Archaic Logic. Symbol and Structure in Heraclitus, Parmenides and Empedocles

177 Pages·1976·3.44 MB·English

by  Prier

DE PROPRIETATIBUS LITTERARUM
edenda curat
C.H. VAN SCHOONEVELD
Indiana University
Series Practica, 11

ARCHAIC LOGIC:
SYMBOL AND STRUCTURE IN HERACLITUS,
PARMENIDES, AND EMPEDOCLES
by
RAYMOND ADOLPH PRIER
Von Humboldt Fellow - Hamburg
1976
MOUTON
THE HAGUE - PARIS
© Copyright 1976
Mouton & Co. B.V., Publishers, The Hague
No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photo-
print, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers.
ISBN 90279 3155 0
Printed in the Netherlands
Εις, δύο, τρεις • ö δέ δη τέταρτος ήμίν
sono qui
To three close friends and scholars:
Robert Barnes
Jane Cody
Elaine Gazda

AUTHOR'S PREFACE
The following study represents an attempt not only to explicate in some
small way a mode of thought significantly different from much of our own,
but also to suggest a new criterion of judgment for Classical Philology. These
two purposes merge into one insofar as both come about from my own sharp
disagreement with certain prevailing critical attitudes towards the so-called
pre-Socratics. These essentially ungrounded attitudes are characterized, as I
see them, by strong relativistic and materialistic premises which, although
hidden for the most part, result in awkward misunderstandings of the pre-
Platonic corpus in general and an uneven, if not castrating, criticism of specific
authors in particular. These modern critical stances did not exist in the pre-
Aristotelian Greek world in any predominant form, but Classical Philology in
the later half of the twentieth century maintains otherwise and has, conse-
quently, severely limited itself and very probably its future by adopting a
narrow and unnecessarily rigid criterion of judgment that largely misrep-
resents the literary evidence at hand. Beyond the by no means unanimous
acknowledgment that Aristotle revealed little of the real worth of the pre-
Socratics, modern Classical Philology has not even suggested the need of a
method — let alone the method itself - that might grasp the period between
Homer and the Platonic revolution. I offer this study as an attempt to supply
this critical tool.
The method I shall suggest is one stemming from my studies for over a
decade of Archaic Greek literature and, therefore, represents the accomplish-
ment of more than intermittent thought over several years. I could not,
however, have completed my endeavor without the encouragement and help
of several universities and individuals. I should like to thank Stanford, Yale,
U.C.L.A., and U.S.C. for the use of their libraries and U.S.C. for supplying
the funds to put in order the final manuscript. I am especially indebted to
Robert Brumbaugh, Thomas Cole, Michael Gagarin, Eric Havelock, and Bruno
Snell for encouragement and advice along the way. I also wish to acknowledge
Apeiron, Classical Philology, and Classical World in whose pages a portion of
the following text has appeared in the past.
Hamburg, August 1975

CONTENTS
Preface VII
I The Archaic Configuration of Mind 1
II The Homeric Hymns and Hesiod 27
III Heraclitus 57
IV Parmenides 90
V Empedocles 120
VI Language, Time, and Form 149
Bibliography 154
Index of Ancient Passages 159