7/24/2019 Chroust a., The Term Philosopher
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chroust-a-the-term-philosopher 1/3
THE T E R M P H I L O S O P H E R AND THE P A N E G Y R I C ANALOGY
IN
ARISTOTLE'S
PROTREPTICUS
T h e r e exists a w i d e l y s p r e a d
tradition
w h i c h
m ai n t a i n s
that
th e t e rm
p hi l o so p her w a s c o i n e d , o r first u s e d by , P y t h a g o r a s . P y t h a g o r a s is sa id n o t
o n l y to h a v e c a l l e d h i m s e l f a p h i l o s o ph e r , that is, a lover o f w i s dom , bu t
also t o h a v e e x p l a i n e d t h e
m e a n i n g
o f this n o v e l a n d , i t a p p e a r s , startling
term.
T h e tradition
w h i c h d e c l a r e s P y t h a g o r a s
to be th e
originator
an d inter-
preter o f the ^ . e r m , p h i l o s o p h e r is
c o mmo nl y
t r a c e d to H e r a c l e i d e s o f Po n t us
and
hisTT^-T^S
Q . T N O V
mpl \ /06LC >\ /
,
a work w n i c h is c o m p l e t e l y lost.
F o r t u n a t e l y , i n h i s
T u s c u l a n
D i s p u t a t i o n s V . 8 - 1 0 , G i c e r c ha s p r ese r v ed
what
seem
to be the
essentials
o f
H e r a c l e i d e s
c
a c c o u n t .
I t m a y
also
be
pr e s u m e d that
C i c e r o
r e c o r d e d this story f a i r l y accurately.
A c c o r d i n g t o
C i c e r o ' s report,
P y t h a g o r a s o n c e
visited
t h e
town
o f Phlius.
h e n a s k e d
in
what
particular a r t o r
skill
h e
e x c e l l e d ,
he i s
sa i d
to
ha v e
replied
that h e w as a
p h i lo s o ph e r a n d , h e n c e ,
d i d n o t
p o s s e s s
an y
particular
practical
skill.
E x p l a i n i n g f u r t h e r
this
u n u s u a l t e r m , w h i c h a p p a r e n t l y b a f f l e d his
listen-
e r s , P y t h a g o r a s c o n t i n u e d : T h e life o f m a n r e s e m b l e s a great festival celebrated.,
b ef o r e t he
c o n c o u r s e £rom
th e
w h ol e
o f
G r e e c e .
A t
this festival some pe opl e so ug h t
to w i n th e g l o r i o u s distinction o f a c r w o n ; an d others w e r e attracted by th e pros-
pect
o f
m a t e r i a l g a i n t h r o u g h b u y i n g
a n d
selling.
B u t
there
w a s
a l s o
a
certain
type o f p eo p l e , a n d that quite th e best t y p e o f m e n , w h o w e r e
interested
neither
in
c o m p e t i n g , a p p l a u d i n g
o r
s e e k i n g m a t e r i a l g a i n ,
b u t w h o
came solely
fo r
the
s a k e o f
the
spectacle
itself
a n d , h e n c e ,
c l o s e l y
w a t c h e d what
w as
done
and h ow i t
was
d o n e . S o a l s o we, as ' thoug h we had come f rom some city to a crowded festival,
l e a v i n g in like f a s h i o n a n o t h e r life a n d a n o t h e r n a t u r e o f b e i n g , entered upon
this life.
A n d
some
were
slaves
of
a m b i t i o n ,
an d
some
slaves
o f
m on e y .
B u t
there
are a special fe w
w h o, c o u n t i n g
a l l
else
fo r
n o t h i n g ,
closely
s c a n n e d
t h e n a t u r e
of
things.
T h e s e m e n g a v e t h e m s e l v e s th e
n a m e
o f 'philosophers' (sapientiae
studiosi)...and
this is the m e a n i n g of the term
' p h i l o s o p h e r s ' .
And just as at
these
festivals
t h e m e n o f t h e m o s t e x a l t e d e d u c a t i o n l o o k e d o n w i t h o u t an y
s e l f - s e e k i n g interest,
so in life t h e
c o n t e m p l a t i o n
o f
t h i n g s
a n d their rational
a p p r e h e n s i o n ( c o g n i t i o )
b y f a r surpasses a l l other pursuits. 4
T h a t H e r a c l e i d e s o f P o n t u s w a s n o t t h e i n v e n t o r o r p e r h a p s th e
first
reporter
o f
this e n g a g i n g story m i g h t
b e
g a t h e r e d
f rom
Aristotle's
Protrepticus
w h i c h , '
it is fairly
r e a s o n a b l e
to
a s s u m e ,
was
com posed
a b o u t
350
B . C . ,
that
is,
some
t i m e
b e f o r e H e r a c l e i d e s w r o t e h i s rtfa\
ôçò drt^cxJ
° In the
Protrepticus
Aristotle m a i n t a i n s : I t i s by no
m e a n s
s t r a n g e that p h i l o s o p h i c wisdom
(^puv^eiS ) sho u l d a p p ea r d ev o i d o f
i m m e d i a t e practical
u s e f u l n e s s a n d , a t t h e
same
t i m e ,
m i g h t n o t a t a l l prove itself a d v a n t a g e o u s . F o r w e call p h i l o s o p h i c
wisdom
n o t
a d v a n t a g e o u s ,
b u t
g o o d .
I t
o u g h t
to be
p u r s u e d ,
no t fo r th e
sa k e
o f
a n y t h i n g
else, b u t
solely
fo r ts o w n
s a k e «
F o r a s w e
j o u r n e y
to th e
Games
a t
Olympia
for the s a k e of the s p e c t a c l e itself - for the spectacle as s u c h is w o r t h
more t h a n just a great d e a l of
money
- and as we w a t c h th e D i o n y s i a no t in
order
to derive some
m a t e r i a l g a i n from
th e actors - as a
m a t t e r
o f
f a c t ,
w e
spend
money
on them - and as there a re many m o r e
s p e c t a c l e s
w e
o u g h t
to prefer to
great
riches:
so ,
t o o ,
t h e
v i e w i n g
a n d
c o n t e m p l a t i o n
o f t h e
u n i v e r s e
is to be
v a l u e d
above
a ll other
t h i n g s commonly c o n s i d e r e d
to be
u s e f u l
in a practical sense.
F o r ,
m os t certainly,
i t
w o u l d m a k e
little
sen se w er e
w e
to
t a k e p a i n s
t o
w a t c h
m e n i m i t a t i n g w o m e n
o r
slaves,
o r
f i g h t i n g
o r
r u n n i n g ,
b u t n o t
t h i n k
i t
proper
t o
v i ew , f r ee
o f a l l
c h a r g e s ,
t h e
n a t u r e
a n d t n e true reality o f
e v e r y t h i n g
that
exists .
b
Thi s p a ssa g e from Aristotle's Protrepticus,
w h i c h
h a s a p p a r e n t l y b e e n
c o m p l e t e l y o v e r l o o k e d or s i m p l y i g n o r e d ,
s t tou ld
m a k e it
quite
clear that the use
of th e p a n e g y r i c a n a l o g y for th e p u r p o s e o f e x p l a i n i n g th e t e r m p hi l o so p her o r
theoretic m a n ,
is certainly older
t h a n
H e r a c l e i d e s '
n f f t
**?J ctrTVOtJ , and
p er ha p s ev en o l d e r t ha n Aristotle's
Protrepticus.
It
m i g h t
be c o n j e c t u r e d
that
i t w a s a l r e a d y k n o w n , a n d a l r e a d y u s e d , d u r i n g t h e first part o f t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y
B . C . ,
a n d , as f r a g m e n t 19 4 ( D i e l s - K r a n z ) of Democr i t u*- seems t o indicate, probably
b e f o r e
that
t i m e . T h e f u r t h e r q u e s t i o n as to w h e t h e r
this
a n a l o g y
m a y i n f a c t b e
traced b a ck to P y t h ag o ra s h i m s e l f , is o u t s i d e the s c o p e of this
brief
c o m m e n t . It
d o es seem d o u b t f u l , h o w e v e r , that so t e c h n i c a l a t e r m a s p h i l o so p he r sho u l d
a l r e a d y be in use d u r i n g t h e
latter
part o f the
sixth
c e n t u r y
B . C .
7
I n a n y
event,
Aristotle d o es
not
credit
it
s p e c i f i c a l l y
to
P y t h a g o r a s .
7/24/2019 Chroust a., The Term Philosopher
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chroust-a-the-term-philosopher 2/3
15.
Both
Pythagoras and Aristotle seem to stress
that /fzjptci,
is enjoyable
per
se without any material gain - a
distinctly
Platonic twist. Heracleides, it
s e e m s ,
tries to point out
that
in
h u man life
we
m i g h t
be
either
a passionate
participant or a dispassionate spectator. For
some u n k n o w n
reason Heracleides
links this observation
to the
story that Pythagoras invented
the
term philosopher
T he panegyric analogy emp loyed by
Aristotle
and credited by Heracleides to Pythag-
oras in no way explains the term
philosopher
10
,
but merely proclaims or illustrates
that
dispassionate contemplation -
the
purely theoretic life - constitutes the
m a i n
or
preferred activity
of the
true philosopher. H e n c e
it
m i g h t
be
argued that
the link be tween the term philosopher and the
m a i n
activity of the philosopher
is not altogether successful : it
s i m p l y
presupposes the term philosopher as
a
well-established
term.
It
w o u l d
not be too far fetched to surmise
that
the a b o v e m e n t i o n e d
passage f rom Aristotle's
Protrepticus
is a faint
echo
of Plato, Republic 475E:
Who, then, are the true philosophers? T h o s e . . . w h o are the lovers of the vision
of truth
(ôïàß
iff?
aUf ct e/tO sdtA 'Ctú ) « One m i g h t quote here also the
m a n y Platonic references to the true nature or f u n c t i o n of philosophy and the
philosopher: Philosophical m i n d s a l w a y s have
k n o w l e d g e
of a
sort w h i c h shows
them
the
eternal nature ( R e p u b l i c
485B);
the philosophers alone
are
capable
of
grasping
that
w h i c h is eternal and u n c h a n g e a b l e ( R e p u b l ic 484B); those who
love
the
truth
in
e a c h thing
are to be
called philosophers (Republic 480A);
only
the philosopher is capable of k n o w i n g the truth of each thing
( R e p u b l i c
484D) ;
and of experiencing the
delight
w h i c h
is to be
f o u n d
in the understanding
of
true
being
( R e p u b l i c 5 8 2 D ) ;
the
philosopher alone, being capable
of visual-
izing and loving absolute beauty, recognizes the
existence
of absolute beauty
( R e p u b l i c
476B) ; the philosopher's eyes are forever directed
towards things
i m m u t a b l e and
fixed ( R e p u b l i c 500C) ; God invented
and gave us
sight
to the end
that
we m i g ht
beho ld
the courses of the intelligences in the heavens....and f rom
this source we
h ave
derived philosophy ( T i m a e u s 47A f f . ) ; the
m i n d
of the
philosopher, disdaining the
pettiness
and nothingness of hu m a n
affairs . . . .
is
flying
about, m e a s u r i n g
earth
a n d heaven
(Theaetetus 173E); and the
philosopher's
m i n d , being
f i x e d
on true being, has surely no time to
look
down on h u man affairs
....And holding conversation with the divine order, he himself becomes....divine :
(Republ i c 500C f f . ) .
All
these
statements,
in
turn,
bring
us
close
to the
problem, discussed
in Plato's Sympos i um (201C f f . ) , but not to be discussed
here,
that the
good
is
also the beautiful
and , ,
hence, truth; and that love is directed towards the beaut-
iful and the true
0
The
dispassionate v i e w i n g
of the
sublimely beautiful
is the
dispassionate love of the sublimely beautiful and of the ultimate truth arid b e a u t y «
W i t h Plato, the close interrelation
of
ô&
KC^ON/
/nd y Ë&/ permits us to call
philosophy
âÑ/ëè«?/1<âÉ
, and the philosopher a
òÑ/ëïÇáÁï^
: But who are the lovers
of w isdom? ° >
They
are
those
w ho are in a mear . b e t w e e n th e t w O o Love is one of
t hem
0
For
wi sdom
is a mos t beautiful t h i n g , , and
love
is of the beautiful. And
therefore love is also a
p h i l o s o p h e r »
1
Bu t
ail these
explanations
a n d references
still leave unsolved the p rob l em of the panegyric a n a l o g y « ,
It
m i g h t
be
s a f e
to a s s u m e
that the ideal
of the
contemplative
or
theor-
etic
life, as it is
extolled
in the
story
of
Pythagoras
and
stated
in Aristotle's
Protrepticus.was originally a d v o c a t e d by PJatc a n d t h e
Academy»
At one time, w e
m a v surmise, thie ideal was retroactively attributed or credited to Pythagoras,
p r e s u m a b l y w h e n
late Piatonism a s s u m e d a
distinct
Pythagorizing
trends
U n d o u b t e d l y ,
the
panegyric a n a l o g y refers primarily
to the
truee basic
w a y s of
life:
the
life
of
bodily pleasure or material gain,
represented
by those who
attend
the
festival
tor the sake of buying and selling ; the life of
virtue
and h o n o r (the
practical
or political life), represented by those w n
' ° a eeK
a c r o w n ; and the life of pure
c o n t e m p l a t i o n
(or theoretic life -
$F£j£>tft
) » represented by the dispassionate
(philosophic) observer.
The
philosopher
- and
this s e e m s
to be a
definite Platonic
twist
- is
w h o l l y dedicated
to a
life
of
contemplation
and
' theory , that
is, a
life centered
a r o u n d
(Pfd^dct °
H e n c e ,
the accounts of Aristotle and Heracleides
of
P o n t u s actually
c o m b ine two m a j or
themes:
the three f u n d a m e n t a l
w a y s
of life
a n d
the way of the
true
p h i l o s o p h e r , ,
W . J a e g e r
S u g g e s t s
that
Heracleides took
these
tw o
themes
directly f rom
Aristotle's
Protrepticus ( a & d more
remotely
f rom Plato),
a n d , at the
s ame
time, c o m b ine d to
tried
to integrate them into a single a c c o u n t »
In order to
endow this
story with greater authority he projected into the remote
past by creo*iting it to. Pythagoras» ̂ I n Aristotle's a c c o u n t . , it will be noted,
the key terrfi is Oe^jpco, and it is this (9f6J£t . w h i c h he advocates and extolls»
7/24/2019 Chroust a., The Term Philosopher
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chroust-a-the-term-philosopher 3/3
16.
For
the purpose o f
illustration
Aristotle d r a w s certain parallels be tween the
con t empl a t i ve
or theoretic life
of the true ph i l o s ophe r a n d t h e ce leb ra t ed
spectacle
(o r
d i s p a s s i o n a t e v i ewe r
of the
s p e c t a c l e )
a t Olympia or the
G re a t
D i o n y s i a .
Tha t
the story of the
three
b a s i c
w a y s
o f
life
goes back t o P l a t o ma y
b e
ga t he red
from R e pub l i c
581C,
where w e a r e told that there exist
three
classes
of
m e n : lovers
o f
wi sd om,
lovers o f honor (o r virtue o r f a m e ) , a n d
lovers
o f
m a t e r i a l gain.
In
short, a c c o r d i n g
to
Plato ( a n d Aristotle)
there are three
main
purposes in human life as we l l a s i n a l l
f u n d a m e n t a l human
pursuits.·^
D i f f e r e n t people seek
their
h a p p i n e s s
a n d
f u l f i l m e n t
in
these
three
pursuits,
n a m e l y ,
either
in ifpOWeiS , or in virtue (honor o r f a m e ) , or in p h y s i c a l
p l e a s u re
or
m a t e r i a l gain. Th i s triadic n o t i o n ,
wh i ch is vitally
related to
Plato's basic p h i l o s o p h i c o u t l o o k ,
i s once
a g a i n
restated in Aristotle's
E u d emian
Ethics, i n c i d e n t a l l y a fairly early w o r k :
N o w
to be h a p p y , to
live
b l i s s f u l l y
'and b e a u t i f u l l y , must
consist
m a i n l y in three t h i n g s wh ich appea r t o be
most
desirable. F o r
some
m a i n t a i n
that <Upow76iS
is the greatest
go o d , some
sa y
virtue ( o r h o n o r ) , a n d
some
s a y p h y s i c a l pleasure. ̂ Hence w e realize
that
there are
three
lives wh ich
a l l
those choose
w ho
have
the
power
to do so , to
w i t ,
the life o f
'political (practical) m a n ,
1
th e life of the ph i l o s ophe r , a n d t h e
life of the
v o l u p t u a r y .
Of
these,
the
phi losopher
is
de t e rmi n ed
to
ded i c a t e
himse l f
to <pf>o \S )6l5
;
the
'political
( p r a c t i c a l )
m a n '
to n ob l e deeds ,
that
is,
to acts
wh ich
originate w i t h virtue; and the v o l u p t u a r y to b o d i l y pleasures.
14
The triad
of
< ^ D V < t f t S
,
virtue
(o r
n o b l e d e e d s )
and
p h y s ic a l
pleasure, it
goes
w i t h o u t s a y i n g , is closely related to Plato's d o c t r i n e of the
tripartite
soul,
f rom wh ich P l a t o a l s o derives the three w a y s o f life a s w e l l as the three types
of happ i n e s s o r p l e a s u r e .
Notre
D a m e L aw
Schoo l ,
An ton -He rmann
C hrous t
N o t r e Dame,
I n d i a n a .
N o t e s ;
1..
S ee
A .
-H . C hrous t ,
Some
O bserva t ions on the O r ig in o f the
Term
' P h i l o s o p h e r ' ,
The N ew S c h o l a s t i c i s m , v o l .
28 .
n o .
4. (1 96 4 ) , pp .
423-434.
2. Diogenes
Laertius 1.12.
3. See also l a m b l i c h u s , Protrepticus ( S u m m a r i a ) ,
p.
4, lines 15 f f
(edit.H.Pitelli,
1888).
4 . l a m b l i c h u s , V i t a P y t h a g o r a e , pp .
58
f f . , closely
f o l l o w s
C i c e r o ' s a c c o u n t .
Hence i t ma y be assumed that l a m b l i c h u s relies o n Cicero for his i n f o r m a t i o n o r ,
pe rhaps ,
on a
source c lose
to that used by
C i c e r o .
It is not
i mpos s i b l e
that he
sa w the
original
work o f
H e r a c l ei d e s
o f
P o n t u s .
S ee
a l s o
l a m b l i c h u s « P r o t r e p t i c u s ,
p. 53,
lines
15 f f . ; A t he n ae us ,
De i pn os oph i s t a e
X I. 463DE;
D i o g e n es L a e r t i u s V I I I .
8. He re Diogenes
L a e r t i u s
credits the
story
to Sosicrates'
Success ion
of
P h i l o s o -
phers
rather
t h a n
to
H e r a c le id e s
o f
P o n t u s .
5.
l a m b l i c h u s , Protrepticus,
p. 53, line 5 - p. 54, line 5;
f r a g .
58, R o s e ;
f r a g .
12,
W a l z e r ; f r a g .
12, R o s s ; f r a g . 44, Dur in g (I . D u r i n g ,
Aristotle's
Protrepticus; A n
At tempt
a t R e c o n s t r u c t i o n ,
S t ud i a Graeca
e t
L a t i n a G o t h o b u r g e n s ia ,
vol.
XI I ,
G
teborg, 1961,
p. 6 7 ) ; f r a g . 42,
C hrous t
(A
0
- H » C h r o u s t , Aristotle iProtrepticus
-
A
Recon s t ruc t i on , N o t r e Dame, Ind i ana , 1964 , pp .18 f f .T i
6. It
will
be
no ted that Aristotle r e f e r s
to the
Olymp ic Games
in
Nicomachean
E thics 1099
a
3;
a n d that
St. P a u l ,
I
C o r i n t h i a n s 9 : 2 4 , l i k ew i s e u s e s
the
p a n e g y r i c
a n a l o g y ( the I s thmian
Games ) .
- S i n c e P y t h a g o r a s compares th e ph i l o s ophe r to the
f o n d v iwer of the
subl ime
spec t ac le (o r v i s i o n ) , he s hou l d have c a l l e d h i ms e l f
a <^i/ioO FQ//c^y (see Plato,
R e p u b l i c
475E, an d ibid, a t 476A) or , perhaps , a
(see
Aristotle, Nicomachean
E thics 1100 b 19-20) , rather t han a
7. It is not imposs ib le
that
the d e f i n i t i o n of the ph i l o s ophe r as the
lover
of
wisdom
goes back
to Plato, Phaedrus
278D:
Wise ( 6 o<po£ ) , I may no t call
them
(seil. ,
those whose
com pos i t i on s a r e b a s ed on t he knowledge o f
truth,
a n d w h o
are
ab le t o de f e n d or prove
t he m ) . F o r ^ t h i s
i s a n exa l t ed t e rm
wh ich
b e l on gs t o G od
a l o n e . B u t
'lovers
o f
wi sd om
1
(ö/ëï ïöïß,
)
is
their modes t a n d b e f i tt i n g
title.