The history of philosophy, in eight parts by Thomas Stanley.

CHAP. I.

Of PHILOSOPHY in generall, and particularly of DIALECTICK.

a 1.1 WISDOME is the Science of things divine and humane; Philosophy is the exercitation of convenient Art: Conve∣nient is only and supream vertue. Of Vertues in the most generall sence there are three kinds, Naturall, Morall, Rationall; for which cause Philosophy likewise hath three parts, Physick, E∣thick, Logick: Physick, when we enquire concerning the World, and the things in the world: Ethick is employ'd about humane life: Logick is that part which concerns reason, which is also called Dialectick.b 1.2 Thus Zeno the Cittiean first divided it in his book of Speech, and Chrysippus in his first book of Speech, and in his first of Physicks; and Apollodorus Ephillus in his first book of Introductions into Doctrines; and Eudromus in his morall Institutions; and Diogenes the Babylonian, and Possidonius. These parts Apol∣lodorus calleth Places; C••rysippus and Eudromus species, others ge∣nus's.

That Logick is a part of Philosophy distinct from the rest,

(wherein all the Stoicks agree) is proved by two arguments•• the first this:c 1.3 Every thing which useth another; if that which the thing using, useth, be neither part nor particle, nor part of part of any other, it must be part or particle of the thing using; as medicine useth the art of prescribing diet, which art being neither part nor particle of any other, is consequently a part or particle of Medicine; of part, as to the cure, of particle, as to the practise.

d 1.4 Philosophy; is conversant about Logick; Logick therefore is either a part or particle of Philosophy; but, a particle it is not, for it is not a part either of the Contemplative or the Active. That which is a particle of any thing, ought to have the same matter and scope, with that whereof it is a part: Logick hath neither of these common with Active Philosophy; the matter whereof is humane things, and moderation of Appetite, the common scope, what in them is to be embraced or shunned: but, the matter of Logick is propositions, the scope, to demonstrate by a composure of propositions, that which necessarily falls out upon the collection. Neither is Logick a part of the Contem∣plative, the matter whereof is things divine, the end, contem∣plation of them: now, if it be not a part, either of the Contem∣plative or the Active, it is not a particle of Philosophy, but e∣qually separate from both these, and consequently it must be a part of it.

e 1.5 The second Argument is thus. No Art frameth its own In∣struments, if therefore Philosophy make Logick, it is not its In∣strument, but part thereof.

f 1.6 Philosophy, is by some compared to a field which produceth all manner of fruit; Physick to the soil and tall trees, Ethick to to the mature pleasant fruit, Logick to the strong fence. Others liken it to an Egge; Ethick to the yolk, which some affirm to bee the Chicken; Physick to the white, which is the nourishment of the Chicken; Logick to the outside or shell, Possidonius, (because the parts of Philosophy are inseparable from one another, but plants are distinct from the fruits, as walls from hedges) chuseth rather to compare Philosophy to a living creature, Physick to blood and flesh, Logick, to bones and nerves, Ethick to the soul. (Thus Sextus Empiricus, by whom, perhaps, Laertius is to be corrected, who saith, They likened Ethick to the Flesh, Physick to the Soul) Lastly, they compare Philosophy to a City, well fortified and govern'd according to Reason.

g 1.7 Some affirm, that none of these parts are distinct from the rest, but, all intermingled with one another, for which reason, they deliver them confusedly. The greater part place Logick first, Ethick next, Physick last; because the minde ought first to be fortified for the keeping of those things which are committed to it; so, as it be not easily expugnable. The Dialectick place is

a fortification for the minde. Secondly, to describe the contem∣plation of manners, that they may be reformed, which is safely undertaken, when the Logicall power is first laid down. Lastly, to induce the contemplation of Nature, for that is more divine, and requireth a more profound attention. This methodh 1.8 Pit∣tarch affirmes to have been observed by Chrysippus, adding that of Physick, the last part, is that which treateth of God; for which reason they call the precepts of Religion 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It seemes therefore, that there is some mistake in Laertius, who of those who place Logick first, Physick next, and Ethick next, and Ethick last, citeth Zeno in his Book of Speech, and Chrysippus, and Archedemus, and Ea∣dromus. But Diogenes the Ptolemaean (continueth he) begins with Ethick: Apollodorus puts Ethick in the second place; Panaetius and Possidonius begin with Physick, as Phanias, companion of Possidonius affirms, in his first of Possidonius's dissertations.

i 1.9 Of Logick, Cleanthes assigneth six parts, Dialectick, Rhetorick, Ethick, Politick, Physick, Theologick: Some affirm, these are not parts of Logick, but of Philosophy it selfe: so Zeno of Tursis. The Logicall part is by some divided into two Sciences, Rhetorick and Dialectick; some add the definitive part, some divide the definitive part into that which concernes invention of truth (by which the differences of Phantasies are directed) and that which concernes knowledge of truth; for things are comprehended by notions.

k 1.10 Rhetorick is the science of well speaking, by dilating upon the thing comprehended. Dialectick is the science of well speaking, (that is true and consentaneous) or well disputing by question and answer. It is defined by Possidonius, the science of true, false, and neuter.

l 1.11 Rhetorick is of three kinds, deliberative, judiciall, demonstra∣tive: The parts of Rhetorick are Invention, Stile, Disposition, Pro∣nunciation: Rhetoricall Speech is divided into Proem, Narration, Confutation, Epilogue.

m 1.12 Dialectick is necessary, and a virtue within its species, con∣taining other vertues; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a Science whereby we are taught when to assent, and when not; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a firm reason, whereby we resist appearances, and are not led away by them: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a fortitude of reason, which keeps us from being tran∣sported with the adverse opinion: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a habit directing phantasies to right reason.

n 1.13 Dialectick is a Science or certain comprehension, or a habit, not erring by reason in reception of phantasies; but, without Dialectick, a wise man cannot be infallible in reason; for by this, we discern the true, false, and probable, and distinguish the ambiguous.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Plut. de plac. Phil. 1. 1.
• b 1.2

  Laert.
• c 1.3

  Ammonius in Categ.
• d 1.4

  Philop. in lib. 1. Anal. prior.
• e 1.5

  Ammonius in Categor.
• f 1.6

  Sext. Empir. adv. Log. 1.
• g 1.7

  Laert.
• h 1.8

  De plac. Phil.
• i 1.9

  Laert.
• k 1.10

  Laert.
• l 1.11

  Laert.
• m 1.12

  Laert.
• n 1.13

  Laert.