Opening the library…

Home Bible Corpus Discover You

Search the Bible

The Divine Institutes

Lactantius

Book 3 · Chapter 4

About this work

A large Latin presentation of Christian teaching that criticizes pagan religion and philosophy while treating justice, God, creation, Christ, worship, ethics, and the final destiny of humanity.

Author: Lactantius
Date: c. AD 303–311
Origin: North Africa and Nicomedia
Genre: Apology

Chap. IV.—That Knowledge is Taken Away by Socrates, and Conjecture by Zeno.

Zeno and the Stoics, then, were right

‹ Book 3 · Chapter 3 Book 3 · Chapter 5 ›

in

repudiating

conjecture

.

For

to

conjecture

that

you

know

that

which

you

do

not

know

,

is

not

the

part

of

a

wise

,

but

rather

of

a

rash

and

foolish

man

.

Therefore

if

nothing

can

be

known

,

as

Socrates

taught

,

or

ought

to

be

conjectured

,

as

Zeno

taught

,

philosophy

is

entirely

removed

.

Why

should

I

say

that

it

is

not

only

overthrown

by

these

two

,

who

were

the

chiefs

of

philosophy

,

but

by

all

,

so

that

it

now

appears

to

have

been

long

ago

destroyed

by

its

own

arms

?

Philosophy

has

been

divided

into

many

sects

;

and

they

all

entertain

various

sentiments

.

In

which

do

we

place

the

truth

?

It

certainly

cannot

be

in

all

.

Let

us

point

out

some

one

;

it

follows

that

all

the

others

will

be

without

wisdom

.

Let

us

pass

through

them

separately

;

in

the

same

manner

,

whatever

we

shall

give

to

one

we

shall

take

away

from

the

others

.

For

each

particular

sect

overturns

all

others

,

to

confirm

itself

and

its

own

doctrines

:

nor

does

it

allow

wisdom

to

any

other

,

lest

it

should

confess

that

it

is

itself

foolish

;

but

as

it

takes

away

others

,

so

is

it

taken

away

itself

by

all

others

.

For

they

are

nevertheless

philosophers

who

accuse

it

of

folly

.

Whatever

sect

you

shall

praise

and

pronounce

true

,

that

is

censured

by

philosophers

as

false

.

Shall

we

therefore

believe

one

which

praises

itself

and

its

doctrine

,

or

the

many

which

blame

the

ignorance

of

each

other

?

That

must

of

necessity

be

better

which

is

held

by

great

numbers

,

than

that

which

is

held

by

one

only

.

For

no

one

can

rightly

judge

concerning

himself

,

as

the

renowned

poet

testifies

;

for

the

nature

of

men

is

so

arranged

,

that

they

see

and

distinguish

the

affairs

of

others

better

than

their

own

.

Since

,

therefore

,

all

things

are

uncertain

,

we

must

either

believe

all

or

none

:

if

we

are

to

believe

no

one

,

then

the

wise

have

no

existence

,

because

while

they

separately

affirm

different

things

they

think

themselves

wise

;

if

all

,

it

is

equally

true

that

there

are

no

wise

men

,

because

all

deny

the

wisdom

of

each

individually

.

Therefore

all

are

in

this

manner

destroyed

;

and

as

those

fabled

sparti

of

the

poets

,

so

these

men

mutually

slay

one

another

,

so

that

no

one

remains

of

all

;

which

happens

on

this

account

,

because

they

have

a

sword

,

but

have

no

shield

.

If

,

therefore

,

the

sects

individually

are

convicted

of

folly

by

the

judgment

of

many

sects

,

it

follows

that

all

are

found

to

be

vain

and

empty

;

and

thus

philosophy

consumes

and

destroys

itself

.

And

since

Arcesilas

the

founder

of

the

Academy

understood

this

,

he

collected

together

the

mutual

censures

of

all

,

and

the

confession

of

ignorance

made

by

distinguished

philosophers

,

and

armed

himself

against

all

.

Thus

he

established

a

new

philosophy

of

not

philosophizing

.

From

this

founder

,

therefore

,

there

began

to

be

two

kinds

of

philosophy

:

one

the

old

one

,

which

claims

to

itself

knowledge

;

the

other

a

new

one

,

opposed

to

the

former

,

and

which

detracts

from

it

.

Between

these

two

kinds

of

philosophy

I

see

that

there

is

disagreement

,

and

as

it

were

civil

war

.

On

which

side

shall

we

place

wisdom

,

which

cannot

be

torn

asunder

?

If

the

nature

of

things

can

be

known

,

this

troop

of

recruits

will

perish

;

if

it

cannot

,

the

veterans

will

be

destroyed

:

if

they

shall

be

equal

,

nevertheless

philosophy

,

the

guide

of

all

,

will

still

perish

,

because

it

is

divided

;

for

nothing

can

be

opposed

to

itself

without

its

own

destruction

.

But

if

,

as

I

have

shown

,

there

can

be

no

inner

and

peculiar

knowledge

in

man

on

account

of

the

frailty

of

the

human

condition

,

the

party

of

Arcesilas

prevails

.

But

not

even

will

this

stand

firm

,

because

it

cannot

be

the

case

that

nothing

at

all

is

known

.

Notes

1
Terent., Heautont., iii. sec. 97.
2
σπαρτοί, those who sprung from the dragon’s teeth.
3
Distrahi, which is the reading of some editions, is here followed in preference to the common reading, detrahi.