Repository | Book | Chapter

The founders and adherents of both dogmatic schools, of the Stoa and of the Garden of Epicurus, though differing substantially, became the principal rivals to Plato's heritage. It was only the controversy with the Stoa that procured results of value because Epicurus' philosophy was developing in quite a different direction. The philosophy, which Plato expressed in his writings, was not entirely proof against the influence of other doctrines, for it might be taken in different senses and variously interpreted, especially since some of its doctrines were not wholly consistent and lacked that firm coherence that only a system could give them. Nevertheless his writings preserved Plato, largely unaltered, for all coming centuries, as a philosopher whom one could approach directly and without the mediation of interpreters. But the philosophers who represented or were supposed to represent the second part of Plato's legacy, his Academy, were in constant touch with the development of philosophical thought outside the Academy, received its impulses, and whether they were attracted or repelled by them, they felt their influence. Thus they sometimes deviated from Plato's way of thought. This divergence grew obvious as they abandoned Plato's metaphysics and made his dialectics and end in itself.

DOI: 10.1007/978-94-009-9704-2_4

Full citation: