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

About this Item

Title
The history of philosophy, in eight parts by Thomas Stanley.
Author
Stanley, Thomas, 1625-1678.
Publication
London :: Printed for Humphrey Moseley and Thomas Dring :
1656.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Philosophy, Ancient -- Early works to 1800.
Philosophy -- History.
Cite this Item
"The history of philosophy, in eight parts by Thomas Stanley." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A61287.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed May 3, 2024.

Pages

Page 41

CHAP. II.

His School and Philosophy.

BEing returned home to Eretria, he set up a School, and taught Philosophy there: the Elia.a School being thus trans∣fer'd to Eretria, was from thence forward called Eretriack.

In his School there was no order of place, no seats round a∣bout it; but, as every man chanced to be sitting, or standing, or walking, in the same postures they heard him.

He held, that there was but one vertue and good, reprehen∣ding those who asserted more; whence of one who held there were many Gods, he demanded ironically how many? and whe∣ther he thought there were more then a hundred?

He was of a versatile wit, and in composure of his speech a difficult adversary; he turned himselfe every way, and found something to say for every thing: He was very litigious, as An∣tisthenes in his successions affirmes, and used this question, What is not the same, is different from that with which it is not the same? Yes, To benefit is not the same with good, therefore good doth not benefit. He took away negative propositions, leaving only the affirmative; and of these he admitted the simple only; but rejected those which were not simple, calling them conjoyn∣ed and complexe.

Heraclides saith, he was a Platonick, and derided Dialectick. Hexinus asking, whether he had given over beating his Father? I neither did beat him, saith he, nor have given over. The other replyed, Either say yes or no, to dissolve the ambiguity. It is ridiculous, saith he, to follow your Lawes, when a man may withstand them in the very entrance.

He writ not, or composed any thing, because (saith Antigonus Carystius) he was of no certain opinion: yet, in dispute he was so vehement, that he many times went away with black and blew eyes.

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.