Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T20:33:30.338Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Hellenistic physics and metaphysics

from PART IV - PHYSICS AND METAPHYSICS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2008

David Sedley
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Keimpe Algra
Affiliation:
Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
Jonathan Barnes
Affiliation:
Université de Genève
Jaap Mansfeld
Affiliation:
Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
Malcolm Schofield
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The Stoics are leading champions of the continuum, the Epicureans its leading opponents. Any such division of Hellenistic schools into continuists and discontinuists provides a useful skeleton, but one which needs careful fleshing out.

The Stoic world – like the Aristotelian world before it – is a continuum both materially and structurally: materially because it contains no void gaps, structurally because it is infinitely divisible, or divisible at any point. The Epicurean world is discontinuous in both ways: materially to the extent that it consists of bodies separated by void gaps, structurally both because those bodies are themselves unbreakable (‘atoms’) and because at a still lower level there is an absolute unit of magnitude not capable of analysis into parts (the ‘minimum’).

In case such a characterization should suggest that the material and structural continua are inseparably united, it is important to appreciate that this was by no means assumed by the contemporaries and immediate forerunners of Epicurus and Zeno. Strato of Lampsacus, head of the Peripatos during the later part of their careers, viewed the world as materially discontinuous, thanks to the existence of minute interstitial pockets of void, but as structurally continuous. If, as seems probable, he gave matter a particulate structure, this was in order to account for change, mixture and the like, and his particles were in no obvious sense indivisible. The same can probably be said of the puzzling theory of ‘dissoluble lumps’ (αναρμοι ογκοι) proposed by the Platonist Heraclides of Pontus in the mid or late fourth century BC.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Algra, K. A. (1993) ‘Posidonius' conception of the extra-cosmic void: the evidence and the arguments’, Mnemosyne 46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Algra, K. A. (1995) Concepts of Space in Greek Thought, PhA 65 (Leiden).Google Scholar
Barnes, J. (1988b) ‘Bits and pieces’, in Barnes, & Mignucci, (1988a).Google Scholar
Bréhier, E. (1910) La Théorie des Incorporels dans l'Ancien Stoicisme (Paris; repr. 1962).Google Scholar
Brunschwig, J. (1977) ‘L'argument d'Epicure sur l'immutabilité du tout’, in Permanence de la philosophie: mélanges offerts à Joseph Moreau (Neuchâtel) ; repr. in Brunschwig, (1995).Google Scholar
Brunschwig, J. (1988a) ‘La théorie stoïcienne du genre suprême et l'ontologie platonicienne’, in Barnes & Mignucci (1988a).Google Scholar
Brunschwig, J. (1990b) ‘Sur une façon stoïcienne de ne pas être’, RThPh 122 ; repr. in Brunschwig, (1995).Google Scholar
Cherniss, H. F. (1976) Plutarch's Moralia XIII, part II, LCL (Cambridge, Mass./London).Google Scholar
Clay, D. (1973) ‘Epicurus' last will and testament’, AGPh 55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denyer, N. C. (1981a) ‘The atomism of Diodorus Cronus’, Prudentia 13.Google Scholar
Döring, K. (1992) ‘Die sog. kleinen Sokratiker und ihre Schulen bei Sextus Empiricus’, Elenchos 13.Google Scholar
Furley, D. J. (1967) Two Studies in the Greek Atomists, 1. Indivisible Magnitudes. 2. Aristotle and Epicurus on Voluntary Action (Princeton).Google Scholar
Giannantoni, G., ed. (1990) Socratis et Socraticorum reliquiae, 4 vols., Elenchos 18 (Naples).Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, V. (1972) ‘πάρξ∊iν et ὑφ∊στἁνα dans la philosophie stoïcienne’, REG 85.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, V. (1979) Le système stoïcien et l'idée de temps, 4th edn (Paris).Google Scholar
Gottschalk, H. B. (1980) Heraclides of Pontus (Oxford).Google Scholar
Graeser, A. (1975) Zenon von Kition, Positionen und Probleme (Berlin).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadot, P. (1969) ‘Zur Vorgeschichte des Begriffs “Existenz”, άπὑρξ∊ιν, bei den Stoikern’, AGP 13 (1969).Google Scholar
Hahm, D. E. (1977) The Origins of Stoic Cosmology (Columbus Ohio).Google Scholar
Hahm, D. E. (1985) ‘The Stoic theory of change’, in Epp (1985).Google Scholar
Hunt, H. A. K. (1976) A Physical Interpretation of the Universe. The Doctrines of Zeno the Stoic (Melbourne).Google Scholar
Krämer, H. J. (1971) Platonismus und Hellenistische Philosophie (Berlin/New York).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapidge, M. (1973) ‘Archai and stoicheia: a problem in Stoic cosmology’, Phronesis 18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapidge, M. (1978) ‘Stoic cosmology’, in Rist (1978).Google Scholar
Lloyd, A. C. (1971) ‘Grammar and metaphysics in the Stoa’, in Long (1971a).Google Scholar
Long, A. A. (1971c) ‘Language and thought in Stoicism’, in Long, (1971a).Google Scholar
Long, A. A. (1975–6) ‘Heraclitus and Stoicism’, Philosophia 5/6 ; repr. in Long, (1996).Google Scholar
Long, A. A. (1977) ‘Chance and natural law in Epicureanism’, Phronesis 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, A. A. & Sedley, D. N., edd. (1987) The Hellenistic Philosophers, 2 vols.: i. Translations of the principal sources with philosophical commentary; ii. Greek and Latin texts with notes and bibliography (Cambridge, various reprints).Google Scholar
Mau, J. (1954a) Zum Problem des Infinitesimalen bei den Antiken Atomisten (Berlin).Google Scholar
Mignucci, M. (1988) ‘The Stoic notion of relatives’, in Barnes, & Mignucci, (1988a).Google Scholar
Montoneri, L., ed. (1984) I Megarici: studio storico-critico e traduzione delle testimonianze antiche (Catania).Google Scholar
Purinton, J. S. (1994) ‘Magnifying Epicurean minima’, AncPhil 14.Google Scholar
Rieth, O. (1933) Grundbegriffe der stoischen Ethik: Eine traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung, Problemata 9 (Berlin).Google Scholar
Rist, J. M. (1969b) ‘Categories and their uses’, in Rist, (1969a) ; repr. in Long, (1971a).Google Scholar
Sambursky, S. (1959) Physics of the Stoics (London).Google Scholar
Schofield, M. (1988) ‘The retrenchable present’, in Barnes, & Mignucci, (1988a).Google Scholar
Schubert, A. (1994) Untersuchungen zur stoischen Bedeutungslehre (Göttingen).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. N. (1976b) ‘Epicurus and the mathematicians of Cyzicus’, CErc 6.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. N. (1982a) ‘Two conceptions of vacuum’, Phronesis 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. N. (1982b) ‘The Stoic criterion of identity’, Phronesis 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. N. (1985) ‘The Stoic theory of universals’, in Epp (1985).Google Scholar
Sedley, D. N. (1988) ‘Epicurean anti-reductionism’, in Barnes, & Mignucci, (1988a).Google Scholar
Solmsen, F. (1961) ‘Greek philosophy and the discovery of the nerves’, MH 18 ; repr. in Solmsen, (1968–82) 1.Google Scholar
Sorabji, R. (1983) Time, Creation and the Continuum (London).Google Scholar
Todd, R. B. (1978) ‘Monism and immanence: foundations of Stoic physics’, in Rist, (1978b).Google Scholar
Vallance, J. T. (1990) The Lost Theory of Asclepiades of Bithynia (Oxford).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, G. (1945) L'évolution de la doctrine du pneuma du Stoicisme à S. Augustin (Paris/Louvain).Google Scholar
Vlastos, G. (1965) ‘Minimal parts in Epicurean atomism’, Isis 56 ; repr. in Graham, (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×