{"id":1708,"date":"2010-10-18T09:39:53","date_gmt":"2010-10-18T09:39:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thetravellerslastjourney.com\/shai\/2018\/11\/27\/889-revision-v1\/"},"modified":"2019-08-25T04:39:18","modified_gmt":"2019-08-25T04:39:18","slug":"speusippus-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thetravellerslastjourney.com\/shai\/2010\/10\/18\/speusippus-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Speusippus"},"content":{"rendered":"

I recommend reading the first footnote before starting<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

It started with\u00a0Plato<\/a>, but it didn’t end there[1]<\/sup><\/a>. This fact isn’t often discussed.<\/p>\n

Plato lived in\u00a0Athens<\/a>\u00a0in\u00a0Ancient Greece<\/a>\u00a0about 2400 years ago. He himself studied informally under\u00a0Socrates<\/a>, and Plato, in turn, had his own students and disciples at a school (of sorts) called\u00a0The Academy<\/a>.[2]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0The very first person to succeed as head of The Academy was one of Plato’s nephews, Speusippus, who led the Platonic school from Plato’s death (348\/7\u00a0BCE<\/small>) for eight years until he himself died in 339\/8\u00a0BCE<\/small>. After Seusippus’ death, the Academy was headed by\u00a0Xenocrates<\/a>. The Academy continued to exist until 83\u00a0BCE<\/small>.<\/p>\n

Metaphysics<\/a>:<\/h3>\n

It is no surprise that Speusippus’ metaphysics were a derivation and development of Plato, who was his teacher for many years[3]<\/sup><\/a>. What\u00a0may<\/i>, however, come to a surprise to many people, especially those who depend on Plato’s own writings as indicators of his thought, is that Plato’s late philosophy took a strong turn in a\u00a0Pythagorean<\/a>\u00a0direction. Plato still maintained his ideas about Forms, but he also postulated\u00a0The One<\/i>\u00a0and the\u00a0Indefinite Dyad<\/i>\u00a0as key concepts. Speusippus’ ideas should be considered as a response to these aspects of Platonic thought.<\/p>\n

The architecture of Speusippus’ metaphysics is quite unwieldy, so it is worth outlining it before discussing what it sought to achieve and how it grew out of Plato’s own ideas.<\/p>\n

Like Plato, Speusippus begins with two primary principles: the\u00a0One\u00a0<\/i>and\u00a0Multiplicity<\/i>\u00a0(plethos<\/a>\u00a0in Greek, and which corresponds to Plato\u2019s Indefinite Dyad). Whereas the\u00a0One<\/i>\u00a0is the epitome of unity (and is by nature indivisible),\u00a0Multiplicity<\/i>\u00a0is the epitome of a continuum, that is, that which is continually divisible. To Speussipus\u2019 mind, the entire universe can be seen as a product of these two basic aspects.\u00a0One<\/i>\u00a0and\u00a0Multiplicity<\/i>\u00a0combine to form the principle of Number. Through Number, the\u00a0One<\/i>\u00a0is able to form the first of the number series, namely the number one. From the number one the rest of the numbers are derived, including the numbers 1,2,3,4 which made up the\u00a0Tetractys<\/a>\u00a0which was important to Speusippus for mystical reasons, as together they add to make the number ten. So\u00a0One<\/i>\u00a0and Number make the numbers, and on the other side\u00a0Multiplicity<\/i>\u00a0and Number make Figure (as in the essence of geometry). Figure and\u00a0One<\/i>\u00a0together manifest the point (i.e. the single point) from which are derived all other geometrical shapes. The geometrical entities can interact with\u00a0Multiplicity<\/i>\u00a0to form Soul, which is defined as the form of dimensionality, the very essence of existing in space. From the Soul come the forms of the souls and bodies that form our world.<\/p>\n

Certainly not the most intuitive set-up. This metaphysical architectonic is summarized below:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
I<\/th>\nThe One<\/th>\n<\/th>\nMultiplicity<\/th>\nThe One and Multiplicity combine to form Number<\/i><\/small><\/th>\n<\/tr>\n
IIa<\/th>\n<\/th>\nNumber<\/th>\n<\/th>\nNumber and The One form Numbers, and Number and Multiplicity form Figures<\/i><\/small><\/th>\n<\/tr>\n
IIb<\/th>\nNumbers<\/th>\n<\/th>\nFigures<\/th>\nThe One and Numbers forms one, and The One and Figure forms point<\/i><\/small><\/th>\n<\/tr>\n
IIc<\/th>\none<\/th>\n<\/th>\npoint<\/th>\nPoint makes geometrical shapes<\/i><\/small><\/th>\n<\/tr>\n
IId<\/th>\n<\/th>\ngeometrical shapes<\/th>\n<\/th>\nGeometrical shapes and Multiplicity make Soul<\/i><\/small><\/th>\n<\/tr>\n
III<\/th>\n<\/th>\n<\/th>\nSoul<\/th>\nSoul makes all the bodies and souls of the world<\/i><\/small><\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

As indicated above, Speuspippus’ principles were seen to fit into tiers. The first three tiers out of five have been described. It is not clear but it seems likely that tiers IV and V were populated respectively with\u00a0inanimate<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0animate<\/a>\u00a0things.<\/p>\n

Ethics<\/a>:<\/h3>\n

Speusippus did not develop any complicated ethical theory akin to his metaphysical one, and in fact, seems to have been only a single principle. This principle is that the best life is that which sees “freedom from disturbance” which is understood as being a state intermediate to pain and (as we normally use the word) pleasure.<\/p>\n

Both Plato and\u00a0Aristotle<\/a>\u00a0took Speusippus to task for this philosophy, accusing him of not explaining how pleasure could be bad. And while this is true, he\u00a0did<\/i>\u00a0seem to hold that pain and (naive) pleasure were both bad extremes, his problem was a problem of nomenclature. Speusippus lacked the technical terminology of the later\u00a0Stoics<\/a>, whose philosophy he would have admired. To a certain extent, Stoic philosophy can be seen as a sophisticated elaboration of Speusippus’ ethics, although it is not clear to what extent he\u00a0actually<\/i>\u00a0influenced or informed them.<\/p>\n

Epistemology<\/a>:<\/h3>\n

From what I can tell, Speusippis didn’t have any coherent unified system of epistemology. Nonetheless, I will list a few of his ideas in this general area.<\/p>\n