कार्नियाडीज़
हम कभी निश्चित नहीं हो सकते कि कोई प्रभाव सत्य है, पर हम परख सकते हैं कि वह कितना विश्वासोत्पादक है – और जीने और कर्म करने के लिए यही पर्याप्त है।
पृष्ठभूमि
कुरेने के अकादमी-प्रमुख जिन्होंने कुछ नहीं लिखा: कोई प्रभाव अपनी सत्यता की गारंटी नहीं देता, पर मात्र “विश्वासोत्पादक” कर्म का मार्गदर्शन कर सकता है; उन्होंने प्रश्न के हर पक्ष में तर्क दिया, और रोम में 155 ईसा पूर्व में बताया जाता है कि उन्होंने एक दिन न्याय के पक्ष में और अगले दिन उसके विरुद्ध भाषण दिया।
मुख्य विचार
- विश्वासोत्पादक (पिथानॉन) मार्गदर्शक के रूप में
- दोनों पक्षों में तर्क
- स्टोइक धर्मशास्त्र, भविष्यवाणी और नियति की आलोचना
- नैतिक लक्ष्यों का विभाजन (कार्नियाडियन विभाजन)
प्रभाव
जिनसे प्रभावित 1
आर्केसिलाउस
जिनसे प्रभावित
Carneades took up Arcesilaus’ arguments against the Stoic criterion of truth and sharpened them against Chrysippus’ refined version; he too argued on both sides of a question. Cicero, Academica II; Sextus Empiricus, Against the Logicians I.159–189; SEP “Carneades”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
आर्केसिलाउस › लगभग 316–241 ईसा पूर्व
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया 1
सिसरो
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Cicero drew on Carneades, via Clitomachus, in Academica and On the Nature of the Gods, and used his division of views on the highest good (De finibus V). Cicero, Academica II; De natura deorum III; De finibus V.16–23; SEP “Carneades”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
सिसरो › 106–43 ईसा पूर्व
आलोचना
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित 2
सेक्सटस एम्पिरिकस
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Sextus set Pyrrhonism apart from Carneades’ New Academy, whose claim that nothing can be known and trust in the ‘persuasive’ he judged dogmatic. Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism I.220–235
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
सेक्सटस एम्पिरिकस › लगभग 160–210
ऑगस्टीन
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Augustine answered the probabilism of Carneades: whoever has never grasped the truth cannot know what merely resembles it (Contra Academicos, 386). Augustine, Contra Academicos II.7.16–12.27; Cicero, Academica II.98–104
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ऑगस्टीन › 354–430
जिनकी आलोचना की 2
एपिकुरुस
जिनकी आलोचना की
Carneades objected that Epicurus needed no atomic swerve to save free will, since a voluntary movement of the mind needs no external cause. Cicero, De fato 23, 31–32
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एपिकुरुस › 341–270 ईसा पूर्व
क्रिसिप्पस
जिनकी आलोचना की
Carneades attacked Chrysippus’ ‘kataleptic’ impression, arguing that any true impression could have an indistinguishable false twin; he said that he himself would be nothing without Chrysippus. Cicero, Academica II.40–42, 83–90; Diogenes Laertius 4.62; SEP “Carneades”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
क्रिसिप्पस › लगभग 279–206 ईसा पूर्व
मत
Carneades sharpened Arcesilaus’ arguments against the Stoic theory of knowledge, which Chrysippus had meanwhile defended and refined; he is credited with the remark that without Chrysippus he himself would not have existed. No impression carries a mark of truth that a false impression could not also carry. Carneades nevertheless described how one can act and inquire without certainty. According to Sextus Empiricus, impressions can be more or less persuasive (pithanon): persuasive in themselves; persuasive and not contradicted by any other impression; and persuasive, uncontradicted and thoroughly tested. The more important the matter, the more testing it requires. Whether Carneades endorsed this view or only put it forward for the sake of argument was already disputed among his pupils; Clitomachus said he had never discovered what Carneades really thought. In ethics he drew up a scheme of all possible views of the highest good, the Carneadea divisio, which Cicero used to sort the schools (De finibus V 16–23). Against the Stoics he argued that their gods could not exist as described, that divination has no basis, and that the principle that every statement is true or false does not imply that everything is fated; against the Epicureans, that freedom does not need a swerve of the atoms. Much of Cicero’s Academica, On the Nature of the Gods and On Divination draws on Carneades through Clitomachus. Sextus Empiricus set Pyrrhonism apart from the New Academy, and Augustine’s Against the Academics (386) was written against Carneades and Arcesilaus.
जीवन और संदर्भ
Carneades was born around 214/213 BCE in Cyrene in North Africa. In Athens he studied in the Academy and, according to Diogenes Laertius, learned dialectic from the Stoic Diogenes of Babylon. By the middle of the second century BCE he was head of the Academy. In 155 BCE Athens sent him to Rome, together with Diogenes of Babylon and the Peripatetic Critolaus, to plead for the reduction of a fine imposed over the town of Oropus. His lectures drew crowds of young Romans, and Cato the Elder is said to have urged the Senate to send the philosophers home quickly. A story that goes back to Cicero’s Republic, preserved by Lactantius, has him praising justice one day and arguing against it the next; how far it is reliable is disputed. Carneades wrote nothing. His pupil Clitomachus, a Carthaginian, recorded his arguments in many books, all lost. He gave up the headship in old age and died around 129/128 BCE, at 85.
प्रमुख कृतियाँ
- No writings (Carneades taught only orally; the books of his pupil Clitomachus are lost)
नवंबर 2026 तक · स्रोत · इस पृष्ठ को बेहतर बनाएँ · Agora कैसे बना है