Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis quis. Vivamus laoreet velit justo, in ven e natis purus.
Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis quis. Vivamus laoreet velit justo, in ven e natis purus.
Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis quis. Vivamus laoreet velit justo, in ven e natis purus.
Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis quis. Vivamus laoreet velit justo, in ven e natis purus.
Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis quis. Vivamus laoreet velit justo, in ven e natis purus pretium sit amet. Praesent lectus tortor, tincidu nt in consectetur vestibulum, ultrices nec neque. Praesent nec sagittis mauris. Fusce convallis nunc neque. Integer egestas aliquam interdum. Nulla ante diam, interdum nec tempus eu, feugiat vel erat.Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis quis.Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis. Integer egestas aliquam interdum. Nulla ante diam,
lorem,Cras consequat iaculis id vehicula erat mattis quis. Vivamus laoreet velit justo, in ven e natis purus pretium sit amet. Praesent lectus tortor, tincidu nt in consectetur vestibulum, ultrices nec neque. Praesent nec sagittis mauris. Fusce convallis nunc neque. Integer egestas aliquam interdum. Nulla ante diam, interdum nec tempus eu, feugiat vel erat.Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis quis.Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis.
Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis quis. Vivamus laoreet velit justo, in ven e natis purus.Praesent nec sagittis mauris. Fusce convallis nunc neque.Integer egestas.Vivamus laoreet velit justo
Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis quis. Vivamus laoreet velit justo, in ven e natis purus.Praesent nec sagittis mauris. Fusce convallis nunc neque.Integer egestas.Vivamus laoreet velit justo
Cras consequat iaculis lorem, id vehicula erat mattis quis. Vivamus laoreet velit justo, in ven e natis purus.Praesent nec sagittis mauris. Fusce convallis nunc neque.Integer egestas.Vivamus laoreet velit justo
`
FORE:Again, while attacking the belief in human immortality, Epicurus seems to direct his blows against the metaphysical reasonings of Plato,153 as well as against the indistinct forebod77ings of primitive imagination. The consequences of this two-edged polemic are very remarkable. In reading Lucretius, we are surprised at the total absence of criticisms like those brought to bear on Greek mythology with such formidable effect, first by Plato and, long afterwards, by Lucian. There is a much more modern tone about his invectives, and they seem aimed at an enemy familiar to ourselves. One would suppose that the advent of Catholicism had been revealed in a prophetic vision to the poet, and that this, rather than the religion of his own times, was the object of his wrath and dread; or else that some child of the Renaissance was seeking for a freer utterance of his own revolt against all theology, under the disguise of a dead language and of a warfare with long-discredited gods. For this reason, Christians have always regarded him, with perfect justice, as a dangerous enemy; while rationalists of the fiercer type have accepted his splendid denunciations as the appropriate expression of their own most cherished feelings.Descartes had already accomplished a great simplification of the speculative problem by summing up all existence under the two heads of extension and thought. It remained to account for these, and to reduce them to a single idea. As we have seen, they were derived from Greek philosophy, and the bond which was to unite them must be sought for in the same direction. It will be remembered that the systems of Plato and Aristotle were bounded at either extremity by a determinate and by an indeterminate principle. With the one, existence ranged between the Idea of Good at the upper end of the scale and empty space at the lower; with the other, between absolute Thought and First Matter. It was by combining the two definite terms, space and thought, that Descartes had constructed his system; and after subtracting these the two indefinite terms remained. In one respect they were even more opposed to each other than were the terms with which they had been respectively associated. The Idea403 of Good represented unity, identity, and constancy, as against plurality, difference, and change; while Aristotles Matter was, by its very definition, multiform, fluctuating, and indeterminate. Nevertheless, there were equally important analogies traceable between them. No very clear account could be given of either, and both were customarily described by negatives. If Matter fell short of complete existence, the Good transcended all existence. If the one was a universal capacity for assuming Forms, the other was the source whence all Forms proceeded. When the distinctive characteristics of an individual were thought away, the question might well be mooted into which principle it would return. The ambiguous use of the word Power contributed still further to their identification, for it was not less applicable to the receptive than to the productive faculty. Now we have just seen into what importance the idea of Power suddenly sprang at the Renaissance: with Bruno it was the only abiding reality of Nature; with Hobbes it was the only object of human desire.
March 23rd, 2015 5 Comments
Praesent vestim molestie lacus. Aenean nonummy hendrerit mauris. Phasellus porta. Fusce suscipit varius mi. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.
read more
FORE:
March 23rd, 2014 5 Comments
Praesent vestim molestie lacus. Aenean nonummy hendrerit mauris. Phasellus porta. Fusce suscipit varius mi. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.
read more
March 25rd, 2014 5 Comments
Praesent vestim molestie lacus. Aenean nonummy hendrerit mauris. Phasellus porta. Fusce suscipit varius mi. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.
read more