He says, that the doctrine concerning good and
evil which himself introduces and approves is most agreeable to life, and does most of all reach the inbred prenotions; for this he has affirmed in his Third Book of
Exhortations. But in his First Book he says, that this
doctrine takes a man off from all other things, as being
nothing to us, nor co-operating any thing towards felicity.
See now, how consonant he is to himself, when he asserts
a doctrine which takes us off from life, health, indolence,
and integrity of the senses, and says that those things we
beg of the Gods are nothing to us, though most agreeable
to life and to the common presumptions. But that there
may be no denial of his speaking contradictions, in his
Third Book of Justice he has said thus: ‘Wherefore also,
from the excellence of their greatness and beauty, we
seem to speak things like to fictions, and not according to
man or human nature.’ Is it then possible that any one
can more plainly confess his speaking things contrary to
himself than this man does, who affirms those things which
(he says) for their excellency seem to be fictions and to be
spoken above man and human nature, to be agreeable to
life, and most of all to reach the inbred prenotions?
[p. 446]
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.