<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:S.sextus_empiricus_1</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:S.sextus_empiricus_1</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="S"><div type="textpart" subtype="entry" xml:id="sextus-empiricus-bio-1" n="sextus_empiricus_1"><head><label xml:id="tlg-0544"><persName xml:lang="la"><forename full="yes">Sextus</forename><surname full="yes">Empi'ricus</surname></persName></label></head><p>was a physician, and received his name Empiricus from belonging to the school of Empirici.
      He was a pupil of Herodotus of Tarsus (Diog. Laert. ix.; Timon), who was a physician, and
      apparently a contemporary of Galen. Sextus may, therefore, have lived in the first half of the
      third century of the Christian aera. Nothing is known of his life. He belonged to the
      Sceptici.</p><div><head>Works</head><p>Two works of Sextus are extant. The two works are a great repository of doubts; the
       language is as clear and perspicuous as the subject will allow.</p><div><head><title>Doctrines of the Sceptics</title> (<foreign xml:lang="grc" xml:id="tlg-0544.001">Πυρρώνιαι Ὑποτύπωσεις ἢ σκεπτικὰ
        ὑπομνήματα</foreign>)</head><p>The <foreign xml:lang="grc">Πυρρώνιαι Ὑποτύπωσεις ἢ σκεπτικὰ
         ὑπομνήματα</foreign>, contains the doctrines of the Sceptici, in three books.</p></div><div><head><title>Against the Mathematici</title> (<foreign xml:lang="grc" xml:id="tlg-0544.002">Πρὸς τοὺς μαθηματικοὺς ἀντιρρητικοί</foreign>)</head><p>The second work, entitled, <foreign xml:lang="grc">Πρὸς τοὺς μαθηματικοὺς
         ἀντιρρητικοί</foreign>, against the Mathematici, in eleven books, is an attack upon all
        positive philosophy. The first six books are a refutation of the six sciences of grammatic,
        rhetoric, geometry, arithmetic, astrology, and music. The remaining five books are directed
        against logicians, physical philosophers, and ethical writers, and form, in fact, a distinct
        work, which may be viewed as belonging to the <foreign xml:lang="grc">Ὑποτυπώσεις</foreign>.</p></div><div><head>Lost Medical Works</head><p>None of the medical works of Sextus are extant, though it appears from his own writings
        that he did write on medical subjects.</p></div></div><div><head>Editions</head><div><head>Latin Editions</head><p><bibl>H. Stephens published the first Latin translation of the <title>Hypotyposes,</title>
         in 1562, 8vo.</bibl><bibl>The first Latin translation of the work against the Mathematici is by G. Hervet,
         Antwerp and Paris, 1569, 1601, fol.</bibl></p></div><div><head>Greek Editions</head><p><bibl>The first edition of the Greek text of both works was that of Paris, 1621, fol.; but
         Geneva is often stated to be the place of publication : it is probable that some copies
         were printed with Paris on the title page, and others with Geneva.</bibl><bibl>The second edition was that of J. A. Fabricius, Leipzig, 1718, fol. which contains the
         Latin version and some emendations; but the text has not yet been revised with sufficient
         care.</bibl><bibl>The edition of J. G. Mund is a reprint of the text of Fabricius, with a commentary ;
         but only one part has appeared, which contains the text of the <title>Hypotyposes,</title>
         Halle, 1796, 4to.</bibl></p></div></div><div><head>Translations</head><p><bibl>Buhle translated the <title>Hypotyposes,</title> Lemgo, 1801, 8vo.</bibl><bibl>There is a French translation of the <hi rend="ital">Hypotyposes,</hi> in 1725, 12mo.,
        which was probably published at Amsterdam.</bibl> The anonymous translator is said to be the
       Sieur Huart, a teacher of mathematics; but the translation is not highly spoken of.</p></div><div><head>Thought</head><p>Sextus is the only Greek sceptic whose complete works we possess; and we may probably
       assume that he has collected all that could be said against the Dogmatici, and all that the
       Sceptici had to say for themselves. He does not present what he says as his own, but as the
       exposition of the sceptical school. Ritter (<hi rend="ital">Gesch. der Philosophie,</hi> vol.
       iv. p. 299. &amp;c.) has a long dissertation on Sextus, which as usual is not favourable. His
       philosophy of negations is certainly not satisfactory, nor is Ritter's judgment on Sextus.
       Much that he finds fault with, is precisely that which some thinkers will set a value on. The
       chief objection that Ritter makes against him is, that he does not keep his exposition of
       Scepticism free from such assertions as destroy Scepticism itself. He "denies that there is
       any general moral rule of life which can be prescribed (<hi rend="ital">Adv. Math.</hi>
       11.203), because every man must order his life according to chance and circumstances,
       whereas, however, this general rule of life is excepted, that a man must direct himself
       according to circumstances." But it seems no contradiction to say that there is no general
       rule to guide us in all circumstances, and yet to say that we must do as well as we can
       without such a rule. Sextus maintains that scepticism alone can make a man happy, because it
       teaches that nothing is naturally (<foreign xml:lang="grc">φύσει</foreign>) good or bad
        (<hi rend="ital">Adv. Math.</hi> 11.208). The meaning of the proposition depends on the
       meaning that is to be given to Nature, that much abused word. Nature is nothing more tlan the
       constitution of all things by the will of God and the notion of good and bad, which is a
       notion of limited practical application, is not applicable to the general constitution of all
       things. Such contradictions as these, however, though in truth they do not necessarily
       involve contradictions, Ritter observes, are only in part to be attributed to the
       unskilfulness of Sextus : the greater part are to be attributed to the direction that Greek
       scepticism in general took, or to its tendency particularly among the later Sceptici.</p><p>Ritter considers that the old sceptical objections were mainly designed to oppose the
       reasons founded on the intellect to the purely sensuous view of things. But the objections of
       the Sceptici, as they appear in Sextus, are solely directed against philosophical systems :
       the Sceptici are disposed to consider phaenomena as true for practical purposes, but to
       reject all scientific investigation of them as idle inquiries. Accordingly, they assume a
       kind of practical <pb n="814"/> art, which is based on experience; and admit that a useful
       art of life may be derived from the observation of many particular cases. (<hi rend="ital">Adv. Math.</hi> 8.8.)</p><p>It is an exemplification of the nature of the sceptical doctrines, as exhibited by Sextus,
       that the objections to mathematical science are not directed against reckoning by number and
       against mensuration, but against the scientific form of mathematics, and mainly against its
       fundamental notions; against the admissibility of proof, and against axioms, against the
       notion of body, divisibility into equal parts, and the like. The object of the modern
       scepticism thus appears to be to stop all progress in science which has not utility for its
       object, and to treat it as a pestilent luxury ; in which view there is both wisdom and folly
       ; wisdom, inasmuch as some purpose of utility is the end of all science, and folly, inasmuch
       as utility is not always best attained by proceeding directly towards it. The Sceptici did
       not go so far as to deny that much useful knowledge was traditional, and might be
       communicated by speech and writing ; for no man's sole experience is sufficient to give him
       all useful knowledge.</p><p>Ritter admits that the Sceptici have urged many things that are well worthy of
       consideration, both against the form and the matter of the sciences ; and this is true. Their
       notion of the relation of cause and effect was connected with their notion of the being of
       God, whom they acknowledged to be the supreme activity (Pyrrh. <hi rend="ital">Hyp.</hi> 3.2,
        <foreign xml:lang="grc">δραστικώτατον αἴτιον</foreign>). They showed clearly the
       contradictions which existed in all attempts to define the nature of God after the measure of
       human notions : that passions and motives are attributed to him, which passions and motives
       imply some change in the patient, and this is inconsistent with the nature of God. Even the
       attributing of particular virtuous qualities to God is an inconsistency, inasmuch as God, a
       perfect being, cannot be said to exercise virtues which in themselves imply the possibility
       of vice. The sun of their objections, properly viewed, is this, that God is
       incomprehensible.</p><p>It is difficult to form a just estimate of the value of what Sextus has collected. A good
       translation and a careful analysis of the work would be worth a man's labour. The sceptical
       arguments were directed against proof; but there is evidence which is not demonstration, and
       yet is sufficient, not only for practical purposes, but for a philosophical conviction. All
       conviction is not and cannot be founded on demonstration. The ultimate truths do not, in
       their nature, admit of demonstration, for there is nothing from which the demonstration can
       proceed. If a man, then, cannot have a conviction of these ultimate truths, he must reject
       them, or live in doubt. </p></div><byline>[<ref target="author.G.L">G.L</ref>]</byline></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>