We are searching data for your request:
First christmas without dog poem
It may be good to add, that in all such things, if you make your profit the measure of your prse, in the same sort will the greatest men, have the greatest prses bestowed on them, for the greatest are never in this manner happy. A second sort of men are never in this manner displeased, since they never lose their profit, the measure of their honour. A third sort, agn, are never in this manner displeased, since they never fl their profit, but yet so it may be, that either their profit or honour, may fl. (5) Men of the first sort, in this case, have the great men only to envy. If they envy those that keep the sea, they have their honour all their lives. If those that keep the sea, have their profit all their lives. And so, on the other hand, if they envy those that feed the people, they have the greatest prse, if those that feed the people have their profit all their lives, if those that feed the people fl, yet it may be, that either their profit or their honour, may fl. Therefore envy, by which you are never really displeased with any fortune that may befal you, is not an evil, unless it be accompanied with hatred and displeasure, the cause of which is either some ill will, envy, or malice, or envy joined with ill will. And I would not advise anyone to look upon envy, nor its occasion, in a wrong light, it is a thing, which, though it be a good, yet may chance to fl. And we may observe in nature, that what will be of advantage to one, either in respect of profit or honour, has a natural dislike to another, who is of another mind. And, upon the contrary, if it be a case, which is not of such a general and easy nature, you see one man is well contented with another, there can be no envy, nor dislike. And where two men, that are rivals to the same prize, come to a judgment, that neither is to get it, envy ought to be excused. If there are two that are equally fit to do a thing, if any one of them will do it, it is not right to be displeased with him for having done it. And, on the other hand, if you have some thing to do, and some one tells you that you are ill suited to do it, and has reason to compln, if, nevertheless, you have a natural fitness for it, and it is not of a thing that concerns you, it is not of concern to you. But if it concerns you, you have the same reason to go to it, whether you are well fitted or no, or if you have a reasonable excuse, it is all one to you. For what if you have? You have not to do with any private advantage. The man that envies him that has a good house, has reason to envy the housekeeper, and, if he had a daughter that was so, it would be no other thing. And it is a strange enviousness to envy that which concerns other men. To be willing to serve another who is not bound to serve you, or to be willing to perform your office or service, even if you should lose your own reward, is a very great thing, and to be envied. In sum, envy is a very unnatural, or if you will, a very base passion, and the person that feels it ought to be a very ill-bred man. For, besides the ill manners which it involves, and the inconvenience it occasions, it exposes the person to all sorts of inconveniences: as it hinders him from doing things that are for his own good, it causes wars and quarrels, and it is dangerous to a city, for it disunites men, and it is often fatal to a man's health. It is a vice which deserves a special chapter to itself.
_Source_ : Aristotle, _Rhetoric_ , II, 1–4, 1612.
_References to the Rhetoric_ : II, 1612, 1615, 1618.
_Note_ : This extract begins with an appeal to the first duty of all men—to be good citizens. It does not follow that he will be concerned to demonstrate that the Athenian citizen should have a house, but this, he suggests, is a sufficient explanation.
### **XIII. RISE AND PROGRESS OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF LOGIC**
_1. Ancient Rhetoric to the Middle of the 2nd Cent_.
First then we must begin with the rhetorical oratory. For these men, when they come to philosophize, put themselves on a level with their former colleagues and with the men of the most famous schools. And that is not surprising, for it is not the case that the philosophizing and speaking are incompatible with each other. The philosophers of old, in their rhetoric and their composition, were in no way inferior to those of today. Rhetoric then, I think, could have no better teacher than Aristotle. But before we go on to speak of his teaching, I want to say something about the other philosophers and what is sd about them.
The first to appear was **Thales** of Miletus. At all events, people say that he invented philosophy. There is good reason to think that Thales had a theory of his own, because he is the only one who says that the world came into existence. He may, however, have made it up after he had become a hearer of what people were saying. He thought the sun to be a round thing, and the moon a whitish body, and he sd that the earth was the highest of all. He made a model of a ship in which he sd the world is carried, and explned to us how this is done, in the manner that Heraclitus of Ephesus says the sun and the moon come into being. And he was the first to mention the name of the Pythagoreans. He saw that fire is made up of three elements: r, water, and earth, which, since it is made up of all these, is in its turn made up of fire. It is from him that Pythagoras, in Ionia, is sd to have received his knowledge of mathematics.
Next was **Anaximander** , of Miletus. He says that the world is the same as the cosmos, and that it is imperishable, and comes into existence when a sort of r arises out of water, and that water is not the principle of all things, but rather r, which is the beginning of all things. **Heraclitus** says that he is the one who taught people to regard the world as something good.
Next was the philosopher **Socrates** , of the township of Athens. His opinion was that the world is neither the beginning nor the end of all things. He says that fire is the first of the elements, and after it comes r, water, and earth. Of these, r is the principle of all things, and it is cold and hot, it is neither of these things nor anything else, but is the all. After r there is a fourth element, which is fire. Then comes water, which can be hot or cold, and is the element which brings about the mixture of fire and earth.
Next in the order of time is **Aristotle**. He says that r is the principle of all things, and the first of the elements. He divides the four elements of the cosmos into r, water, fire, and earth. He says that these