<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:A.aristippus_4</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:A.aristippus_4</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:base="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><body xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><div type="textpart" subtype="alphabetic_letter" n="A"><div type="textpart" subtype="entry" xml:id="aristippus-bio-4" n="aristippus_4"><head><persName xml:lang="la"><surname full="yes">Aristippus</surname></persName></head><p>(<persName xml:lang="grc"><surname full="yes">Ἀρίστιππος</surname></persName>), son of Aritades,
      born at Cyrene, and founder of the Cyrenaic School of Philosophy, came over to Greece to be
      present at the Olympic games, where he fell in with Ischomachus the agriculturist (whose
      praises are the subject of Xenophon's <hi rend="ital">Occonomicus</hi>), and by his
      description was filled with so ardent a desire to see Socrates, that he went to Athens for the
      purpose (Plut. <hi rend="ital">de Curios.</hi> 2), and remained with him almost up to the time
      of his execution, <date when-custom="-399">B. C. 399</date>. Diodorus (<bibl n="Diod. 15.76">15.76</bibl>) gives <date when-custom="-366">B. C. 366</date> as the date of Aristippus, which
      agrees very well with the facts which we know about him, and with the statement (Schol. <hi rend="ital">ad Aristoph. Plut.</hi> 179), that Lais, the courtezan with whom he was intimate,
      was born <date when-custom="-421">B. C. 421</date>.</p><p>Though a disciple of Socrates, he wandered both in principle and practice very far from the
      teaching and example of his great master. He was luxurious in his mode of living; he indulged
      in sensual gratifications, and the society of the notorious Lais; he took money for his
      teaching (being the first of the disciples of Socrates who did so, <bibl n="D. L. 2.65">D. L.
       2.65</bibl>), and avowed to his instructor that he resided in a foreign land in order to
      escape the trouble of mixing in the politics of his native city. (Xen. <hi rend="ital">Mlem.</hi> 2.1.) He passed part of his life at the court of Dionysius, tyrant of Syracuse,
      and is also said to have been taken prisoner by Artaphernes, the satrap who drove the Spartans
      from Rhodes <date when-custom="-396">B. C. 396</date>. (<bibl n="Diod. 14.79">Diod. 14.79</bibl>;
      see Brucker, <hi rend="ital">Hist. Crit. Phil.</hi> 2.2, 3.) He appears, however, at last to
      have returned to Cyrene, and there he spent his old age. The anecdotes which are told of him,
      and of which we find a most tedious number in Diogenes Laertius (2.65, &amp;c.), by no means
      give us the notion of a person who was the mere slave of his passions, but rather of one who
      took a pride in extracting enjoyment from all circumstances of every kind, and in controlling
      adversity and prosperity alike. They illustrate and confirm the two statements of Horace
       (<bibl n="Hor. Ep. 1.1.18">Hor. Ep. 1.1. 18</bibl>), that to observe the precepts of
      Aristippus is "<hi rend="ital">mihi res, non me rebus subjungere,</hi>" and (1.17. 23) that, "
       <hi rend="ital">omnis Aristippum deceit color et status et res.</hi>" Thus when reproached
      for his love of bodily indulgences, he answered, that there was no shame in enjoying them, but
      that it would be disgraceful if he could not at any time give them up. When Dionysius,
      provoked at some of his remarks, ordered him to take the lowest place at table, he said, " You
      wish to dignify the seat." Whether he was prisoner to a satrap, or grossly insulted and even
      spit upon by a tyrant, or enjoying the pleasures of a banquet, or reviled for faithlessness to
      Socrates by his fellow-pupils, he maintained the same calm temper. To Xenophon and Plato he
      was very obnoxious, as we see from the Memorabilia (<hi rend="ital">l.c.</hi>), where he
      maintains an odious discussion against Socrates in defence of voluptuous enjoyment, and from
      the Phaedo (p. 59c), where his absence at the death of Socrates, though he was only at Aegina,
      200 stadia from Athens, is doubtless mentioned as a reproach. (See Stallbaum's note.)
      Aristotle, too, calls him a sophist (<hi rend="ital">Metaphys.</hi> 2.2), and notices a story
      of Plato speaking to him with rather undue vehemence, and of his replying with calmness. (<hi rend="ital">Rhet.</hi> 2.23.) He imparted his doctrine to his daughter Arete, by whom it was
      communicated to her son, the younger Aristippus (hence called <foreign xml:lang="grc">Μητροδίδακτος</foreign>), and by him it is said to have been reduced to a system.
      Laertius, on the authority of Sotion (<date when-custom="-205">B. C. 205</date>) and Panactius
       (<date when-custom="-143">B. C. 143</date>), gives a long list of books whose authorship is
      ascribed to Aristippus, though he also says that Sosicrates of Rhodes (<date when-custom="-255">B.
       C. 255</date>) states, that he wrote nothing. Among these are treatises <foreign xml:lang="grc">Περὶ Παιδείας, Περὶ Ἀρετῆς, Περὶ Τύχης</foreign>, and many
      others. Some epistles attributed to him are <pb n="299"/> deservedly rejected as forgeries by
      Bentley. (<hi rend="ital">Dissertation on Phalaris,</hi> &amp;c. p. 104.) One of these is to
      Arete, and its spuriousness is proved, among other arguments, by the occurrence in it of the
      name of a city near Cyrene, <foreign xml:lang="grc">Βερενίκη</foreign>, which must have
      been given by the Macedonians, in whose dialect <foreign xml:lang="grc">β</foreign> stands
      for <foreign xml:lang="grc">φ</foreign>, so that the name is equivalent to <foreign xml:lang="grc">Φερενίκη</foreign>, <hi rend="ital">the victorious.</hi></p><p>We shall now give a short view of the leading doctrines of the earlier Cyrenaic school in
      general, though it is not to be understood that the system was wholly or even chiefly drawn up
      by the elder Aristippus; but, as it is impossible from the loss of contemporary documents to
      separate the parts which belong to each of the Cyrenaic philosophers, it is better here to
      combine them all. From the fact pointed out by Ritter (<hi rend="ital">Geschichte der
       Philosophie,</hi> 7.3), that Aristotle chooses Eudoxus rather than Aristippus as the
      representative of the doctrine that Pleasure is the summum bonum (<hi rend="ital">Eth.
       Nic.</hi> 10.2), it seems probable that but little of the Cyrenaic system is due to the
      founder of the school. <note anchored="true" place="margin">* Ritter believes that Aristippus is hinted at
        (<hi rend="ital">Eth. Nic.</hi> 10.6), where Aristotle refutes the opinion, that happiness
       consists in amusement, and speaks of persons holding such a dogma in order to recommend
       themselves to the favour of tyrants.</note></p><p>The Cyrenaics despised Physics, and limited their inquiries to Ethics, though they included
      under that term a much wider range of science than can fairly be reckoned as belonging to it.
      So, too, Aristotle accuses Aristippus of neglecting mathematics, as a study not concerned with
      good and evil, which, he said, are the objects even of the carpenter and tanner. (<hi rend="ital">Metaphys.</hi> 2.2.) They divided Philosophy into five parts, viz. the study of
      (1) Objects of Desire and Aversion, (2) Feelings and Affections, (3) Actions, (4) Causes, (5)
      Proofs. Of these (4) is clearly connected with physics, and (5) with logic.</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>