Stoic Unformed Substance and Old Academic Ontology
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Stoic Unformed Substance and Old Academic Ontology Martin Skipper University College London 2009 PhD. 1 Stoic Unformed Substance and Old Academic Ontology I, Martin Skipper, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 2 Stoic Unformed Substance and Old Academic Ontology Abstract: This thesis examines the influences on the Stoics‟ development of their material principle. The thesis argues that the reasons for the Stoics‟ conceiving of a material principle as they did actually have their origins in metaphysical speculation rather than physics. While the natural philosophy of the Ionians, as interpreted by Aristotle and his followers, no doubt furnished the intellectual background for a persisting material substrate of all sensible change, it is in fact the concerns of Plato and his early followers with the non-sensible that exert the strongest influence on the Stoics. The thesis examines the concepts of space and matter in the Timaeus ultimately rejecting this work of physics as central to the development of Stoic thought on matter. Rather it is the metaphysical doctrines of Plato and his successors, and the use they make of an incorporeal matter, that exerted the greatest influence on the Stoics and their material principle. The interpretation of Platonic metaphysics argued for in the thesis, based on the Unwritten Doctrines and the Old Academy‟s teachings, challenges the majority opinion of the English speaking community; and as a result offers a novel understanding of the relationship of Stoicism to Platonic metaphysics. The thesis concludes that it is likely that the early Stoics developed their doctrine of a material substrate in the particular way they did because of the tendency in the Old Academy to simplify the doctrines of Plato. This simplifying tendency comes to a head in the early Stoics with the ultimate reduction of the Old Academic system of hypostases, making use of active and passive principles at various levels of reality, finally ending in one level of reality and a simple two principle system. 3 Stoic Unformed Substance and Old Academic Ontology Acknowledgements: I would like to take this space to offer my thanks to all those who have made the completion of this thesis possible. There are too many friends and colleagues to mention who have so kindly offered their time and support to me over the past four years. However special mention must of course be reserved by supervisor Professor Robert W. Sharples who has committed so much time and energy to mentoring me in the production of this thesis. It is not too dramatic to say that without his input this thesis would not have seen the light of day. I am deeply indebted to his wisdom and patience. I would also like to thank my brother, Richard, and his wife Megan for being a source of support and encouragement throughout this time and bringing a source of welcome distraction with the birth of my niece Mair. Of all the friends who have selflessly, and unwittingly, lent their ears to convoluted arguments about Greek metaphysics I must mention Mark Nayler, who has sat through innumerable readings of this topic, and Julian Hudson who has always unflinchingly offered his support of this endeavour. I of course cannot end any acknowledgements without mentioning my parents Richard and Maria who have been a source of constant support and inspiration. Despite the input of all these people it goes without saying that any errors contained within these pages are entirely my own. 4 Stoic Unformed Substance and Old Academic Ontology Contents Introduction 7 Chapter One: 1.1 Matter 24 1.2.1 The Stoic Apoios Ousia 31 1.2.2 Apoios Ousia and its Relation to the Active Principle 45 1.2.3 Blending Through and Through 65 Chapter Two: 2.1 The Timaeus 78 2.1.1 The Elements 80 2.1.2 The Receptacle of Becoming 90 2.1.3 Concluding Remarks about the Timaeus 95 2.2 Aristotle and Matter 99 Chapter Three: 3.1 Plato‟s Late Ontology 109 3.1.1 The Parmenides 112 3.1.2 The Philebus 121 3.1.3 The Metaphysics as it Stands 128 3.2 The Unwritten Doctrines 132 3.2.1 The Written and Unwritten Doctrines 139 3.3 The Old Academy 145 3.3.1 Formal Level 149 3.3.2 Intermediate Levels 154 3.3.3 The Sensible Level 162 3.4 The Stoics 171 3.5 Polemo 178 5 Stoic Unformed Substance and Old Academic Ontology Chapter Four: 4.1 The Intellectual Climate of the Time 184 4.1.1 Heraclitus 185 4.1.2 Ekpyrosis 188 4.1.3 Fire, Matter and God 194 4.2 Biology and the Mythic Account 199 4.3 The Impact of the Natural Philosophers and Medical Theory 208 Conclusion 214 Bibliography 220 List of Abbreviations 233 6 Stoic Unformed Substance and Old Academic Ontology Introduction: The purpose of this thesis is two-fold: firstly to examine and explain the influence of Old Academic ontology on the early Stoics - Zeno, Cleanthes and Chrysippus – and its relationship to their particular understanding of the material principle – the apoios ousia. Secondly, and in order to achieve the first aim, to re-examine Plato‟s late physics in light of the teachings of two of his students (Speusippus and Xenocrates) and in light of the Unwritten Doctrines as reported by Aristotle. In answering the question of what is responsible for the world‟s materiality and corporeality I will look at the interpretations and uses made by the Stoics‟ predecessors of the concept of a material principle as an “out of which”. In looking at matter it is impossible to avoid discussions of the Stoics‟ other principle –the active, or god. The two are closely related and so while the focus of the thesis is matter there will necessarily be discussion of matter‟s concomitant in the analysis of Chrysippus‟ predecessors‟ philosophies and the nature of this relationship will prove key to our understanding. It will be shown that it is likely that the main influence on the Stoics for their development and characterisation of prime matter, so familiar to our minds, can be found primarily in the teachings of Speusippus and Xenocrates; hence matter, as conceived by the Stoics, will be shown to be the culmination of a legacy starting with the mathematical metaphysics of the Pythagoreans and reaching them via the incorporeal principles of Plato. There are numerous candidates for the main influence on the Stoics‟ development of their two principles, the active and passive bodies that constitute the universe and all that is in it, and the relationship that holds between them: 1) The pre-Socratics, especially Heraclitus1. This is the influence the early Stoics themselves indicated most strongly but has been convincingly challenged by Long2. 2) The written teachings of Plato, especially the Timaeus – an influence accepted positively by Long and Sedley: “His (Chrysippus‟) borrowings from the Timaeus are obvious.3” 3) The Unwritten Doctrines and their interpretation in the Old Academy – specifically Speusippus and Xenocrates: the view to be argued for in this thesis. 4) Zeno‟s reported teacher at the Academy: Polemo. A position argued for strongly by Sedley 1 Aristotle is our main source of information about the pre-Socratics but there is no reason to suppose that this was the case in the Hellenistic period. The access the Stoics had to Heraclitus‟ work will be discussed in chapter four. 2 Long 1996a. 3 Cf. L&S vol. 1, p. 278. 7 Stoic Unformed Substance and Old Academic Ontology in his “The Origins of Stoic God.” 5) Aristotle‟s writings on the subject, especially the Metaphysics and Physics. This view is forcefully argued by Hahm4, and accepted to a lesser degree by Long5, but argued just as vociferously against by Sandbach6. There is also the suggestion of influence from the Near East and Semitic tradition, a possibility discussed by Hahm7 but in the end rejected through lack of evidence. I will not, therefore, entertain this possibility as it has already been sufficiently discussed and lacks any significant plausibility. The first option, that of influence through the pre-Socratic tradition, will be discussed at the end of the thesis as, while their materialistic theories undeniably have many resonances with Stoicism, the idea of them as a significant influence on the philosophical development of Stoicism seems unlikely. Not, though, for the reasons given by Curd8 that neither Plato nor Aristotle paid much attention to Heraclitus, since, on the contrary, he seems to have been a strong influence on Plato‟s epistemology and a major driving factor behind his ontology and was certainly seen as a significant thinker by Aristotle9; but rather because the relationship of early Stoicism to Heraclitus is more of retrograde ascription by them of their theories onto Heraclitus in order to support their theories by appeal to venerable antiquity10. However, since “influence” does not simply mean “adoption” the discussion of pre- Socratic theories, and Heraclitus in particular, will help to place the main theme of the thesis in the context of the intellectual development of philosophy in the post- Socratic environment11. Option two, that it is primarily through the written work of Plato and especially the Timaeus that the Stoics‟ physics developed, was championed indirectly in antiquity by Antiochus of Ascalon and in modern times, as noted above, by Long and Sedley. Since the Timaeus was probably the most influential work on cosmology from 4 Hahm 1977. 5 Long 1998. 6 Sandbach 1985. On pg.