The Guide of the Perplexed (review)

BOOK REVIEWS 265 Seneeas Beweis]i~hrung. By Winfried Trillitzsch. Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Schriften der Sektion fiir Altertumswissenschaft, Band 37. (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag 1962. Pp. xiv § 148. DM 24.50.) This philosophical dissertation, written under the supervision of Professors F. Dornseiff (Leipzig) and K. Kumaniecki (Warsaw) and accepted in 1959 by the University of Leipzig, is a careful historical investigation of the character of argumentation in the writings of Seneca. Moreover, it is a valuable contribution to our understanding of the Hellenistic Diatribe literature . The dissertation has already been published in part in the "Wissenschaftliehe Zeitschrift der Karl-Marx-Universitgt Leipzig" 9, 1959/60, pp. 821--872, under the title "Interpretationen zu Senecas Beweisfiihrung." In his first section, the author presents the means of argumentation as they were at the disposal of a man like Seneca at that time. In the second part, entitled "Interpretationen," Seneca's methods of argumentation are shown in detail by analyzing illustrative texts. From case to case, the problem of sources is treated, but this is not the major intention of the book. The stoic dialectic is of no great importance for Seneca, because it is too abstract for his more practical attitude. Furthermore, when he uses dialectical arguments, he corrects them ("Ostende rebus, non verbisI"). For the same reasons, Seneca avoids formally constructed rhetorical arguments and prefers simpler rational arguments, lie is in agreement with the rhetoric of his time when he favours evident "rationes," pointed "scntentiae," the "consensus omnium gentium," or proofs from experience, analogy, sayings, and descriptions. This, then, is not far away from the diatribe style of the cynic-stoic popular philosophy, with which Seneca does have much in common. Here the method of logical demonstration has been largely replaced by skills of persuasion. Inasmuch as Seneca is influenced by the diatribe style, he is also influenced by the consolation literature related to it. As a means of demonstration he extensively uses the "auctoritas maiorum." Strangely enough, of all the philosophers Seneca prefers to quote Epicurus, but, of course, he as well as the poets is subiected to his own interpretation. Ultimately, these "dicta probantia" are considered to be of the same deep wisdom as are the common sayings. Similarly, the historical "exempla" are very highly regarded by Seneca. They serve as "imagines virtutis." As incarnations of stoic wisdom they represent examples for the stoic "sapiens." These "exempla" may also appear in the form of an anecdote or apophthegm. In his paraenesis, Seneca regards comparisons, images, and descriptions (emphasizing especially the horrible and dreadful things in life) as an effective preparation for the exhortations he wants to convey. However, he rejects fables and allegorical interpretation or mythology as a means of argurnentation . The book has a bibliography as well as indices of subjects, persons, and textual references. HA~S DIETERBETZ Claremont, Cali/o~'nia The Guide o] the Perplexed. By Moses Maimonides. Translated with an Introduction and Notes by Shlomo Pines, with an Introductory Essay by Leo Strauss. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1963. Pp. cxxxiv + 658. $15.00.) The publication of a new English translation of Maimonides' Guide o] the Perplexed is an event of major importance to students of medieval philosophy and of Jewish thought. By common consent Maimonides is recognized as by far the greatest and most original of the medieval Jewish philosophers. But his work has been relatively inaccessible to those without a command of Arabic and Hebrew. The Guide has been translated into a number of modern languages, most notably into French by Solomon Munk. However, even the best of these translations has defects which distort the book and make it unintelligible. These defects result on occasion from the translators' inadequate linguistic knowledge, but they stem more frequently from their failure to understand Maimonides. As Professor Pines puts it in his 266 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY Introduction, "the Guide belongs to a very peculiar literary genre, of which it is the unique specimen." Not knowing this, though Maimonides himself makes it eminently clear, most translators treat the Guide as if it were an ordinary book, with the inevitable consequence that both they and their readers are misled. In the new edition now before...