愛華網(wǎng)卷一：古代哲學(xué) AncientPhilosophy
第三篇亞里士多德以后的古代哲學(xué)
AncientPhilosophy afterAristotle
第26章犬儒學(xué)派與懷疑派Cynics andSceptics
知識(shí)優(yōu)異的(intellectually eminent)人們與他們當(dāng)時(shí)社會(huì)(contemporarysociety)的關(guān)系，在不同的時(shí)代里是非常之不同的。在某些幸運(yùn)的時(shí)代里，他們大體上能與他們的環(huán)境調(diào)和，——毫無疑問他們要提出他們自己認(rèn)為是必要的那些改革來，但是他們深信他們的提議是會(huì)被人歡迎的；而且即使是世界始終不曾改革的話，他們也不會(huì)因此就不喜歡他們自己所處的世界。在另一些時(shí)代里，他們是革命的，認(rèn)為需要號(hào)召激烈的變革(radicalalteration)，但希望這些變革（部分地是由于他們忠告的結(jié)果）在不久的將來就可以實(shí)現(xiàn)。又在另一些時(shí)代里，則他們對(duì)世界是絕望的，他們覺得盡管他們自己知道什么是必需的，但卻絕沒有可以實(shí)現(xiàn)的希望。這種心情很容易陷于一種更深沉的絕望，把地上的生活認(rèn)為本質(zhì)上都是壞的，而對(duì)好的事物則只能寄希望于來生或者是某種神秘的轉(zhuǎn)變(transfiguration)上。
The relation of intellectually eminent men to contemporarysociety has been very different in
different ages. In some fortunate epochs they have been on thewhole in harmony with their
surroundings--suggesting, no doubt, such reforms as seemed to themnecessary, but fairly
confident that their suggestions would be welcomed, and notdisliking the world in which they found themselves even if itremained unreformed. At other times they have been revolutionary,considering that radical alterations were called for, but expectingthat, partly as a result of their advocacy, these alterations wouldbe brought about in the near future. At yet other times they havedespaired of the world, and felt that, though they themselves knewwhat was needed, there was no hope of its being brought about. Thismood sinks easily into the deeper despair which regards life onearth as essentially bad, and hopes for good only in a future lifeor in some mystical transfiguration.
在某些時(shí)代，所有這幾種態(tài)度可以在同時(shí)為不同的人所采取。例如，讓我們看一下早期的十九世紀(jì)。歌德（Goethe）是快活的，邊沁（Bentham）是個(gè)改革者，雪萊（Shelley)是個(gè)革命者，而李?yuàn)W巴第(Leopardi)則是個(gè)悲觀主義者(pessimist)。但在大多數(shù)的時(shí)期里，偉大的作家們中間卻有著一種流行的格調(diào)。在英國，他們?cè)谝聋惿讜r(shí)代和十八世紀(jì)是快活的；在法國，他們約當(dāng)1750年左右變成了革命的；在德國，自從1813年以后他們是民族主義的(nationalistic)。
In some ages, all these attitudes have been adopted by differentmen living at the same time.
Consider, for example, the early nineteenth century. Goethe iscomfortable, Bentham is a
reformer, Shelley is a revolutionary, and Leopardi is a pessimist.But in most periods there has
been a prevailing tone among great writers. In England they werecomfortable under Elizabeth and
in the eighteenth century; in France, they became revolutionaryabout 1750; in Germany, they
have been nationalistic since 1813.
在教會(huì)統(tǒng)治(ecclesiasticaldomination)時(shí)期，也就是說從公元五世紀(jì)至十五世紀(jì)，人們?cè)诶碚撋纤嘈诺呐c在實(shí)際上所感覺的之間，是有著一種沖突(conflict)的。在理論上世界是一個(gè)流淚泉(valeoftears)，是在受苦受難(tribulation)之中對(duì)于來世的一種準(zhǔn)備，但是在實(shí)際上作家們（他們幾乎全都是教士）又不免對(duì)于教會(huì)的權(quán)勢(shì)感到高興；他們有機(jī)會(huì)從事于許多他們認(rèn)為是有用的那種活動(dòng)。因此他們具有著統(tǒng)治階級(jí)的心理(mentality)，而不是那種覺得自己是在逃亡到另一個(gè)世界里去的人們的心理。這就是貫穿著整個(gè)中世紀(jì)的那種奇怪的二元論的一部分，這種二元論是由于下列事實(shí)造成的，即教會(huì)雖然是基于出世的信仰(other-worldlybeliefs)但又是日常世界中最重要的一種制度。
During the period of ecclesiastical domination, from the fifthcentury to the fifteenth, there was a certain conflict between whatwas theoretically believed and what was actually felt.Theoretically, the world was a vale of tears, a preparation, amidtribulation, for the world to come. But in practice the writers ofbooks, being almost all clerics, could not help feeling exhilaratedby the power of the Church; they found opportunity for abundantactivity of a sort that they believed to be useful. They hadtherefore the mentality of a governing class, not of men who feelthemselves exiles in an alien world. This is part of the curiousdualism that runs through the Middle Ages, owing to the fact thatthe Church, though based on other-worldly beliefs, was the mostimportant institution in the every-day world.
基督教出世精神的心理準(zhǔn)備(psychologicalpreparation)開始于希臘化的時(shí)期，并且是與城邦的衰頹相聯(lián)系著的。希臘的哲學(xué)家們，下迄亞里士多德為止，盡管他們可以埋怨這埋怨那；但在大體上對(duì)于宇宙并不絕望，也不覺得他們自己在政治上是無能的。他們有時(shí)候可以是屬于失敗了的政黨，但如果是這樣，他們的失敗也只是由于沖突中的機(jī)緣所致，而不是由于有智慧的人之任何不可避免的無能為力(inevitablepowerlessness)。甚至連那些象畢達(dá)哥拉斯(Pythagoras)或者在某種心情之下的柏拉圖那樣地鄙棄現(xiàn)象世界而力求逃避于神秘主義(mysticism)的人，也都有著要把統(tǒng)治階級(jí)轉(zhuǎn)化成為圣賢(saintsandsages)的具體計(jì)劃。但當(dāng)政權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)到馬其頓人(Macedonian)手里的時(shí)候，希臘的哲學(xué)家們就自然而然地脫離了政治，而更加專心致意于個(gè)人德行的問題或者解脫問題了(individualvirtue orsalvation)。他們不再問：人怎樣才能夠創(chuàng)造一個(gè)好國家？而是問：在一個(gè)罪惡的世界里，人怎樣才能夠有德；或者，在一個(gè)受苦受難的世界里，人怎樣才能夠幸福？當(dāng)然這種變化僅僅是程度上的變化；這樣的問題在以前也曾被人提出來過，并且后期的斯多葛派有一個(gè)時(shí)期也是關(guān)懷政治的，——但關(guān)懷的是羅馬的政治而非希臘的政治。然而這個(gè)變化卻仍然是一場(chǎng)真實(shí)的變化。除了羅馬時(shí)期斯多葛主義(Stoicism)在一定限度上而外，凡是那些認(rèn)真思想、認(rèn)真感受的人們的觀點(diǎn)都日益變得主觀的和個(gè)人主義的了；直到最后，基督教(Christianity)終于帶來了一套個(gè)人得救的福音，這就鼓舞了傳教的熱誠并創(chuàng)造了基督教教會(huì)。在這以前，始終沒有過一種制度是可以讓哲學(xué)家們?nèi)娜獾匕采砹⒚?，因而他們?duì)權(quán)勢(shì)的合法的愛好心就沒有適當(dāng)?shù)某雎?。因?yàn)檫@種原因，所以希臘化時(shí)代的哲學(xué)家，作為人而論，就要比那些生活于城邦仍然能夠鼓舞其忠誠的時(shí)代的人們，具有更大的局限性。他們?nèi)匀凰枷耄驗(yàn)樗麄儾荒懿凰枷?；但是他們幾乎并不希望他們的思想在?shí)際世界里會(huì)產(chǎn)生什么效果。
The psychological preparation for the other-worldliness ofChristianity begins in the Hellenistic
period, and is connected with the eclipse of the City State. Downto Aristotle, Greek philosophers, though they might complain ofthis or that, were, in the main, not cosmically despairing, nor didthey feel themselves politically impotent. They might, at times,belong to a beaten party, but, if so, their defeat was due to thechances of conflict, not to any inevitable powerlessness of thewise. Even those who, like Pythagoras, and Plato in certain moods,condemned the world of appearance and sought escape in mysticism,had practical plans for turning the governing classes into saintsand sages. When political power passed into the hands of theMacedonians, Greek philosophers, as was natural, turned aside frompolitics and devoted themselves more to the problem of individualvirtue or salvation. They no longer asked: how can men create agood State? They asked instead: how can men be virtuous in a wickedworld, or happy in a world of suffering? The change, it is true isonly one of degree; such questions had been asked before, and thelater Stoics, for a time, again concerned themselves with politics--the politics of Rome, not of Greece. But the change was none theless real. Except to a
limited extent during the Roman period in Stoicism, the outlook ofthose who thought and felt
seriously became increasingly subjective and individualistic,until, at last, Christianity evolved a gospel of individualsalvation which inspired missionary zeal and created the Church.Until that happened, there was no institution to which thephilosopher could give whole-hearted adherence, and therefore therewas no adequate outlet for his legitimate love of power. For thisreason, the philosophers of the Hellenistic period are more limitedas human beings than the men who lived while the City State couldstill inspire allegiance. They still think, because they cannothelp thinking; but they scarcely hope that their thought will bearfruit in the world of affairs.
有四派哲學(xué)大約都是在亞歷山大的時(shí)代建立起來的。最有名的兩派，即斯多葛派(Stoics)和伊壁鳩魯派(Epicurean)，是我們后兩章的主題；在本章中我們將要討論犬儒派(Cynic)和懷疑派(Sceptic)。
Four schools of philosophy were founded about the time ofAlexander. The two most famous, the
Stoics and Epicureans, will be the subjects of later chapters; inthe present chapter we shall be
concerned with the Cynics and Sceptics.
這兩個(gè)學(xué)派中的前一派出自（通過它的創(chuàng)始人狄奧根尼Diogenes）安提斯泰尼(Antisthenes)；他是蘇格拉底(Socrates)的弟子，約長(zhǎng)于柏拉圖(Plato)二十歲。安提斯泰尼是一個(gè)非常引人注意的人物，在某些方面其有似于托爾斯泰(Tolstoy)。直到蘇格拉底死后，他還生活在蘇格拉底貴族弟子們的圈子里，并沒有表現(xiàn)出任何非正統(tǒng)的(unorthodoxy)征象來。但是有某種東西——或者是雅典的失敗，也許是蘇格拉底之死，也許是他不喜歡哲學(xué)的詭辯——卻使得他在已經(jīng)不再年青的時(shí)候，鄙棄了他從前所重視的東西。除了純樸的善良(simplegoodness)而外，他不愿意要任何東西。他結(jié)交工人并且穿得和工人一樣。他進(jìn)行露天講演(openair
preaching)，他所用的方式是沒有受過教育的人也都能理解的。一切精致的哲學(xué)，他都認(rèn)為毫無價(jià)值；凡是一個(gè)人所能知道的，普通的人也都能知道。他信仰“返于自然”(returntonature)，并把這種信仰貫徹得非常徹底。他主張不要政府，不要私有財(cái)產(chǎn)，不要婚姻，不要確定的宗教。他的弟子們（如果他本人不曾）譴責(zé)奴隸制。他并不是一個(gè)嚴(yán)格的苦行主義者(ascetic)，但是他鄙棄奢侈與一切人為的對(duì)感官快樂的追求。他說“我寧可瘋狂也不愿意歡樂”。(Ihad rather be mad than delighted)①
The first of these schools is derived, through its founderDiogenes, from Antisthenes, a disciple of Socrates, about twentyyears older than Plato. Antisthenes was a remarkable character, insome
ways rather like Tolstoy. Until after the death of Socrates, helived in the aristocratic circle of his fellow disciples, andshowed no sign of unorthodoxy. But something--whether the defeatof
Athens, or the death of Socrates, or a distaste for philosophicquibbling-- caused him, when no
longer young, to despise the things that he had formerly valued. Hewould have nothing but
simple goodness. He associated with working men, and dressed as oneof them. He took to openair
preaching, in a style that the uneducated could understand. Allrefined philosophy he held to be worthless; what could be known,could be known by the plain man. He believed in the "return tonature," and carried this belief very far. There was to beno government, no private property, nomarriage, no established religion. His followers, if not hehimself, condemned slavery. He was not exactly ascetic, but hedespised luxury and all pursuit of artificialpleasures of the senses. "I had rather be mad thandelighted," he said.
安提西尼(Antisthenes)的名聲被他的弟子戴奧真尼斯（Diogenes）蓋過了，戴奧真尼斯“是歐濟(jì)尼河上西諾普地方的青年，最初他［安提西尼］并不喜歡他；因?yàn)樗且粋€(gè)曾因涂改貨幣而被下過獄的不名譽(yù)的錢商的兒子。安提西尼命令這個(gè)青年回家去，但是他絲毫不動(dòng)；他用杖打他，他也一動(dòng)不動(dòng)。他渴望'智慧'，他知道安提斯泰尼可以教給他智慧。他一生的志愿也是要做他父親所做過的事，要'涂改貨幣'（defacethecoinage），可是規(guī)模要大得多。他要涂改世上流行的一切貨幣。每種通行的印戳都是假的。人被打上了將帥與帝王的印戳，事物被打上了榮譽(yù)、智慧、幸福與財(cái)富的印戳；一切全都是破銅爛鐵打上了假印戳罷了?！雹?/p>
The fame of Antisthenes was surpassed by that of his discipleDiogenes, "a young man from
Sinope, on the Euxine, whom he [ Antisthenes] did not take to atfirst sight; the son of a
disreputable money-changer who had been sent to prison for defacingthe coinage. Antisthenes
ordered the lad away, but he paid no attention; he beat him withhis stick, but he never moved.
He wanted 'wisdom,' and saw that Antisthenes had it to give. Hisaim in life was to do as his
father had done, to 'deface the coinage,' but on a much largerscale. He would deface all the
coinage current in the world. Every conventional stamp was false.The men stamped as generals
and kings; the things stamped as honour and wisdom and happinessand riches; all were base
metal with lying superscription."
他決心象一條狗一樣地生活下去，所以就被稱為“犬儒”（cynic），這個(gè)字的意思就是“象犬一樣”。他拒絕接受一切的習(xí)俗——無論是宗教的、風(fēng)尚的、服裝的、居室的、飲食的、或者禮貌的。據(jù)說他住在一個(gè)桶里，但是吉爾柏特·穆萊（GilbertMurray）向我們保證說這是個(gè)錯(cuò)誤：因?yàn)槟鞘且粋€(gè)大甕（pitcher），是原始時(shí)代用以埋葬死人的那種甕。②他象一個(gè)印度托缽僧（fakir）那樣地以行乞?yàn)樯?。他宣揚(yáng)友愛，不僅僅是全人類之間的友愛，而且還有人與動(dòng)物之間的友愛。甚至當(dāng)他還活著的時(shí)候，他的一身就聚集了許多的傳說。盡人皆知，亞歷山大怎樣地拜訪過他，問他想要什么恩賜；他回答說：“只要你別擋住我的太陽光”（onlyto stand out of my light）。
He decided to live like a dog, and was therefore called a"cynic," which means "canine." He
rejected all conventions--whether of religion, of manners, ofdress, of housing, of food, or of
decency. One is told that he lived in a tub, but Gilbert Murrayassures us that this is a mistake: it was a large pitcher, of thesort used in primitive times for burials. He lived, like an Indianfakir, by begging. He proclaimed his brotherhood, not only with thewhole human race, but also with animals. He was a man about whomstories gathered, even in his lifetime. Every one knows howAlexander visited him, and asked if he desired any favour; "only tostand out of my light," he replied.
戴奧真尼斯（Diogenes）的教導(dǎo)，一點(diǎn)也沒有我們現(xiàn)在所稱之為“玩世不恭”（cynical）的（“犬儒”的）東西，——而是恰好與之相反。他對(duì)“德行”（virtue）具有一種熱烈的感情，他認(rèn)為和德行比較起來，俗世的財(cái)富（worldlygoods）是無足計(jì)較的。他追求德行，并追求從欲望之下解放出來的道德自由：只要你對(duì)于幸運(yùn)所賜的財(cái)貨無動(dòng)于衷，便可以從恐懼之下解放出來。我們可以看出，他的學(xué)說在這一方面是被斯多葛派（Stoics）所采用了的，但是他們并沒有追隨著他摒絕文明的歡樂（amenitiesofcivilization）。他認(rèn)為普羅米修斯（Prometheus）由于把那些造成了近代生活的復(fù)雜與矯揉造作的技術(shù)帶給了人類，所以就公正地受到了懲罰。在這一點(diǎn)上他有似于道家（Taoist）、盧梭（Rousseau）與托爾斯泰（Tolstoy），但是要比他們更加徹底。
The teaching of Diogenes was by no means what we now call"cynical"--quite the contrary. He
had an ardent passion for "virtue," in comparison with which heheld worldly goods of no
account. He sought virtue and moral freedomin liberation from desire: beindifferent to the
goods that fortune has to bestow, and you will be emancipated fromfear. In this respect, his
doctrine, as we shall see, was taken up by the Stoics, but they didnot follow him in rejecting the amenities of civilization. Heconsidered that Prometheus was justly punished for bringing to manthe arts that have produced the complication and artificiality ofmodern life. In this he resembled the Taoists and Rousseau andTolstoy, but was more consistent than they were.
雖然他是亞里士多德同時(shí)代的人，但是他的學(xué)說在品質(zhì)上卻屬于希臘化的時(shí)代。亞里士多德是歡樂地正視世界的最后一個(gè)希臘哲學(xué)家；從他而后，所有的哲學(xué)家都是以這樣或那樣的形式而具有著一種逃避（retreat）的哲學(xué)。世界是不好的，讓我們學(xué)會(huì)遺世而獨(dú)立吧。身外之物(Externalgoods)是靠不住的(precarious)；它們都是幸運(yùn)的賜予，而不是我們自己努力的報(bào)酬。唯有主觀的財(cái)富——即德行，或者是通過聽天由命(resignation)而得到的滿足——才是可靠的，因此，唯有這些才是有智慧的人所要重視的。戴奧真尼斯本人是一個(gè)精力旺盛的人，但他的學(xué)說卻正象希臘化時(shí)代所有的學(xué)說一樣，乃是一種投合于勞苦倦極的人們的學(xué)說，失望已經(jīng)摧毀了這些人的天賦的熱忱了。這種學(xué)說除了對(duì)于強(qiáng)有力的罪惡是一種抗議而外，當(dāng)然絕不是一種可以指望促進(jìn)藝術(shù)或科學(xué)或政治或任何有用的活動(dòng)的學(xué)說。
His doctrine, though he was a contemporary of Aristotle, belongsin its temper to the Hellenistic
age. Aristotle is the last Greek philosopher who faces the worldcheerfully; after him, all have,
in one form or another, a philosophy of retreat. The world is bad;let us learn to be independent
of it. External goods are precarious; they are the gift of fortune,not the reward of our own
efforts. Only subjective goods --virtue, or contentment throughresignation--are secure, and
these alone, therefore, will be valued by the wise man. Diogenespersonally was a man full of
vigour, but his doctrine, like all those of the Hellenistic age,was one to appeal to weary men, in whom disappointment had destroyed natural zest. And itwas certainly not a doctrine calculated
to promote at or science or statesmanship, or any useful activityexcept one of protest against
powerful evil.
看一下在犬儒學(xué)派普及之后，他們的學(xué)說變成了什么樣子，是饒有趣味的。公元前三世紀(jì)的早期，犬儒學(xué)派(Cynic)非常風(fēng)行，尤其是在亞歷山大港(Alexandria)。他們刊行了短篇的說教(sermon)，指出沒有物質(zhì)財(cái)產(chǎn)(materialpossessions)是多么地輕松，飲食簡(jiǎn)樸可以是多么地幸福，怎樣在冬天不必穿昂貴的衣服就可以保持溫暖（這在埃及也許是真的！），對(duì)自己的家鄉(xiāng)依依不舍或者悲悼自己的孩子或朋友的死亡又是何等之愚蠢。這些通俗化的犬儒學(xué)者之中有一個(gè)叫做德勒斯(Teles)的說：“我的兒子或妻子死了，那難道就有任何理由應(yīng)該不顧仍然還在活著的我自己，并且不再照顧我的財(cái)產(chǎn)了么？”①在這一點(diǎn)上我們很難對(duì)于這種單純生活感到任何的同情，它已經(jīng)變得太單純了。我們懷疑是誰高興這種說教，是希望把窮人的苦難想象成僅僅是幻想的那些富人呢？還是力圖鄙視獲得了成功的事業(yè)家們的那些新的窮人呢？還是想使自己相信自己所接受的恩賜是無關(guān)重要的那些阿諛獻(xiàn)媚者呢？德勒斯對(duì)一個(gè)富人說：
It is interesting to observe what the Cynic teaching became whenit was popularized. In the
early part of the third century B.C., the Cynics were the fashion,especially in Alexandria. They
published little sermons pointing out how easy it is to do withoutmaterial possessions, how
happy one can be on simple food, how warm one can keep in winterwithout expensive clothes
(which might be true in Egypt!), how silly it is to feel affectionfor one's native country, or to
mourn when one's children or friends die. "Because my son or mywife is dead," says Teles,
who was one of these popularizing Cynics, "is that any reason formy neglecting myself, who
am still alive, and ceasing to look after my property?" * At thispoint, it becomes difficult to
feel any sympathy with the simple life, which has grown altogethertoo simple. One wonders
who enjoyed these sermons. Was it the rich, who wished to think thesufferings of the poor
imaginary? Or was it the new poor, who were trying to despise thesuccessful business man? Or
was it sycophants who persuaded themselves that the charity theyaccepted was unimportant?
Teles says to a rich man:
“你慷慨大度地施舍給我，而我痛痛快快地取之于你，既不卑躬屈膝(grovel)，也不嘮叨不滿。”②這是一種很便當(dāng)?shù)膶W(xué)說。通俗的犬儒主義并不教人禁絕(abstinence)世俗的好東西，而僅僅是對(duì)它們具有某種程度的漠不關(guān)心(indifference)而已。就欠債的人來說，這可以表現(xiàn)為一種使他減輕自己對(duì)于債主所負(fù)的義務(wù)的形式。我們可以看到“玩世不恭”（“犬儒的”）這個(gè)名詞是怎樣獲得它的日常意義的。
"You give liberally and I takevaliantly from you, neither grovellingnor demeaning myself
basely nor grumbling." * A very convenient doctrine. PopularCynicism did not teach
abstinence from the good things of this world, but only a certainindifference to them. In the
case of a borrower, this might take the form of minimizing theobligation to the lender. One can
see how the word "cynic" acquired its every-day meaning.
犬儒派學(xué)說中最好的東西傳到了斯多葛主義(Stoicis)m里面來，而斯多葛主義則是一種更為完備和更加圓通的哲學(xué)。
What was best in the Cynic doctrine passed over into Stoicism,which was an altogether more
complete and rounded philosophy.
懷疑主義(Scepticism)之成為一種學(xué)派的學(xué)說最初是由皮洛(Pyrrho)提倡的，皮洛參加過亞歷山大的軍隊(duì)，并且隨軍遠(yuǎn)征過印度?？雌饋磉@使他發(fā)生了濃厚的旅行興趣；他的余年是在他的故鄉(xiāng)愛里斯城度過的，公元前275年他死在這里。除了對(duì)于以往的各種懷疑加以一定的系統(tǒng)化與形式化而外，他的學(xué)說里并沒有多少新東西。對(duì)于感官的懷疑是從很早以來就一直在困惱著希臘哲學(xué)家的；唯一的例外就是那些象巴門尼德（Parmenides）和柏拉圖那樣否認(rèn)知覺的認(rèn)識(shí)價(jià)值的人們，他們還把他們的否定當(dāng)做是宣揚(yáng)知識(shí)上的教條主義（dogmatism）的一種好機(jī)會(huì)。智者們，特別是普羅泰戈拉（Protagoras）和高爾吉亞（Gorgias），曾經(jīng)被感官知覺（sense-perception）的模糊極其顯著的矛盾而引到了一種有似于休謨的主觀主義（subjectivism）。皮洛似乎（因?yàn)樗苈斆鞯貨]有寫過任何書）在對(duì)感官的懷疑主義之外，又加上了道德的與邏輯的懷疑主義。據(jù)說他主張絕不可能有任何合理的理由，使人去選擇某一種行為途徑而不選擇另外的一種。在實(shí)踐上，這就意味著一個(gè)人無論住在哪個(gè)國家里，都是順從著那里的風(fēng)俗的。一個(gè)近代的信徒會(huì)在禮拜日到教堂去，并且奉行正確的跪拜儀式，而不必具有任何被人認(rèn)為是足以激發(fā)這些行動(dòng)的宗教信仰。古代的懷疑主義者奉行著全套的異教宗教儀節(jié)，有時(shí)候甚至于他們本人就是祭司；他們的懷疑主義向他們保證了這種行為不可能被證明是錯(cuò)誤的，而他們的常識(shí)感（這種常識(shí)感比他們的哲學(xué)更經(jīng)久）又向他們保證了這樣做是便當(dāng)?shù)摹?/p>
Scepticism, as a doctrine of the schools, was first proclaimedby Pyrrho, who was in
Alexander's army, and campaigned with it as far as India. It seemsthat this gave him a
sufficient taste of travel, and. that he spent the rest of his lifein his native city, Elis, where he died in 275 B.C. There was notmuch that was new in his doctrine, beyond a certain
systematizing and formalizing of older doubts. Scepticism withregard to the senses had
troubled Greek philosophers from a very early stage; the onlyexceptions were those who, like
Parmenides and Plato, denied the cognitive value of perception, andmade their denial into an
opportunity for an intellectual dogmatism. The Sophists, notablyProtagoras and Gorgias, had
been led by the ambiguities and apparent contradictions ofsense-perception to a subjectivism
not unlike Hume's. Pyrrho seems (for he very wisely wrote no books)to have added moral and
logical scepticism to scepticism as to the senses. He is said tohave maintained that there could
never be any rational. ground for preferring one course of actionto another. In practice, this
meant that one conformed to the customs of whatever countryoneinhabited. A modern disciple
would go to church on Sundays and. perform the correctgenuflexions, but without any of the
religious beliefs that are supposed to inspire these actions.Ancient Sceptics went through the
whole pagan ritual, and were even sometimes priests; theirScepticism assured them that this
behaviour could not be proved wrong, and their common sense (whichsurvived their
philosophy) assured them that it was convenient.
懷疑主義自然地會(huì)打動(dòng)許多不很哲學(xué)的頭腦。人們看到了各派之間的分歧以及他們之間的爭(zhēng)論的尖銳，于是便斷定大家全都一樣地自命為具有實(shí)際上是并不可能獲得的知識(shí)。懷疑主義是懶人的一種安慰，因?yàn)樗C明了愚昧無知的人和有名的學(xué)者是一樣的有智慧。對(duì)于那些品質(zhì)上要求著一種福音的人來說，它可能似乎是不能令人滿意的；但是正象希臘化時(shí)期的每一種學(xué)說一樣，它本身就成為了一付解憂劑而受人歡迎。為什么要憂慮未來呢？未來完全是無從捉摸的。你不妨享受目前；“未來的一切都還無從把握”。因?yàn)檫@些原因，懷疑主義在一般人中就享有了相當(dāng)?shù)某晒Α?/p>
Scepticism naturally made an appeal to many unphilosophic minds.People observed the
diversity of schools and the acerbity of their disputes, anddecided that all alike were pretending to knowledge which was infact unattainable. Scepticism was a lazy man's consolation, sinceit showed the ignorant to be as wise as the reputed men oflearning. To men who, by temperament, required a gospel, it mightseem unsatisfying, but like every doctrine of the Hellenisticperiod it recommended itself as an antidote to worry. Why trouble about the future? It is wholly uncertain. Youmay as well enjoy the present; "What'sto come is still unsure." For these reasons, Scepticismenjoyed a considerable popular success.
應(yīng)該指出，懷疑主義作為一種哲學(xué)來說，并不僅僅是懷疑而已，并且還可以稱之為是武斷的懷疑?？茖W(xué)家說：“我以為它是如此如此，但是我不能確定”。具有知識(shí)好奇心的人說：“我不知道它是怎樣的，但是我希望能弄明白”。哲學(xué)的懷疑主義者則說：“沒有人知道，也永遠(yuǎn)不可能有人知道”。正是這種教條主義（dogmatism）的成份，便使得懷疑主義的體系有了弱點(diǎn)。懷疑主義者當(dāng)然否認(rèn)他們武斷地肯定了知識(shí)的不可能性，但是他們的否認(rèn)卻是不大能令人信服的。
It should be observed that Scepticism as a philosophy is notmerely doubt, but what may be
called dogmatic doubt. The man of science says "I think it is so-and-so, but I am not sure."The
man of intellectual curiosity says "I don'tknow how it is, but I hope to find out." The
philosophical Sceptic says "nobody knows, andnobody ever can know." It is this element of
dogmatism that makes the system vulnerable. Sceptics, of course,deny that they assert the
impossibility of knowledge dogmatically, but their denials are notvery convincing.
然而，皮洛的弟子蒂孟（Timon）提出了一種理智上的論證，這種論證從希臘邏輯的立場(chǎng)來說是很難于答覆的。希臘人所承認(rèn)的唯一邏輯是演繹（deductive）的邏輯，而一切演繹都得象歐幾里德（Euclid）那樣，必須是從公認(rèn)為自明的普遍原則出發(fā)。但蒂孟否認(rèn)有任何找得出這種原則來的可能性。所以一切就都得靠著另外的某種東西來證明了；于是一切的論證要末便是循環(huán)的，要末便是系在空虛無物上面的一條無窮無盡的鏈鎖。而這兩種情形無論哪一種，都不能證明任何東西。我們可以看到，這種論證就砍中了統(tǒng)治著整個(gè)中世紀(jì)的亞里士多德哲學(xué)的根本。
Pyrrho's disciple Timon, however, advanced some intellectualarguments which, from the
standpoint of Greek logic, were very hard to answer. The only logicadmitted by the Greeks was
deductive, and all deduction had to start,like Euclid, from general principlesregarded as selfevident. Timon denied the possibility offinding such principles. Everything, therefore, will
have to be proved by means of something else, and all argument willbe either circular or an
endless chain hanging from nothing. In either case nothing can beproved. This argument, as we
can see, cut at the root of the Aristotelian philosophy whichdominated the Middle Ages.
在我們今天被那些并不是完全懷疑的人們所宣揚(yáng)的某些形式的懷疑主義，對(duì)于古代的懷疑派并不曾出現(xiàn)過。他們并不懷疑現(xiàn)象，也不疑問那些他們認(rèn)為是僅只表示我們所直接知道的有關(guān)現(xiàn)象的命題。蒂孟大部分的著作都已佚失了，但他現(xiàn)存的兩句話可以說明這一點(diǎn)。一句是說：“現(xiàn)象永遠(yuǎn)是有效的”。另一句是說：“蜜是甜的，我決不肯定；蜜看來是甜的，我完全承認(rèn)?！雹僖粋€(gè)近代的懷疑主義者會(huì)指出，現(xiàn)象僅僅是出現(xiàn)，它既不有效也不無效；有效或無效的必須是一個(gè)陳述；但并沒有一種陳述能夠和現(xiàn)象聯(lián)系得如此之密切，以致于不可能有虛假。由于同樣的理由，他也會(huì)說“蜜看來是甜的”這一陳述僅僅是高度或然的，而不是絕對(duì)確實(shí)可靠的。
Some forms of Scepticism which, in our own day, are advocated bymen who are by no means
wholly sceptical, had not occurred to the Sceptics of antiquity.They did not doubt phenomena,
or question propositions which, in their opinion, only expressedwhat we know directly
concerning phenomena. Most of Timon's work is lost, but twosurviving fragments will
illustrate this point. One says "Thephenomenon is always valid." The other says: "That honey is
sweet I refuse to assert; that it appears sweet, I fullygrant." * A modern Sceptic would point out that thephenomenon merely occurs, and is not either valid or invalid; whatis valid or invalid must be a statement, and no statement can be soclosely linked to the phenomenon as to be incapable of falsehood.For the same reason, he would say that the statement "honey appearssweet" is only highly probable, not absolutely certain.
在某些方面，蒂孟的學(xué)說非常有似于休謨（Hume）的學(xué)說。他認(rèn)為某些從未被人觀察到的東西——例如原子——就不能有效地被我們所推知；當(dāng)兩種現(xiàn)象屢屢被我們觀察到在一片的時(shí)候，我們就可以從一個(gè)推知另一個(gè)。
In some respects, the doctrine of Timon was very similar to thatof Hume. He maintained that
something which had never been observed--atoms, for instance--couldnot be validly inferred; but
when two phenomena had been frequently observed together, one couldbe inferred from the
other.
蒂孟在他悠長(zhǎng)的一生的晚年就住在雅典，并于公元前235年死于雅典。隨著他的死，皮洛的學(xué)派作為一個(gè)學(xué)派就告結(jié)束了；但是他的學(xué)說——說來似乎很奇怪——多少經(jīng)過了改造之后，卻被代表柏拉圖傳統(tǒng)的學(xué)園接受過來了。
Timon lived at Athens throughout the later years of his longlife, and died there in 235 B.C. With
his death, the school of Pyrrho, as a school, came to an end, buthis doctrines, somewhat modified, were taken up, strange as it mayseem, by the Academy, which represented the Platonictradition.
造成這一驚人的哲學(xué)革命的人是與蒂孟同時(shí)代的人阿塞西勞斯（Arcesilaus），他大約老死于公元前240年。大多數(shù)人所接受于柏拉圖的乃是信仰一個(gè)超感的理智的世界，信仰不朽的靈魂對(duì)可朽的肉體的優(yōu)越性。但柏拉圖是多方面的，在某些方面也可以把他看作是在宣揚(yáng)懷疑主義。柏拉圖筆下的蘇格拉底是自稱一無所知的；我們自然而然地總把這話認(rèn)為是諷刺，但是這話也可以認(rèn)真地加以接受。有許多篇對(duì)話并沒有達(dá)到任何正面的結(jié)論，目的就在要使讀者處于一種懷疑狀態(tài)。有些篇對(duì)話——例如《巴門尼德篇》的后半部——?jiǎng)t似乎是除了指明任何問題的正反兩方都可以提出同等可信的理由而外，并沒有什么別的目的。柏拉圖式的辯證法（dialectic）可以認(rèn)為是一種目的而不是一種手段；若是這樣加以處理的話，則它本身就成為對(duì)于懷疑主義的一種最可贊美的辯護(hù)。這似乎就是阿塞西勞斯所解說柏拉圖的方式，他自認(rèn)為仍然是在追隨著柏拉圖的。他砍掉了柏拉圖的頭，但是保留下來的軀干卻無論如何仍然是真的。
The man who effected this surprising philosophic revolution wasArcesilaus, a contemporary of T
imon, who died as an old man about 240 B.C. What most men havetaken from Plato is belief in a
supersensible intellectual world and in the superiority of theimmortal soul to the mortal body. But Plato was many-sided, and in somerespects could be regarded as teaching scepticism. The
Platonic Socrates professes to know nothing; we naturally treatthis as irony, but it could be taken seriously. Many of thedialogues reach no positive conclusion, and aim at leaving thereader in a state of doubt. Some--the latter half of theParmenides, for instance--might seem to have no purpose except toshow that either side of any question can be maintained with equalplausibility. The Platonic dialectic could be treated as an end,rather than a means, and if so treated it lent itself admirably tothe advocacy of Scepticism. This seems to have been the way inwhich Arcesilaus interpreted the man whom he still professed tofollow. He had decapitated Plato, but at any rate the torso thatremained was genuine.
阿塞西勞斯的教學(xué)方式會(huì)有許多地方是值得表揚(yáng)的，假使跟他學(xué)習(xí)的青年人能夠不為它所麻痹的話。他并不主張任何論點(diǎn)，但是他卻要反駁學(xué)生所提出來的任何論點(diǎn)。有時(shí)候他會(huì)自己前后提出兩個(gè)互相矛盾的命題，用以說明怎樣就可以令人信服地論證兩者之中的任何一個(gè)命題。一個(gè)有足夠的叛逆勇氣的學(xué)生，就可以學(xué)到機(jī)智并且避免謬誤；但事實(shí)上除了機(jī)伶和對(duì)于真理漠不關(guān)心而外，似乎并沒有人學(xué)到了任何的東西。阿塞西勞斯的影響是如此之大，以至于整個(gè)的學(xué)園大約有兩百年之久一直都是懷疑主義的。
The manner in which Arcesilaus taught would have had much tocommend it, if the young men
who learnt from him had been able to avoid being paralysed by it.He maintained no thesis, but
would refute any thesis set up by a pupil. Sometimes hewould himself advance two contradictory
propositions on successive occasions, showing how to argueconvincingly in favour of either. A
pupil sufficiently vigourous to rebel might have learnt dexterityand the avoidance of fallacies;
in fact, none seem to have learnt anything except cleverness andindifference to truth. So great
was the influence of Arcesilaus that the Academy remained scepticalfor about two hundred years.
在這一懷疑時(shí)期的中葉，發(fā)生了一件有趣的事情。公元前156年雅典派至羅馬的外交使團(tuán)有三位哲學(xué)家，其中有一個(gè)就是不愧繼任阿塞西勞斯作學(xué)院首領(lǐng)的那位卡爾內(nèi)亞德（Carneades）。他看不出有什么理由他作使臣的尊嚴(yán)就應(yīng)該妨礙他的這次大好機(jī)會(huì)，于是他就在羅馬講起學(xué)來。那時(shí)候的青年人都渴望模仿希臘的風(fēng)氣，學(xué)習(xí)希臘的文化，于是都蜂擁而來聽他講學(xué)。他的第一篇講演是發(fā)揮亞里士多德和柏拉圖的關(guān)于正義的觀點(diǎn)，并且是徹底建設(shè)性的。然而他的第二篇講演即是反駁他第一次所說過的一切，并不是為了要建立相反的結(jié)論，而僅僅是為了要證明每一種結(jié)論都是靠不住的。柏拉圖筆下的蘇格拉底論證說，以不公道加于人對(duì)于犯者來說要比忍受不公道是一樁更大的罪過?？杻?nèi)亞德在他的第二篇講演里，非常輕蔑地對(duì)待了這種說法。他指出，大國就是由于他們對(duì)軟弱的鄰邦進(jìn)行不正義的侵略而成為大國的；這一點(diǎn)在羅馬是不大好否認(rèn)的。船破落水的時(shí)候，你可以犧牲別的弱者而拯救你自己的生命；如果你不這樣做，你就是個(gè)傻瓜。他似乎認(rèn)為“先救婦孺”并不是一句可以導(dǎo)致個(gè)人得救的格言（maxim）。如果你在得勝的敵人面前潰退的時(shí)候已經(jīng)丟失了你的馬，而又發(fā)現(xiàn)有一個(gè)受傷的同志騎著一匹馬，那末你應(yīng)該怎么辦呢？如果你是有理智的，你就會(huì)把他拉下馬，搶過他的馬來，不管正義是怎么樣的講法。這一切不大有建設(shè)性的論證出于一個(gè)名義上是柏拉圖的追隨者之口，真是令人驚訝的，但是它似乎曾使得具有近代頭腦的羅馬青年們大為高興。
In the middle of this sceptical period, an amusing incidentoccurred. Carneades, a worthy
successor of Arcesilaus as head of the Academy, was one of threephilosophers sent by Athens on
a diplomatic mission to Rome in the year 156 B.C. He saw no reasonwhy his ambassadorial
dignity should interfere with the main chance, so he announced acourse of lectures in Rome. The
young men, who, at that time, were anxious to ape Greek manners andacquire Greek culture,
flocked to hear him. His first lecture expounded the views ofAristotle and Plato on justice, and
was thoroughly edifying. His second, however, was concerned inrefuting all that he had said in
his first, not with a view to establishing opposite conclusions,but merely to show that every
conclusion is unwarranted. Plato's Socrates had argued thatto inflict injustice was a greater evil to the perpetrator than tosuffer it. Carneades, in his second lecture, treated thiscontention with scorn. Great States, hepointed out, had become great by unjust aggressions against theirweaker neighbours; in Rome, this could not well be denied. In ashipwreck, you may save your life at the expense of some oneweaker, and you are a fool if you do not. "Women andchildren first," he seems to think, is not a maxim that leads topersonal survival. What would you do if you were flying from avictorious enemy, you had lost your horse, but you found a woundedcomrade on a horse? If you were sensible, you would drag him offand seize his horse, whatever justice might ordain. All this notvery edifying argumentation is surprising in a nominal follower ofPlato, but it seems to have pleased the modern-minded Romanyouths.
但是它卻使得有一個(gè)人大不高興，那個(gè)人就是老卡圖（elder Cato）；老卡圖代表著嚴(yán)峻的、僵硬的、愚蠢而又粗暴的道德規(guī)范（moralcode），正是靠了這種道德規(guī)范羅馬人才打敗了迦太基（Carthage）的。老卡圖從年青到年老都過著簡(jiǎn)樸的生活，一早就其床，進(jìn)行嚴(yán)格的體力勞動(dòng)，只吃粗糙的食物，并且從未穿過一件價(jià)值一百辨士以上的衣服。對(duì)于國家他是忠心耿耿的，他拒絕一切賄賂（bribery）和貪污（plunder）。他嚴(yán)格要求別的羅馬人也具有他自己所實(shí)行的一切德行，并且堅(jiān)持說控訴和檢舉壞人乃是一個(gè)正直的人所能做的最好的事情。他竭力推行古羅馬的嚴(yán)肅的風(fēng)尚：
There was one man whom it did not please and that was the elderCato, who represented the stern,
stiff, stupid, and brutal moral code by means of which Rome haddefeated Carthage. From youth
to old age, he lived simply, rose early, practised severe manuallabour, ate only coarse food, and
never wore a gown that cost over a hundred pence. Towards the Statehe was scrupulously honest,
avoiding all bribery and plunder. He exacted of other Romans allthe virtues that he practised
himself, and asserted that to accuse and pursue the wicked was thebest thing an honest man could
do. He enforced, as far as he could, the old Roman severity ofmanners:
“卡圖把一個(gè)叫做馬尼里烏斯的人趕出了元老院，這個(gè)人本來是極有希望在下一年被任命為執(zhí)政官的，僅僅因?yàn)檫@個(gè)人在白天并且當(dāng)著自己女兒的面前太多情地吻了自己的妻子；并且卡圖在譴責(zé)他做這件事時(shí)還告訴他說，除非在打雷的時(shí)候，他自己的妻子是從不吻他的”。①
" Cato put out of the Senate also, one Manilius, who was ingreat towardness to have been made
Consul the next year following, only because he kissed his wife toolovingly in the day time,
and before his daughter: and reproving him for it, he told him, hiswife never kissed him, but
when it thundered."
卡圖當(dāng)政的時(shí)候便禁止奢侈和宴會(huì)。他要他的妻子不僅哺乳她自己的孩子，還要哺乳他奴隸們的孩子，為的是用同樣的奶喂養(yǎng)起來之后，奴隸們的孩子就可以愛他自己的孩子了。當(dāng)他的奴隸年老不能工作時(shí)，他就毫不憐惜地把他們賣掉。他堅(jiān)持他的奴隸們應(yīng)當(dāng)永遠(yuǎn)不是做工便是睡覺。他鼓勵(lì)他的奴隸們互相爭(zhēng)吵，因?yàn)椤八荒苋萑膛`們居然做了好朋友”。若是有一個(gè)奴隸犯了嚴(yán)重的過錯(cuò)，他就把其余的奴隸都召來，并且誘導(dǎo)他們來咒罵這個(gè)犯過錯(cuò)的人罪該萬死；然后他就當(dāng)著其余奴隸們的面前親手把他處決。
When he was in power, he put down luxury and feasting. He madehis wife suckle not only her
own children, but also those of his slaves, in order that, havingbeen nourished by the same
milk, they might love his children. When his slaves were too old towork, he sold them
remorselessly. He insisted that his slaves should always be eitherworking or sleeping. He
encouraged his slaves to quarrel with each other, for "he could notabide that they should be
friends." When a slave had committed a grave fault, he would callin his other slaves, and
induce them to condemn the delinquent to death; he would then carryout the sentence with his
own hands in the presence of the survivors.
卡圖和卡爾內(nèi)亞德之間的對(duì)比真是非常全面的：一個(gè)是由于道德過分嚴(yán)厲、過分傳統(tǒng)以至于粗暴，另一個(gè)是由于道德過分放恣、過分沾染上了希臘化世界的社會(huì)墮落以至于下賤。
The contrast between Cato and Carneades was very complete: theone brutal through a morality
that was too strict and too traditional, the other ignoble througha morality that was too lax and
too much infected with the social dissolution of the Hellenisticworld.
“馬爾庫斯·卡圖從一開始——從青年們開始學(xué)希臘語，從而希臘語在羅馬日益為人重視的時(shí)候——就不喜歡這件事：怕的是渴望學(xué)習(xí)知識(shí)與辯論的羅馬青年們，會(huì)完全忘掉榮譽(yù)與武力的光榮?！谑怯幸惶焖驮谠显豪锕_地攻擊這幾位使臣在這里呆得時(shí)間太久，而且沒有趕快辦事：還要考慮到這些使臣都是狡猾的人，很容易說服別人相信他們。假使沒有其他方面的考慮的話，僅此一點(diǎn)也就足以說服元老院對(duì)使臣們做出一個(gè)決定的答復(fù)來，好把他們遣送回國去教書，去教他們自己的希臘孩子，別讓他們?cè)俟芰_馬的孩子了；讓羅馬的孩子們還象從前一樣地學(xué)習(xí)著服從法律和元老院吧。他向元老院說這番話，并不是出于他對(duì)卡爾內(nèi)亞德有任何的私仇或惡意（象某些人所猜想的那樣）：而是因?yàn)樗偸浅鹨曊軐W(xué)的"。①
" Marcus Cato, even from the beginning that young men began tostudy the Greek tongue, and
that it grew in estimation in Rome, did dislike of it: fearing lestthe youth of Rome that were
desirous of learning and eloquence, would utterly give over thehonour and glory of arms. . . .
So he openly found fault one day in the Senate, that theAmbassadors were long there, and had
no dispatch: considering also they were cunning men, and couldeasily persuade what they
would. And if there were no other respect, this only might persuadethem to determine some
answer for them, and to send them home again to their schools, toteach their children of
Greece, and to let alone the children of Rome, that they mightlearn to obey the laws and the
Senate, as they had done before. Now he spake thus to the Senate,not of any private ill will or
malice he bare to Carneades, as some men thought: but because hegenerally hated philosophy."
在卡圖的眼里，雅典人是沒有法律的低等人；所以他們?nèi)舯恢R(shí)分子的淺薄的詭辯術(shù)所腐蝕的話，那是沒有關(guān)系的；但是羅馬青年則必須是清教徒式的、帝國主義的、無情的而又愚昧的。然而他并沒有成功；后來的羅馬人不但保存了卡圖的許多毛病，同時(shí)還接受了卡爾內(nèi)亞德的許多毛病。
The Athenians, in Cato's view, were a lesser breed without thelaw; it did not matter if they
were degraded by the shallow sophistics of intellectuals, but theRoman youth must be kept
puritanical, imperialistic, ruthless, and stupid. He failed,however; later Romans, while retaining many of his vices, adoptedthose of Carneades also.
繼卡爾內(nèi)亞德（約當(dāng)公元前180-110年）之后的下一任學(xué)園園長(zhǎng)是一個(gè)迦太基人（Carthaginian），他的真名字是哈斯德魯拔（Hasdrubal），但是他和希臘人打交道時(shí)喜歡自稱為克來多馬柯（Clitomachus）。與卡爾內(nèi)亞德之把自己只限于講學(xué)不同，克來多馬柯寫了四百多部書，其中有些是用腓尼基文寫的。他的原則似乎和卡爾內(nèi)亞德的一樣。在某些方面，它們是有用的。這兩位懷疑派都從事反對(duì)那些變得日益廣泛流行的占卜（divination）、巫術(shù)和星相學(xué)（astrology）的信仰。他們也發(fā)展了一種建設(shè)性的有關(guān)或然性的程度的學(xué)說；盡管我們永遠(yuǎn)不可能有理由感到確實(shí)的可靠性，但是某些東西卻似乎要比別的東西更近乎真實(shí)?；蛉恍詰?yīng)該是我們實(shí)踐的指導(dǎo)，因?yàn)楦鶕?jù)各種可能的假設(shè)中之或然性最大的一種而行事，乃是合理的。這種觀點(diǎn)也是大多數(shù)近代哲學(xué)家所同意的一種觀點(diǎn)。不幸的是發(fā)揮這種觀點(diǎn)的書籍已經(jīng)失傳了；我們很難依據(jù)現(xiàn)存的一些提示而重新構(gòu)造出來這種學(xué)說。
The next head of the Academy, after Carneades (ca. 180 to ca.110 B.C.), was a Carthaginian
whose real name was Hasdrubal, but who, in his dealings withGreeks, preferred to call himself
Clitomachus. Unlike Carneades, who confined himself to lecturing,Clitomachus wrote over four
hundred books, some of them in the Phoenician language. Hisprinciples appear to have been the
same as those of Carneades. In some respects, they were useful.These two Sceptics set
themselves against the belief in divination, magic, and astrology,which was becoming more and
more widespread. They also developed a constructive doctrine,concerning degrees of probability;
although we can never be justified in feeling certainty, somethings are more likely to be true than others. Probability shouldbe our guide in practice, since it is reasonable to act on the mostprobable of possible hypotheses. This view is one with which mostmodern philosophers would
agree. Unfortunately, the books setting it forth are lost, and itis difficult to reconstruct the
doctrine from the hints that remain.
克來多馬柯之后，學(xué)園就不再是懷疑主義的了，并且從安提阿古（Antiochus，他死于公元前69年）而后，它的學(xué)說有好幾個(gè)世紀(jì)實(shí)際上已經(jīng)變得和斯多葛派的懷疑主義難以區(qū)分了。
After Clitomachus, the Academy ceased to be sceptical, and fromthe time of Antiochus (who died
in 69 B.C.) its doctrines became, for centuries, practicallyindistinguishable from those of the
Stoics.
人被打上了將帥與帝王的印戳，事物被打上了榮譽(yù)、智慧、幸福與財(cái)富的印戳；，諾索斯（假如我們知道一點(diǎn)的話）早在兩千多年以前就可能有過懷疑派，他們以懷疑動(dòng)物的女神有沒有神性來取悅于放蕩的廷臣們。艾奈西狄姆的年代無法確定。他拋開了卡爾內(nèi)亞德所宣揚(yáng)的或然性學(xué)說，又回到了懷疑主義最初的形式上去。他的影響相當(dāng)大；追隨他的有公元二世紀(jì)時(shí)的詩人魯西安以及稍后的古代懷疑派哲學(xué)家中唯一有著作流傳下來的塞克斯托·恩皮里庫斯。例如，有一片短文《反對(duì)信仰神的論證》曾被愛德文·比萬在他的《晚期希臘宗教》一書第52-56頁里譯為英文，并且據(jù)他說這或許就是塞克斯托·恩皮里庫斯根據(jù)克來多馬柯的口授而采自卡爾內(nèi)亞德的。
Scepticism, however, did not disappear. It was revived by theCretan Aenesidemus, who came
from Knossos, where, for aught we know, there may have beenSceptics two thousand years
earlier, entertaining dissolute courtiers with doubts as to thedivinity of the mistress of animals. The date of Aenesidemus isuncertain. He threw over the doctrines on probability advocated byCarneades, and reverted to the earliest forms of Scepticism. Hisinfluence was considerable; he was followed by the poet Lucian inthe second century A.D., and also, slightly later, by SextusEmpiricus, the only Sceptic philosopher of antiquity whose workssurvive. There is, for example, a short treatise, "ArgumentsAgainst Belief in a God," translated by Edwyn Bevan in his LaterGreek Religion, pp. 52-56, and said by him to be probably taken bySextus Empiricus from Carneades, as reported by Clitomachus.
這片文章一開始就解釋說，在行為上懷疑派乃是正統(tǒng)的：“我們懷疑派在實(shí)踐上追隨著世人的做法，并且對(duì)它沒有任何的意見。我們談到神，把他們當(dāng)做是存在的，我們敬神并且說他們執(zhí)行天命；但是這樣說的時(shí)候，我們并沒有表示信仰，從而避免了教條者們的魯莽輕率”。
This treatise begins by explaining that, in behaviour, theSceptics are orthodox: "We sceptics
follow in practice the way of the world, but without holding anyopinion about it. We speak of the
Gods as existing and offer worship to the Gods and say that theyexercise providence, but in saying this we express no belief, andavoid the rashness of the dogmatisers."
接著他就論證說，人們對(duì)于神的性質(zhì)是意見分歧的，例如有人認(rèn)為他是有身體的，又有人認(rèn)為他是沒有身體的。我們既然對(duì)他沒有任何的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，所以我們就不能知道他的屬性。神的存在并不是自明的，所以才需要證明。同時(shí)他還有一個(gè)比較混亂的論證，指出這樣的證明乃是不可能的。其次，他就談到了罪惡這一問題，并結(jié)論說：
He then argues that people differ as to the nature of God; forinstance, some think Him corporeal,
some incorporeal. Since we have no experience of Him, we cannotknow His attributes. The
existence of God is not self-evident, and therefore needsproof. There is a somewhat confused
argument to show that no such proof is possible. He next takes upthe problem of evil, and
concludes with the words:
“那些積極肯定神存在的人，就不能避免陷于一種不虔敬(impiety)。因?yàn)槿绻麄冋f神統(tǒng)御著萬物，那末他們就把他當(dāng)成是罪惡事物的創(chuàng)作者了；另一方面，如果他們說神僅只統(tǒng)御著某些事物或者不統(tǒng)御任何事物；那末他們就不得不把神弄成是心胸狹隘的或者是軟弱無能的了，而這樣做便顯然是一種十足的不虔敬?！?/p>
"Those who affirm positively that God exists cannot avoidfalling into an impiety. For if they say
that God controls everything, they make Him the author of evilthings; if, on the other hand, they
say that He controls some things only, or that He controls nothing,they are compelled to make
God either grudging or impotent, and to do that is quite obviouslyan impiety."
懷疑主義盡管繼續(xù)打動(dòng)著某些有教養(yǎng)的個(gè)人一直要到公元后三世紀(jì)，但是它卻與日益轉(zhuǎn)向教條化的宗教和得救學(xué)說的時(shí)代性格背道而馳。懷疑主義者有足夠的力量能使有教育的人們對(duì)國家宗教不滿，但是它卻提供不出任何積極的東西（哪怕是在純知識(shí)的領(lǐng)域內(nèi)）來代替它。自從文藝復(fù)興以來，神學(xué)上的懷疑主義（就它大多數(shù)的擁護(hù)者而論）已經(jīng)被對(duì)于科學(xué)的熱誠信仰所代替了，但是在古代卻并沒有這種對(duì)懷疑的代替品。古代世界沒有能夠回答懷疑派的論證，于是就回避了這些論證。奧林匹克的神已經(jīng)不為人所相信了，東方宗教入侵的道路已經(jīng)掃清了，于是東方的宗教就來爭(zhēng)取迷信者們的擁護(hù)，直到基督教的勝利為止。
Scepticism, while it continued to appeal to some cultivatedindividuals until somewhere in the
third century A.D., was contrary to the temper of the age, whichwas turning more and more to
dogmatic religion and doctrines of salvation. Scepticism had enoughforce to make educated men
dissatisfied with the State religions, but it had nothing positive,even in the purely intellectual sphere, to offer in their place.From the Renaissance onwards, theological scepticism has beensupplemented, in most of its advocates, by an enthusiastic beliefin science, but in antiquity there was no such supplement to doubt.Without answering the arguments of the Sceptics, the ancient worldturned aside from them. The Olympians being discredited, the waywas left clear for an invasion of oriental religions, whichcompeted for the favour of the superstitious until the triumph ofChristianity.
========================================
①貝恩，卷二，第4，5頁；穆萊，《五個(gè)階段》，第113-114頁。
①穆萊，《五個(gè)階段》，第117頁。
②同上，第119頁。
] 12;《希臘化時(shí)代》（1923年，劍橋板），第84頁以下。
②同上，第86頁。
①轉(zhuǎn)引自愛德文·比萬：《斯多葛派與懷疑派》，第126頁。
①諾爾斯譯，普魯塔克《名人傳》，馬爾庫斯·卡圖傳。
①諾爾斯譯，普魯塔克《名人傳》，馬爾庫斯·卡圖傳。
(待續(xù)）
