Scanned text contains errors.
phorianus Champerius, 4to. Lyon, 1507, under the title of Enchiridion Sixti PhilosopM Pythagorici. The volume contains various pieces, of which the first is the work of Champerius, de Quadruplici Vita. This edition is incorrectly described by Fabricius as entitled Sixti s. Xysti Annulus. The title An- nulus was given to the work by Rufinus, as equi valent to the Greek Enchiridion (Hand-book), because it should be always " in manibus," in (or on) the hands. The text of Champerius is said by Fontanini to be from one of the best MSS. The Sen- tentiae were again printed at Wittenberg, 4to. 1514, with the Aurea Carmina of Pythagoras ; and again with various other pieces, by Beatus Rhenanus, 4to. Basil. 1516, under the title of Xysti Pythagorici Sententiae. Various editions followed, but they omitted Rufinus's Prologue. The work was also comprehended in the various editions of De la Bigne's Biblioilieca Patrum, where it appears as the work of Pope Sixtus, down to the Lyon edition of 1677. It was included, still without the Pro- logue, in the Opuscida Mythologica, Ethica, et Phy- sica of Gale, 12mo. Cambridge, 1670, 8vo. Amster dam, 1688. The text of Rhenanus was reprinted, with Observations^ designed to vindicate the title of Pope Sixtus II. to the authorship, by Urbanus Godofredus Siberus, 4to. Lipsiae, 1725. The ori ginal Greek of some of the Sententiae has been traced in Origen, Nilus, Maximus, in the Sententiae of Demophilus and Democrates, and in Stobaeus. An edition of the Latin text with a French version was published, 12mo. Paris, 1843, by Le Comte C. P. de Lastayrie, with the view of showing that as pure and elevated morality was to be found else where as in the Christian Scriptures: the editor seems to have forgotten that the unsettled author ship of the work, and the interpolations of Rufinus rendered the work unsuitable for his purpose. (Fabricius, BibL Graec. vol. i. p. 870, &c. ; Fonta nini, Brucker, II. cc.; Gale, Praefat. ad Opusc. My- thologica, <Jrc.) [J. C. M.]
SEXTUS EMPPRICUS, was a physician, and received his name Empiricus from belonging to the school of Empirici. He was a pupil of Herodotus of Tarsus (Diog. Laert. ix. ; Timon). who was a physician, and apparently a contemporary of Galen. Sextus may, therefore, have lived in the first half of the third century of the Christian aera. Nothing is known of his life. He belonged to the Seeptici.
Two works of Sextus are extant. The TIvppoo-viat 'Y-TroTUTrwtreis $ O7ce7m/ca i/TrOjUvr^uara, contains the doctrines of the Seeptici, in three books. The second work, entitled, TLpos tovs /j.a67]fj.ariKovs dv-TLppfiTiKoi, against the Mathematici, in eleven books, is an attack upon all positive philosophy. The first six books are a refutation of the six sciences of grammatic, rhetoric, geometry, arithmetic, astrology, and music. The remaining five books are directed against logicians, physical philosophers, and ethical writers, and form, in fact, a distinct work, which may be viewed as belonging to the 'YiTQTVTruiffeis. The two works are a great repository of doubts ; the language is as clear and perspicuous as the subject will allow.
H. Stephens published the first Latin translation of the HypotyposeS) in 1562, 8vo. The first Latin translation of the work against the Mathematici is by G. Hervet, Antwerp and Paris, 1569,1601, fol. The first edition of the Greek text of both works was that of Pans, 1621, fol.; but Geneva is often
stated to be the place of publication: it is probable that some copies were printed with Paris on the title page, and others with Geneva. The second edition was that of J. A. Fabricius, Leipzig, 1718, fol. which contains the Latin version and some emendations ; but the text has not yet been revised with sufficient care. The edition of J. G. Mund is a reprint of the text of Fabricius, with a commentary ; but only one part has appeared, which contains the text of the Hypotyposes, Halle, 1796, 4to. Buhle translated the Hypotyposes^ Lemgo, 1801, 8vo. There is a French translation of the Hypotyposes, in 1725, 12mo., which was probably published at Amsterdam. The anonymous translator is said to be the Sieur Huart, a teacher of mathematics ; but the translation is not highly spoken of.
None of the medical works of Sextus are extant, though it appears from his own writings that he did write on medical subjects.
Sextus is the only Greek sceptic whose complete works we possess ; and we may probably assume that he has collected all that could be said against the Dogmatici, and all that the Seeptici had to say for themselves. He does not present what he says as his own, but as the exposition of the sceptical school. Ritter (Gesch. der Philosophic, vol.iv. p. 299. &c.) has a long dissertation on Sextus, which as usual is not favourable. His philosophy of negations is certainly not satisfactory, nor is Ritter's judgment on Sextus. Much that he finds fault with, is precisely that which some thinkers will set a value on. The chief objection that Ritter makes against him is, that he does not keep his exposition of Scepticism free from such assertions as destroy Scepticism itself. He " denies that there is any general moral rule of life which can be prescribed (Adv. Math. xi. 208), because every man must order his life according to chance and circumstances, whereas, however, this general rule of life is excepted, that a man must direct himself according to circumstances." But it seems no contradiction to say that there is no general rule to guide ns in all circumstances, and yet to say that we must do as well as we can without such a rule. Sextus maintains that scepticism alone can make a man happy, because it teaches that nothing is naturally ($ucrej) good or bad (Adv. Math. xi. 208). The meaning of the proposition depends on the meaning that is to be given to Nature, that much abused word. Nature is nothing more than the constitution of all things by the will of God ; and the notion of good and bad, which is a notion of limited practical application, is not applicable to the general constitution of all things. Such contradictions as these, however, though in truth they do not necessarily involve contradictions, Ritter observes, are only in part to be attributed to the unskilfulness of Sextus : the greater part are to be attributed to the direction that Greek scepticism in general took, or to its tendency particularly among the later Seeptici.
Ritter considers that the old sceptical objections were mainly designed to oppose the reasons founded on the intellect to the purely sensuous view of things. But the objections of the Seeptici, as they appear in Sextus, are solely directed against philosophical systems: the Seeptici are disposed to consider phaenomena as true for practical purposes, but to reject all scientific investigation of them as idle inquiries. Accordingly, they assume a kind of prac-