Unquestionably there are contradictions involved in this scheme, but the acceptance of antinomies is one of the most striking characteristics of the doctrines of Xenophanes. Naturally and necessarily he is lirought to declare all things incomprehensible. Certain knowl- edge is thus impossible ; all truth evaporates into opin- ion ; scepticism is introduced — the scepticism which disregards the sensible as a delusion — the scepticism which excludes the eternal and the divine as unintel- ligible, or the scepticism which regards truth as unat- tainable. Thus tlie fundamental positions of the Ele- atics prognosticate the age of the Sophists, and the theories of the Epicureans the Pyrrhonists and the Neo-Platonists.
It is not easj' to discover the exact mode in which Xenophanes interpreted the order of the scnsil)le crea- tion. The remarkable feature in his cosmogony is that he anticipated geology, and made it the basis of some of liis deductions. He thus contril)uted to sci- ence the coinmoncements of that marvellous investi- gation, as Pythagoras contributed tlic tlicory of the geometrical liarinonies of the universe, and divined the Copernican system. It may appear a remarkable incongruit}' tliat, after identifying (iod and the uni- verse, and asserting the infinity, immutability, and eternity of the divine existence, Xenophanes and Par- menides should both have held the periodicity of the destruction of the world — the former by water, the lat- ter by fire. This conclusion may have been suggested
ELEATIC SCHOOL
121
ELEATIC SCHOOL
to the earlier philosopher by the fossil remains which he recognised as aqueous deposits ; but it also results from the dogma that all things are in a perpetual flux except the one eternal existence. The phenomena change recurrently, tlie One remains unchanged.
The Eleatic philosophy, in its first enunciation, was a crude idealism, extravagant in expression, if moder- ate in design. It was an anxious attempt to unite tlie operation of the omnipotence, omnipresence, and unity of the divine Intelligence witli the recognition of his continual support and government of the cre- ation. It was a protest alii^e against the vain ab- stractions, tlie materialistic tendencies, and the poly- tlieistic creed of the Hellenic Morld ; but in the en- deavor to avoid popular and philosophical errors, it fell into the opposite extreme, and became in tendency, though not in purpose, distinctly i)antheistic. It is impossible to explain the connection between the Cre- ator and the creation — the distinction and the union of the intelligible and the sensible universe. To these heights the mind of man cannot soar. There is a truth of tilings sensible and a truth of things spiritual. Neither can be safely disregarded or misapprehended. Tlic world of matter, with all its changes — the world of mind, with all its intuitions and reasonings, are as essentially real as the divine Being on whom the}' de- pend. But what the degree and mode of tlic depend- ence-— when the dependence is interrupted and the laws imposed upon creation come into action — what is the hidden spring of natural forces, who shall define ? If Xenophanes ran into errors as hazardous as those which ho resisted, he is entitled to indulgent censure when it is considered that lie was the iirst, or among the first, to introduce into Greek speculation worthj-, if inadequate, conceptions of the grandeur, and glory, and inefltable sovereignty of the divine Intelligence.
Parmenhhs. — The most illustrious name produced by the Eleatic School is that of Parmenidcs, the disci- ple, probably, of the founder of the sect. lie was, bj' all accounts, a native of Elea (about 53G B.C.), and may have furnished, by his birtliplace, the chief cause for the designation habitually bestowed upon this tj-pe of pliilosophy. He is frequently represented as the founder of dialectics, though this distinction is given bj' Aristotle to his pupil Zeno. He is, however, enti- tled to the credit of having given a more logical de- velopment to the views of his supposed teacher. So far as any authoritative exposition of his doctrines is concerned, we are in nearly as unfortunate a position as in the case of his predecessor. Insufficient frag- ments of his philosophical poem are preserved, but the rest of our knowledge must lie obtained from the po- lemics of his adversaries, and from the statements of late compilers. Ho is commended l>y Aristotle for his perspicacity, and certainly gave greater coherence to the sj-stem espoused liy him. In doing so he may have improved its form at the expeuFe of its elevation. The divinit}' of the universal Existence disappears ; for liis point of departure is not the all-embracing In- telligence, but the abstract conception of being. In the main he agrees with Xenophanes, thougli lie pre- sents his tenets in a different order and connection. He states precisely the antagonism between the judg- ments of the senses and the conclusions of the reason, but lie leaves it undeveloped. This has been regarded as his most important addition to the Eleatic meta- physics, though the princifde is latent and presupposed in tlie whole speculations of the earlier philoso])iier. The fundamental position of his scheme is the contra- diction of entity and nonentity. Wliat is cannot lie non-existent ; what is non-existent is not. But ev- erything that is, exists. Hence the universality and unity of existence must be admitted ; and as nothing can spring from nothing, or proceed from non-exist- ence to existence, all existence is eternal and un- changeable. There is nothing but being ; therefore there is a, plenum without any vacuum, and all being is