98 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY. 



(I. A) as a fact or phenomenon. This conception was to the Greeks 

 so obvious 70 that the fact of natural growth lay at the foundation of 

 their thought. Growth implies life, and life implies motion. This is 

 true of Greek thought always. The growth denoted by $ucm refers to 

 animal as well as to vegetable life ; wherefore <f>vr6v appears originally 

 to have applied to the former as well as to the latter. It is noteworthy 

 that 4>v<ri% as implying motion, seems always to denote a process or a 

 phase of such process ; that is to say, specifically the process itself, 

 taken as a whole, 71 or its beginning, progress, or end. It does not lend 

 itself, therefore, to use as an absolute apxv ■ it is consequently always 

 opposed, or subordinated to, creative force as such. 72 These ideas 

 clearly hark back to the pre-Socratic period. In Empedocles we find 

 (frvais, in the sense of absolute origination, denied ; 73 in Aristophanes 74 

 we find <£v<ns in the sense of origin. It is difficult to classify certain 

 uses of (f>vaL<;, where it may be rendered birth, descent, age, lineage, 

 etc., but they may be set down here for convenience. 75 



But <£iW, as a process, may be viewed abstractly (I. B) as natural 



70 Arist. Phys. 193* 3 us 5' H&riv i) <pu<xis weipdadai. beiKvvvm yeXohv. These words 

 apply to (pvcns as a whole, which, according to Aristotle, is a process. 



71 There is an interesting passage in Plato's Vhacdo 71 E foil., where he is apply- 

 ing to the soul the principles of the pre-Socratics : ovk dvTakob^<jo;xev r-qv tsavriav 

 yiuecriv, dXXd ravrr) x w ^-1 tcrrai 7) (pvcris ; r) dvdyKrj aTrodovvcu rep aTro6i>r)ijKeiv evavriav 

 tlvo. yiveaiv; . . . rb dvaftiuffKeadat.. Here <pv<ris is the circular process as a whole. 



72 Thus Arist. can say rj drj/xiovpyrjaaaa <pvais, Dc Partt. Anim. 645" 9, but that is 

 said metaphorically ; habitually <j>vais is opposed to 8vva.Lt.is and rexvv, in that they 

 operate from without, whereas <pv<xis resides within : I)e Cael. 301 b 17 eirel 8e <pu<ru 

 ixiv icrriv T) kv a.vru) virdpxovcra Kivqoews dpxv, bvva.Li.is 5' r\ ev dXXcp rj &XXo. Cp. Met, 

 1049 b 8. Met. 1070° 7 rj p.ef ovv rex vr i apxv &> dWy, V & (pvats dpxh £" avrcp. As 

 the Stoics regarded God as immanent, they could speak of Zevs rexvirris. In Plato, 

 Tim. 41 C even the Oeol 0eQv are bidden : rpeirecde Kara (pvaiv ifKis eirl rr\v twv 

 fawv Sr/uuovpyiav. Without dismissing whether Plato's 5rjp.iovpyos was regarded as a 

 creator merely /car' e-rrivoiav or not, it is clear that nature is supposed to proceed 

 according to her own laws, and ' creation ' is not aw\rj yeveais. 



73 Fr. 8 (Diels) ; <pv<ri.s ovSevos eanv dwdvrwv \ dvrjrGiv, ov8i tls ovXop.ivov Oavaroio 

 reXevrf), | d\\& p.6vov lli^ls re 8tdXXai;Ls re Luyivrwv | iari, <pvcus 8' eirl rots 6vop.d'gerai 

 dvdpdnrotcnv. Aristotle, Met. 1014 b 35 curiously misinterprets tpvcris here, equating it 

 with Trpd)T7) o-vvdeais, possibly because he misquoted 46vtwv for dirdvrwv, quoting (as 

 usual) from memory. The slavish commentators do not correct him. Empedocles 

 implies that laymen understand <pv<ris as dirXri yeveais, which the philosophers one 

 and all denied. Aristotle recognizes <pv<ns = 7^eo-ts, Phys. 193 b 12 &ri 8' 17 <pv<ns i) 

 Xeyoixivq ws yeveais 686s 4jtiv els <pv<nv (= els overlay, cp. Met. 1003 b 7). Met. 1014 b 16 

 <pu<ns Xkyerai ... 17 ru>v (pvop.e'vwv yeveens. 



74 Av. 691 (pvaiv olwv&v yevealv re deuiv. This occurs in the so-called ' Orphic 

 cosmogony.' 



75 Cp. Soph. Ant. 726 ol r-qXiKoiSe kclI diSa^Sfiea-da 8'q | <ppovelv vir' dvbpbs rr/XiKouSe 

 r))v tpvaw; Q. C. 1295 wv cpveei ve&repos. Track. 379 r) ndpra Xap.Trpd /cat /car' ivoiia 



