eternal； for that which is； they were content with affirming that it exists。 With him； as with the older sages； philosophy was a search for truth。 With them it was a scheme of doctrines to be defended。 And the dialectic on which they prided themselves so much； differed from his accordingly。 He used it inductively； to seek out； under the notions and conceptions of the mind； certain absolute truths and laws of which they were only the embodiment。 Words and thought were to him a field for careful and reverent induction； as the phenomena of nature are to us the disciples of Bacon。 But with these hapless Megarans； who thought that they had found that for which Socrates professed only to seek di