Vitae philosophorum

Diogenes Laertius

Diogenes Laertius. Hicks, R. D., editor. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd., 1925.

Good is divided into four kinds. One is the possessor of virtue, whom we affirm to be individually good. Another is virtue itself and justice; these we affirm to be good. A third includes such things as food, suitable exercises and drugs. The fourth kind which we affirm to be good includes the arts of flute-playing, acting and the like. Thus there are four kinds of good: the possession of virtue; virtue itself; thirdly, food and beneficial exercises; lastly, flute-playing, acting, and the poetic art.

Whatever is is either evil or good or indifferent. We call that evil which is capable of invariably doing harm; for

V1_367
instance, bad judgement and folly and injustice and the like. The contraries of these things are good. But the things which can sometimes benefit and sometimes harm, such as walking and sitting and eating, or which can neither do any benefit nor harm at all, these are things indifferent, neither good nor evil. Thus all things whatever are either good, or evil, or neither good nor evil.

Good order in the state falls under three heads. First, if the laws are good, we say that there is good government. Secondly, if the citizens obey the established laws, we also call this good government. Thirdly, if, without the aid of laws, the people manage their affairs well under the guidance of customs and institutions, we call this again good government. Thus three forms of good government may exist, (1) when the laws are good, (2) when the existing laws are obeyed, (3) when the people live under salutary customs and institutions.

Disorder in a state has three forms. The first arises when the laws affecting citizens and strangers are alike bad,

the second when the existing laws are not obeyed, and the third when there is no law at all. Thus the state is badly governed when the laws are bad or not obeyed, or lastly, when there is no law.

Contraries are divided into three species. For instance, we say that goods are contrary to evils, as justice to injustice, wisdom to folly, and the like. Again, evils are contrary to evils, prodigality is contrary to niggardliness, and to be unjustly tortured is the contrary of being justly tortured, and so with similar evils. Again, heavy is the contrary of light,

V1_369
quick of slow, black of white, and these pairs are contraries, while they are neither good nor evil.

Thus, of contraries, some are opposed as goods to evils, others as evils to evils, and others, as things which are neither good nor evil, are opposed to one another.

There are three kinds of goods, those which can be exclusively possessed, those which can be shared with others, and those which simply exist. To the first division, namely, those which can be exclusively possessed, belong such things as justice and health. To the next belong all those which, though they cannot be exclusively possessed, can be shared with others. Thus we cannot possess the absolute good, but we can participate in it. The third division includes those goods the existence of which is necessary, though we can neither possess them exclusively nor participate in them. The mere existence of worth and justice is a good; and these things cannot be shared or had in exclusive possession, but must simply exist. Of goods, then, some are possessed exclusively, some shared, and others merely subsist.

Counsel is divided under three heads. One is taken from past time, one from the future, and the third from the present. That from past time consists of examples; for instance, what the Lacedaemonians suffered through trusting others. Counsel drawn from the present is to show, for instance, that the walls are weak, the men cowards, and the supplies running short. Counsel from the future is. for instance, to urge that we should not wrong the embassies by suspicions, lest the fair fame of Hellas be stained. Thus counsel is derived from the past, the present and the future.

V1_371

Vocal sound falls into two divisions according as it is animate or inanimate. The voice of living things is animate sound; notes of instruments and noises are inanimate. And of the animate voice part is articulate, part inarticulate, that of men being articulate speech, that of the animals inarticulate. Thus vocal sound is either animate or inanimate.

Whatever exists is either divisible or indivisible. Of divisible things some are divisible into similar and others into dissimilar parts. Those things are indivisible which cannot be divided and are not compounded of elements, for example, the unit, the point and the musical note; whereas those which have constituent parts, for instance, syllables, concords in music, animals, water, gold, are divisible.

If they are composed of similar parts, so that the whole does not differ from the part except in bulk, as water, gold and all that is fusible, and the like, then they are termed homogeneous. But whatever is composed of dissimilar parts, as a house and the like, is termed heterogeneous. Thus all things whatever are either divisible or indivisible, and of those which are divisible some are homogeneous, others heterogeneous in their parts.

Of existing things some are absolute and some are called relative. Things said to exist absolutely are those which need nothing else to explain them, as man, horse, and all other animals.

For none of these gains by explanation. To those which are called relative belong all which stand in need of some explanation, as that which is greater than something or quicker than something, or more beautiful and the like. For the greater implies a less, and the quicker is quicker than something. Thus existing

V1_373
things are either absolute or relative. And in this way, according to Aristotle, Plato used to divide the primary conceptions also.

There was also another man named Plato, a philosopher of Rhodes, a pupil of Panaetius, as is stated by Seleucus the grammarian in his first book On Philosophy; another a Peripatetic and pupil of Aristotle; and another who was a pupil of Praxiphanes; and lastly, there was Plato, the poet of the Old Comedy.

V1_375

The foregoing is the best account of Plato that we were able to compile after a diligent examination of the authorities. He was succeeded by Speusippus, an Athenian and son of Eurymedon, who belonged to the deme of Myrrhinus, and was the son of Plato’s sister Potone. He was head of the school for eight years beginning in the 108th Olympiad.[*](348-344 b.c.) He set up statues of the Graces in the shrine of the Muses erected by Plato in the Academy. He adhered faithfully to Plato’s doctrines. In character, however, he was unlike him, being prone to anger and easily overcome by pleasures. At any rate there is a story that in a fit of passion he flung his favourite dog into the well, and that pleasure was the sole motive for his journey to Macedonia to be present at the wedding-feast of Casander.

It was said that among those who attended his lectures were the two women who had been pupils of Plato, Lastheneia of Mantinea and Axiothea of Phlius. And at the time Dionysius in a letter says derisively, We may judge of your wisdom by the Arcadian girl who is your pupil. And, whereas Plato exempted from fees all who came to him, you

V1_377
levy tribute on them and collect it whether they will or no.[*](Romance seems to have been busy with the life of Speusippus. Athenaeus, vii. 279 e, quotes from the same forged letter of Dionysius to Speusippus bringing similar charges.) According to Diodorus in the first book of his Memorabilia, Speusippus was the first to discern the common element in all studies and to bring them into connexion with each other so far as that was possible.

And according to Caeneus he was the first to divulge what Isocrates called the secrets of his art, and the first to devise the means by which fagots of firewood are rendered portable.

When he was already crippled by paralysis, he sent a message to Xenocrates entreating him to come and take over the charge of the school.[*](The most trustworthy account of what happened when Xenocrates was elected is furnished by Index Academicus, pp. 38 sq. ed. Mekler.) They say that, as he was being conveyed to the Academy in a tiny carriage, he met and saluted Diogenes, who replied, Nay, if you can endure to live in such a plight as this, I decline to return your greeting. At last in old age he became so despondent that he put an end to his life. Here follows my epigram upon him[*](Anth. Pal. viii. 101.):

Had I not learnt that Speusippus would die thus, no one would have persuaded me to say that he was surely not of Plato’s blood; for else he would never have died in despair for a trivial cause.

Plutarch in the Lives of Lysander and Sulla makes his malady to have been morbus pedicularis.[*](Cf. supra, iii. 40.) That his body wasted away is affirmed by Timotheus in his book On Lives. Speusippus, he says, meeting a rich man who was in love with one who was no beauty, said to him, Why, pray, are you in such sore need of him? For ten talents I will find you a more handsome bride.

V1_379

He has left behind a vast store of memoirs and numerous dialogues, among them:

  • Aristippus the Cyrenaic.
  • On Wealth, one book.
  • On Pleasure, one book.
  • On Justice,
  • On Philosophy,
  • On Friendship,
  • On the Gods,
  • The Philosopher,
  • A Reply to Cephalus,
  • Cephalus,
  • Clinomachus or Lysias,
  • The Citizen,
  • Of the Soul,
  • A Reply to Gryllus,
  • Aristippus,
  • Criticism of the Arts, each in one book.
  • Memoirs, in the form of dialogues.
  • Treatise on System, in one book.
  • Dialogues on the Resemblances in Science, in ten books.
  • Divisions and Hypotheses relating to the Resemblances.
  • On Typical Genera and Species.
  • A Reply to the Anonymous Work.
  • Eulogy of Plato.
  • Epistles to Dion, Dionysius and Philip.
  • On Legislation.
  • The Mathematician.
  • Mandrobolus.
  • Lysias.
  • Definitions.
  • Arrangements of Commentaries.
  • V1_381

    They comprise in all 43,475 lines. To him Timonides addresses his narrative in which he related the achievements of Dion and Bion.[*](Nothing is known of any such Bion having taken part in the expedition of Dion against Syracuse. There may be an error in the text arising from dittography.) Favorinus also in the second book of his Memorabilia relates that Aristotle purchased the works of Speusippus for three talents.

    There was another Speusippus, a physician of Alexandria, of the school of Herophilus.

    Xenocrates, the son of Agathenor, was a native of Chalcedon. He was a pupil of Plato from his earliest youth; moreover he accompanied him on his journey to Sicily. He was naturally slow and clumsy. Hence Plato, comparing him to Aristotle, said, The one needed a spur, the other a bridle. And again, See what an ass I am training and what a horse he has to run against. However, Xenocrates was in all besides dignified and grave of demeanour, which made Plato say to him continually, Xenocrates, sacrifice to the Graces. He spent most of his time in the Academy; and whenever he was going to betake himself to the city, it is said that all the noisy rabble and hired porters made way for him as he passed.

    And that once the notorious Phryne tried to make his acquaintance and, as if she were being chased by some people, took refuge under his roof; that he admitted her out of ordinary humanity and, there being but one small couch in the room, permitted her to share it with him, and at last, after

    V1_383
    many importunities, she retired without success, telling those who inquired that he whom she quitted was not a man but a statue. Another version of the story is that his pupils induced Laïs to invade his couch; and that so great was his endurance that he many times submitted to amputation and cautery. His words were entirely worthy of credit, so much so that, although it was illegal for witnesses to give evidence unsworn, the Athenians allowed Xenocrates alone to do so.

    Furthermore, he was extremely independent; at all events, when Alexander sent him a large sum of money, he took three thousand Attic drachmas and sent back the rest to Alexander, whose needs, he said, were greater than his own, because he had a greater number of people to keep. Again, he would not accept the present sent him by Antipater, as Myronianus attests in his Parallels. And when he had been honoured at the court of Dionysius with a golden crown as the prize for his prowess in drinking at the Feast of Pitchers, he went out and placed it on the statue of Hermes just as he had been accustomed to place there garlands of flowers. There is a story that, when he was sent, along with others also, on an embassy to Philip, his colleagues, being bribed, accepted Philip’s invitations to feasts and talked with him. Xenocrates did neither the one nor the other. Indeed on this account Philip declined to see him.

    Hence, when the envoys returned to Athens, they complained that Xenocrates had accompanied them without rendering any service. Thereupon the people were ready to fine him. But when he told them that now more than ever they ought to consider the interests of the state—for, said he, Philip knew

    V1_385
    that the others had accepted his bribes, but that he would never win me over—then the people paid him double honours. And afterwards Philip said that, of all who had arrived at his court, Xenocrates was the only man whom he could not bribe. Moreover, when he went as envoy to Antipater to plead for Athenians taken prisoners in the Lamian war,[*](322 b.c.) being invited to dine with Antipater, he quoted to him the following lines[*](Hom. Od. x. 383-5.):
    O Circe! what righteous man would have the heart to taste meat and drink ere he had redeemed his company and beheld them face to face?
    and so pleased Antipater with his ready wit that he at once released them.

    When a little sparrow was pursued by a hawk and rushed into his bosom, he stroked it and let it go, declaring that a suppliant must not be betrayed. When bantered by Bion, he said he would make no reply. For neither, said he, does tragedy deign to answer the banter of comedy. To some one who had never learnt either music or geometry or astronomy, but nevertheless wished to attend his lectures, Xenocrates said, Go your ways, for you offer philosophy nothing to lay hold of. Others report him as saying, It is not to me that you come for the carding of a fleece.

    When Dionysius told Plato that he would lose his head, Xenocrates, who was present, pointed to his own and added, No man shall touch it till he cut off mine. They say too that, when Antipater came to Athens and greeted him, he did not address him in return until he had finished what he was saying. He was singularly free from pride; more than once

    V1_387
    a day he would retire into himself, and he assigned, it is said, a whole hour to silence.

    He left a very large number of treatises, poems and addresses, of which I append a list:

  • On Nature, six books.
  • On Wisdom, six books.
  • On Wealth, one book.
  • The Arcadian, one book.
  • On the Indeterminate, one book.