Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 17.djvu/347

Rh present became wisdom, and its wisdom became foolish ness. Such is Neoplatonism. The pre-Socratic philosophy took its stand on natural science, to the exclusion of ethics and religion. The systems of Plato and Aristotle sought to adjust the rival claims of physics and ethics (although the supremacy of the latter was already acknowledged); but the popular religions were thrown overboard. The post-Aristotelian philosophy in all its branches makes withdrawal from the objective world its starting point. It might seem, indeed, that Stoicism indicates a falling off from Plato and Aristotle towards materialism, but the ethical dualism, which was the ruling tendency of the Stoa, could not long endure its materialistic physics, and took refuge in the metaphysical dualism of the Platonists. But this originated no permanent philosophical creation. From one-sided Platonism issued the various forms of scepticism, the attempt to undermine the trustworthiness of empirical knowledge. Neoplatonism, coming last, has borrowed something from all the schools. First, it stands in the line of post-Aristotelian systems ; it is, in fact, as a subjective philosophy, their logical completion. Secondly, it is founded on scepticism ; for it has neither interest in, nor reliance upon, empirical knowledge. Thirdly, it can justly claim the honour of Plato s name, since it expressly goes back to him for its metaphysics, directly combating those of the Stoa. Yet even on this point it has learned something from the Stoics ; the Neoplatonic conception of the action of the Deity on the world and of the essence and origin of matter can only be explained by reference to the dynamic pantheism of the Stoa. Fourthly, the study of Aristotle also exercised an influence on Neoplatonism. This appears, not only in its philosophical method, but also though less prominently in its meta- physic. And, fifthly, Neoplatonism adopted the ethics of Stoicism ; although it was found necessary to supplement them by a still higher conception of the functions of the spirit. Thus, with the exception of Epicureanism which was always treated as the mortal enemy of Neoplatonism there is no outstanding earlier system which did not con tribute something to the new philosophy. And yet Neoplatonism cannot be described as an eclectic system, in the ordinary sense of the word. For, in the first place, it is dominated by one all-pervading interest the reli gious; and in the second place, it has introduced a new first principle into philosophy, viz., the supra-rational, that which lies beyond reason and beyond reality. This principle is not to be identified with the &quot; idea &quot; of Plato or the &quot; form &quot; of Aristotle. For, as Zeller rightly says, &quot;in Plato and Aristotle the distinction of the sensible from the intelligible is the strongest affirmation of the validity of the thinking process. It is only sense percep tion, and the existence perceived by the senses, whose relative unreality is presupposed ; of a higher region of spiritual life, lying beyond the notion and beyond thought, there is no hint. In Neoplatonism, on the contrary, it is precisely this supra-rational which is held to be the final goal of all effort and the ultimate ground of all being. Rational cognition is only an intermediate stage between sense perception and supra-rational intuition ; the forms of the intellect are not the highest and ultimate reality, but only the channels through which the activity of the formless primeval being flows into the world. This theory, therefore, proceeds, not merely on the denial of the reality of sensible existence and sensible presentations, but upon absolute doubt a straining after something behind the sum total of reality. The highest intelligible is not that which constitutes the actual contents of reason, but simply what man postulates and reaches after as the 333 unknowable ground of his thought.&quot; Neoplatonism perceived that neither sense perception nor rational cognition is a sufficient basis or justification for religious ethics ; consequently it broke away from rationalistic ethics as decidedly as from utilitarian morality. But, just because it renounced perception and reason, it had to find out a new world and a new spiritual function, in order first to establish the existence of what it desiderated, and then to realize and describe what it had proved to exist. Man, however, cannot add to his psychological endow ment. He is hemmed in by walls of iron ; and, if he will not allow his thought to be determined by experience, he falls a victim to his imagination. In other words, thought, which will not stop, takes to mythology ; and in the place of reason we have superstition. A dumb astonishment in the presence of the incomprehensible passes for the highest aim of mental activity ; arti ficially excited ecstasies are prized above all the conscious acts of the spirit. Still, as we cannot allow every fancy of the subjective reason to assert itself, we require some new and potent principle to keep the imagination within bounds. This is found in the authority of a sound tradi tion. Such authority must be superhuman, otherwise it can have no claim on our respect ; it must, therefore, be divine. The highest sphere of knowledge the supra- rational as well as the very possibility of knowledge, must depend on divine communications, that is, on revelations. In one word, philosophy as represented by Neoplatonism, its sole interest being a religious interest, and its highest object the supra-rational, must be a philosophy of revela tion. This is not a prominent feature in Plotinus or his immediate disciples, who still exhibit full confidence in the subjective presuppositions of their philosophy. But the later adherents of the school did not possess this confidence ; l they based their philosophy on revelations of the Deity, and they found these in the religious traditions and rites of all nations. The Stoics had taught them to overstep the political boundaries of states and nationalities, and rise from the Hellenic to a universal human consciousness. Through all history the spirit of God has breathed ; everywhere we discover the traces of His revelation. The older any religious tradition or mode of worship is the more venerable is it, the richer in divine ideas. Hence the ancient religions of the East had a peculiar interest for the Neoplatonist. In the interpre tation of myths Neoplatonism followed the allegorical method, as practised especially by the Stoa ; but the importance it attached to the spiritualized myths was unknown to the Stoic philosophers. The latter inter preted the myths and were done with them ; the later Neoplatonists treated them as the proper material and the secure foundation of philosophy. Neoplatonism claimed to be not merely the absolute philosophy, the keystone of all previous systems, but also the absolute religion, reinvigorating and transforming all previous religions. It contemplated a restoration of all the religions of antiquity, by allowing each to retain its traditional forms, and at the same time making each a vehicle for the religious attitude and the religious truth embraced in Neoplatonism ; while every form of ritual was to become a stepping-stone to a high morality worthy of mankind. In short, Neoplatonism seizes on the aspiration of the human soul after a higher life, and treats this psychological fact as the key to the interpretation of the universe. Hence the existing religions, after being refined and spiritualized, were made the basis of philosophy. 1 Porphyry wrote a book, irfpi rrjs tic oyi&amp;lt;av &amp;lt;j)ioffo&amp;lt;}&amp;gt;ta$, but this was before he became a pupil of Plotinus ; as a philosopher he was independent of the yia.