Parmenides’ pupil Melissus put into plain prose the ideas which Parmenides had expounded in opaque verse. From these ideas he drew out two particular shocking consequences. One was that pain was unreal, because it implied a deficiency of being. The other was that there was no such thing as an empty space or vacuum: it would have to be a piece of Unbeing.?

巴門尼德的學(xué)生麥里梭用平白的散文闡述了巴門尼德在晦澀的詩歌中表達(dá)的思想。從這些思想中，他推導(dǎo)出了兩個(gè)特別令人震驚的后果。第一，痛苦是不真實(shí)的，因?yàn)樗馕吨嬖诘娜狈?。第二，沒有空間或真空這樣的東西：它必須是非存在的一部分。

Hence, motion was impossible, because the bodies which occupy space have no room to move into. Zeno, a friend of Parmenides some twenty-five years his junior, developed an ingenious series of paradoxes designed to show beyond doubt that movement was inconceivable.

因此，運(yùn)動(dòng)是不可能的，因?yàn)檎紦?jù)空間的物體沒有空間可以移動(dòng)。巴門尼德的朋友芝諾，比他小二十五歲，設(shè)計(jì)了一系列巧妙的悖論，旨在毫無疑問地證明運(yùn)動(dòng)是悖謬的。

The best known of these purports to prove that a fast mover can never overtake a slow mover. Let us suppose that Achilles, a fast runner, runs a hundred-yard race with a tortoise which can only run a quarter as fast, giving the tortoise a forty-yard start. By the time Achilles has reached the forty-yard?mark, the tortoise is still ahead, by ten yards. By the time Achilles has run those ten yards, the tortoise is ahead by two-and-a-half yards.

其中最著名的一個(gè)試圖證明快速移動(dòng)者永遠(yuǎn)無法超過慢速移動(dòng)者。讓我們假設(shè)阿喀琉斯，一個(gè)快跑者， 和一只只能跑阿喀琉斯四分之一速度的烏龜，跑一百碼的比賽， 給烏龜四十碼的領(lǐng)先。當(dāng)阿喀琉斯到達(dá)四十碼標(biāo)記時(shí)，烏龜仍然領(lǐng)先，十碼。當(dāng)阿基里斯跑完那十碼時(shí)，烏龜領(lǐng)先兩點(diǎn)五碼。

Each time Achilles makes up the gap, the tortoise opens up a new, shorter, gap ahead of him; so it seems that he can never overtake him. Another, simpler, argument sought to prove that no one could ever run from one end of a stadium to another, because to reach the far end you must first reach the half-way point, to reach the half-way point you must first reach the point half way to that, and so ad infinitum.

每次阿基里斯彌補(bǔ)差距，烏龜就在他前面形成一個(gè)新的、更短的差距；所以看起來他永遠(yuǎn)也追不上它。另一個(gè)更簡(jiǎn)單的論證試圖證明沒有人能夠從體育場(chǎng)的一端跑到另一端，因?yàn)橐竭_(dá)遠(yuǎn)端，你必須先到達(dá)中點(diǎn)，要到達(dá)中點(diǎn)，你必須先到達(dá)中點(diǎn)的一半，如此無窮無盡。

These and other arguments of Zeno assume that distances are infinitely divisible. This assumption was challenged by some later thinkers, and accepted by others. Aristotle, who preserved the puzzles for us, was able to disentangle some of the ambiguities. However, it was not for many centuries that the paradoxes were given solutions that satisfied both philosophers and mathematicians.

芝諾的這些和其他論證都假設(shè)距離是無限可分的。 這個(gè)假設(shè)受到了一些后來思想家的挑戰(zhàn)，也被其他人接受。 亞里士多德為我們保存了這些難題，他能夠解開其中的一些 歧義。然而，直到許多世紀(jì)之后，這些悖論才得到了既能滿足哲學(xué)家又能滿足數(shù)學(xué)家的解決方案。

Plato tells us that Parmenides, when he was a grey-haired sixty-five-year-old, travelled with Zeno from Elea to a festival in Athens, and there met the young Socrates. This would have been about 450 bc. Some scholars think the story a dramatic invention; but the meeting, if it took place, was a splendid inauguration of the golden age of Greek philosophy in Athens. We shall turn to Athenian philosophy shortly; but in the meantime there remain to be considered another Italian thinker, Empedocles of Acragas, and two more Ionian physicists, Leucippus and Democritus.

柏拉圖告訴我們，巴門尼德在他六十五歲頭發(fā)花白的時(shí)候， 和芝諾一起從埃利亞到雅典參加一個(gè)節(jié)日，那里遇到了年輕的 蘇格拉底。這大約是在公元前450年。有些學(xué)者認(rèn)為這個(gè)故事是一個(gè)戲劇性的創(chuàng)造；但是如果這次會(huì)面真的發(fā)生了，那么它就是雅典希臘哲學(xué)黃金時(shí)代的一個(gè)輝煌的開端。我們不久就會(huì)轉(zhuǎn)向雅典的 哲學(xué)；但與此同時(shí)，還有另一個(gè)意大利思想家，阿克拉加斯的恩培多克勒，和另外兩個(gè)愛奧尼亞物理學(xué)家， 留基伯和德謨克利特，需要被考慮。

Empedocles flourished in the middle of the fifth century and was a citizen of the town on the south coast of Sicily which is now Agrigento. He is reputed to have been an active politician, an ardent democrat who was offered, but refused, the kingship of his city. In later life he was banished and practised philosophy in exile. He was renowned as a physician, but according to the ancient biographers he cured by magic as well as by drugs, and he even raised to life a woman thirty days dead. In his last years, they tell us, he came to believe that he was a god, and met his death by leaping into the volcano Etna to establish his divinity.

恩培多克勒在公元前五世紀(jì)中葉活躍，是西西里島南海岸現(xiàn)在的阿格里真托市的一位公民。他被認(rèn)為是一位積極的政治家，一個(gè)熱情的民主主義者，曾經(jīng)被提供但拒絕了他的城市的王位。晚年他被放逐，在流亡中從事哲學(xué)。 他以醫(yī)生身份而聞名，但根據(jù)古代傳記家的說法，他不僅用藥物而且用魔法治病，甚至讓一位死了三十天的女人復(fù)活。在他最后的歲月里，他們告訴我們，他開始相信自己是一個(gè)神， 并通過跳入埃特納火山來證明自己的神性。

Whether or not Empedocles was a wonder-worker, he deserved his reputation as an original and imaginative philosopher. He wrote two poems, longer than Parmenides’ and more fluent if also more repetitive. One was about science and one about religion. Of the former, On Nature, we possess some four hundred lines from an original two thousand; of the latter, Purifications, only smaller fragments have survived.

無論恩培多克勒是否是一個(gè)奇跡，他都值得以一位原創(chuàng)和富有想象力的哲學(xué)家而聞名。他寫了兩首詩，比巴門尼德的更長(zhǎng)，也更流暢，如果也更重復(fù)的話。一首是關(guān)于科學(xué)的，一首是關(guān)于宗教的。前者，《論自然》，我們擁有原文兩千行中的大約四百行；后者，《凈化》，只有更小的片段幸存下來。

Empedocles’ philosophy of nature can be regarded as a synthesis of the thought of the Ionian philosophers. As we have seen, each of them had singled out some one substance as the basic stuff of the universe: for Thales it was water, for Anaximenes air, for Xenophanes earth, for Heraclitus fire. For Empedocles, all four of these substances stood on equal terms as the basic elements (‘roots’, in his word) of the universe. These elements have always existed, he believed, but they mingle with each other in various proportions to produce the furniture of the world.

恩培多克勒的自然哲學(xué)可以被看作是愛奧尼亞哲學(xué)家思想的綜合。正如我們所見，他們每個(gè)人都選出了一種物質(zhì)作為宇宙的基本物質(zhì)：對(duì)于泰勒斯來說是水，對(duì)于阿那克西美尼是氣，對(duì)于色諾芬尼是土，對(duì)于赫拉克利特是火。對(duì)于恩培多克勒來說，這四種物質(zhì)都是作為宇宙的基本元素（他的話是“根”）平等地存在的。他相信，這些元素一直存在著，但它們以不同的比例相互混合，產(chǎn)生了世界的組件。

From these four sprang what was and is and ever shall Trees, beasts, and human beings, males and females all; Birds of the air, and fishes bred by water bright, The age-old gods as well, long worshipped in the height. These four are all there is, each other interweaving And, intermixed, the world’s variety achieving.

從這四種根中產(chǎn)生了過去、現(xiàn)在和將來的一切 樹木、野獸和人類，男性和女性； 空中的鳥類，和水中養(yǎng)育的魚類， 古老的神靈也是如此，長(zhǎng)久地受到高處的崇拜。 這四種根就是一切，彼此交織 并且，混合在一起，實(shí)現(xiàn)了世界的多樣性。

The interweaving and intermingling of the elements, in Empedocles’ system, is caused by two forces: Love and Strife. Love combines the elements together, making one thing out of many things, and Strife forces them apart, making many things out of one. History is a cycle in which sometimes Love is dominant, and sometimes Strife. Under the influence of Love, the elements unite into a homo-geneous and glorious sphere; then, under the influence of Strife, they separate out into beings of different kinds. All compound beings, such as animals and birds and fish, are temporary creatures which come and go; only the elements are everlasting, and only the cosmic cycle goes on for ever.

恩培多克勒的體系中，元素的交織和混合是由兩種力量引起的：愛和斗爭(zhēng)。愛將元素結(jié)合在一起，使許多事物成為一件事物，而斗爭(zhēng)則將它們分開，使一件事物成為許多事物。歷史是一個(gè)循環(huán)，在這個(gè)循環(huán)中，有時(shí)愛占主導(dǎo)地位，有時(shí)斗爭(zhēng)占主導(dǎo)地位。在愛的影響下，元素統(tǒng)一成一個(gè)均勻而絢爛的球體；然后，在斗爭(zhēng)的影響下，它們分離成不同種類的存在。所有復(fù)合的存在，如動(dòng)物、鳥類和魚類，都是暫時(shí)的生靈，來了又去；只有元素是永恒的，只有宇宙周期永遠(yuǎn)繼續(xù)下去。

Empedocles’ accounts of his cosmology are sometimes prosaic and sometimes poetic. The cosmic force of Love is often personified as the joyous goddess Aphrodite, and the early stage of cosmic development is identified with a golden age over which she reigned. The element of fire is sometimes called Hephaestus, the sun-god. But despite its symbolic and mythical clothing, Empedocles’ system deserves to be taken seriously as an exercise in science.

恩培多克勒對(duì)他的宇宙論有時(shí)是平淡無奇的，有時(shí)是富有詩意的。宇宙力量之愛常常被擬人化為歡樂的女神阿佛洛狄忒，而宇宙發(fā)展的早期階段被認(rèn)同為她統(tǒng)治下的黃金時(shí)代?；鹪赜袝r(shí)被稱為赫菲斯托斯， 太陽神。但是盡管有象征性和神話性的外衣，恩培多克勒?的體系值得被認(rèn)真地當(dāng)作一種科學(xué)上的嘗試。

We are accustomed to think of solid, liquid, and gas as three fundamental states of matter. It was not unreasonable to think of fire, and in particular the fire of the sun, as being a fourth state of matter of equal importance. Indeed, in our own century, the emergence of the discipline of plasma physics, which studies the properties of matter at the temperature of the sun, may be said to have restored the fourth element to parity with the other three. Love and Strife can be recognized as the ancient analogues of the forces of attraction and repulsion which have played a significant part in the development of physical theory through the ages.

我們習(xí)慣于把固體、液體和氣體看作是三種基本狀態(tài) 物質(zhì)。認(rèn)為火，特別是太陽的火，是一種同等重要的第四種物質(zhì)狀態(tài)也不是不合理的。事實(shí)上，在我們自己的世紀(jì)，等離子物理學(xué)這門學(xué)科的出現(xiàn)，它研究了 太陽溫度下物質(zhì)的性質(zhì)，可以說恢復(fù)了第四元素與其他三個(gè)元素之間的平等。愛和斗爭(zhēng)可以被認(rèn)為是古代引力和斥力的類比，引力和斥力在各個(gè)時(shí)代物理理論發(fā)展中扮演了重要角色。

Empedocles knew that the moon shone with reflected light; however, he believed the same to be true of the sun. He was aware that eclipses of the sun were caused by the interposition of the moon. He knew that plants propagated sexually, and he had an elaborate theory relating respiration to the movement of the blood within the body. He presented a crude theory of evolution. In a primitive stage of the world, he maintained, chance formed matter into isolated limbs and organs: arms without shoulders, unsocketed eyes, heads without necks. These Lego-like animal parts, again by chance, linked up into organisms, many of which were monstrosities such as human-headed oxen and ox-headed humans. Most of these fortuitous organisms were fragile or sterile; only the fittest structures survived to be the human and animal species we know.

恩培多克勒知道月亮是反射光而發(fā)光的；然而，他 相信太陽也是如此。他知道日食是由月球的遮擋 引起的。他知道植物是通過有性生殖繁殖的，他有一個(gè)復(fù)雜的理論，將呼吸與 體內(nèi)血液的運(yùn)動(dòng)聯(lián)系起來。他提出了一種粗略的進(jìn)化論。在世界的 原始階段，他堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為，偶然將物質(zhì)形成為孤立的 肢體和器官：沒有肩膀的手臂，沒有眼窩的眼睛，沒有脖子的頭。這些樂高式的動(dòng)物部分，又偶然地連接成為有機(jī)體， 其中許多是怪物，如人頭牛和牛頭人。這些偶然的有機(jī)體大多是脆弱或不育的；只有最適合的結(jié)構(gòu)才能存活下來，成為我們所知道的人類和動(dòng)物種類。

Even the gods, as we have seen, were products of the Empedoclean elements. A fortiori, the human soul was a material compound, composed of earth, air, fire, and water. Each element – and indeed the forces of love and strife – had its role in the operation of our senses, according to the principle that like is perceived by like.

即使是神靈，正如我們所見，也是恩培多克勒元素的產(chǎn)物。 更不用說，人類的靈魂是一種物質(zhì)化合物，由土、氣、火、水組成。每一種元素——甚至愛和斗爭(zhēng)的力量——都在我們感官的運(yùn)作中發(fā)揮著作用，根據(jù)同氣相求的原則。

We see the earth by earth, by water water see?

The air of the sky by air, by fire the fire in flame Love we perceive by love, strife by sad strife, the same.?

我們用大地直觀土，用液體直觀水 用空氣直觀氣，用火焰直觀火。我們用愛感知愛， 我們用悲哀的斗爭(zhēng)感知斗爭(zhēng)，都是一樣的。

Thought, in some strange way, is to be identified with the movement of the blood around the heart: blood is a refined mixture of all the elements, and this accounts for thought’s wide-ranging nature.

思想，以某種奇怪的方式，要與心臟周圍的血液的運(yùn)動(dòng)相一致：血液是所有元素的精煉混合物，這就解釋了思想的廣泛性。

Empedocles’ religious poem Purifications makes clear that he accepted the Pythagorean doctrine of metempsychosis, the transmigration of souls. Strife punishes sinners by casting their souls into different kinds of creatures on land or sea.?

恩培多克勒的宗教詩歌《凈化》清楚地表明，他接受了 畢達(dá)哥拉斯的轉(zhuǎn)世說，靈魂的轉(zhuǎn)移。斗爭(zhēng) 通過將罪人的靈魂投入到陸地或海洋上不同種類的生靈中來懲罰他們。

Empedocles told his followers to abstain from eating living things, for the bodies of the animals we eat are the dwelling-places of punished souls. It is not clear that, in order to avoid the risks here, vegetarianism would be sufficient, since on his view a human soul might migrate into a plant. The best fate for a human, he said, was to become a lion if death changed him into an animal, and a laurel if he became a plant. Best of all was to be changed into a god: those most likely to qualify for such ennoblement were seers, hymn-writers, and doctors.?

恩培多克勒告訴他的追隨者們要戒食活物，因?yàn)槲覀兂缘膭?dòng)物的身體是受罰靈魂的居所。不清楚的是， 為了避免這里的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，素食主義是否就足夠了，因?yàn)樵谒磥恚粋€(gè)人類的靈魂可能會(huì)遷移到一棵植物中。他說，對(duì)于一個(gè)人來說，最好的命運(yùn)是如果死亡把他變成了一只動(dòng)物，就變成一只獅子，如果他變成了一棵植物，就變成一棵月桂樹。最好的是變成一個(gè)神：最有可能獲得這種尊貴的人是先知、贊美詩作者和醫(yī)生。

Empedocles, who fell into all three of these categories, claimed to have experienced metempsychosis in his own person.?

恩培多克勒，他屬于這三類人中的所有人，聲稱他自己經(jīng)歷了轉(zhuǎn)世。

I was once in the past a boy, once a girl, once a tree Once too a bird, and once a silent fish in the sea.?

我曾經(jīng)在過去是一個(gè)男孩，曾經(jīng)是一個(gè)女孩，曾經(jīng)是一棵樹?也曾經(jīng)是一只鳥，還有一次是海里的一條沉默的魚。

Our present existence may be wretched, and after death our immediate prospects may be bleak; but after the punishment of our sins through reincarnation, we can look forward to eternal rest at the table of the immortals, free from weariness and suffering. No doubt this was what Empedocles looked forward to as he plunged into Etna.

?我們現(xiàn)在的存在可能是悲慘的，死后我們的前景可能是暗淡的；但是在通過轉(zhuǎn)世懲罰了我們的罪過之后，我們可以期待在不朽者的餐桌上永恒地安息，擺脫疲勞和痛苦。毫無疑問，這就是恩培多克勒跳入埃特納火山時(shí)所期待的。

The Atomists

原子論者

Democritus was the first significant philosopher to be born in mainland Greece: he came from Abdera, in the north-eastern corner of the country. He was a pupil of one Leucippus, about whom little is known. The two philosophers are commonly mentioned together in antiquity, and the atomism which made both of them famous was probably Leucippus’ invention.?

?德謨克利特是第一個(gè)出生在希臘大陸的重要哲學(xué)家： 他來自希臘東北角的阿布德拉。他是一個(gè)叫做列奧基普的人的學(xué)生，關(guān)于他的情況知之甚少。這兩位哲學(xué)家在古代常常被一起提到，而使他們兩個(gè)都出名的原子論可能是列奧基普的發(fā)明。

Aristotle tells us that Leucippus was trying to reconcile the data of the senses with Eleatic monism, that is, the theory that there was only one everlasting, unchanging Being. Leucippus thought he had a theory which was consistent with sense-perception and would not do away with coming to be and passing away or with motion and the multiplicity of things.?

亞里士多德告訴我們， 列奧基普試圖用埃利亞一元論來調(diào)和感官的數(shù)據(jù)， 也就是說，只有一個(gè)永恒不變的存在的理論。 列奧基普認(rèn)為他有一個(gè)與感官認(rèn)識(shí)相一致的理論，但不會(huì)取消生與滅，也不會(huì)取消運(yùn)動(dòng)和事物的多重性。

He conceded thus much to appearances, but he agreed with the Monists that there could be no motion without void, and that the void was Unbeing and no part of Being, since Being was an absolute plenum. But there was not just one Being, but many, infinite in number and invisible because of the minuteness of their mass.

他對(duì)現(xiàn)象做了這樣多的讓步，但他同意一元論者，認(rèn)為沒有虛空就沒有運(yùn)動(dòng)，而虛空是非存在而不是存在的一部分，因?yàn)榇嬖谑且粋€(gè)絕對(duì)的充滿。但是 存在不只有一個(gè)，而是有許多，無限多，因?yàn)樗鼈兊馁|(zhì)量太小而看不見。

However, no more than one line of Leucippus survives verbatim, and for the detailed content of the atomic theory we have to rely on what we can learn from his pupil.?

然而，列奧基普的原話只有一行幸存下來，對(duì)于原子論的詳細(xì)內(nèi)容，我們不得不依靠我們能從他的學(xué)生那里學(xué)到的東西。

Democritus was a polymath and a prolific writer, author of nearly eighty treatises on topics ranging from poetry and harmony to military tactics and Babylonian theology. But it is for his natural philosophy that he is most remembered. He is reported to have said that he would rather discover a single scientific explanation than become King of the Persians. But he was also modest in his scientific aspirations: ‘Do not try to know everything,’ he warned, ‘or you may end up knowing nothing.’

德謨克利特是一位博學(xué)的人，也是一位多產(chǎn)的作家，他寫了近八十篇論文，涉及從詩歌、和聲到軍事戰(zhàn)術(shù)和巴比倫神學(xué)的各種主題。但是他最為人們所熟知的是他的自然哲學(xué)。據(jù)說他曾經(jīng)說過，他寧愿發(fā)現(xiàn)一個(gè)科學(xué)的解釋，也不愿成為波斯國(guó)王。但他在科學(xué)上的抱負(fù)也很謙虛：“不要試圖知道一切，”他警告說，“否則你可能什么都不知道?！?/p>

The fundamental tenet of Democritus’ atomism is that matter is not infinitely divisible.

德謨克利特原子論的基本原則是，物質(zhì)不是無限可分的。

According to atomism, if we take any chunk of any kind of stuff and divide it up as far as we can, we will have to come to a halt at some point at which we will reach tiny bodies which are indivisible. The argument for this conclusion seems to have been philosophical rather than experimental.?

根據(jù)原子論，如果我們拿任何一塊任何一種的東西并且 把它分割到盡可能小，我們將不得不在某個(gè)點(diǎn)停下來， 在那里我們會(huì)達(dá)到不可分割的微小的物體。如此論證的結(jié)論似乎是哲學(xué)的結(jié)論而不是實(shí)驗(yàn)的結(jié)論。

If matter is divisible to infinity, then let us suppose that this division has been carried out – for if matter is genuinely so divisible, there will be nothing incoherent in this supposition.

如果物質(zhì)是無限可分的，那么讓我們假設(shè)這種分割已經(jīng)進(jìn)行了 -因?yàn)槿绻镔|(zhì)真的可以被無限分割，那么這種假設(shè)就沒有任何不連貫之處。

How large are the fragments resulting from this division? If they have any magnitude at all, then, on the hypothesis of infinite divisibility, it would be possible to divide them further; so they must be fragments with no extension, like a geometrical point.?

從這種分割中產(chǎn)生的碎片有多大？如果它們有任何大小，那么，在無限可分的假設(shè)下，就有可能進(jìn)一步分割它們；所以它們必須是沒有延伸性的碎片，像一個(gè)幾何點(diǎn)。

But whatever can be divided can be put together again: if we saw a log into many pieces, we can put the pieces together into a log of the same size.?

但是任何可以被分割的東西都可以被重新組合：如果我們把一根木頭鋸成許多塊，我們可以把這些塊重新組合成一根相同大小的木頭。

But if our fragments have no magnitude then how can they ever have added up to make the extended chunk of matter with which we began? Matter cannot consist of mere geometrical points, not even of an infinite number of them; so we have to conclude that divisibility comes to an end, and the smallest possible fragments must be bodies with sizes and shapes.

但是如果我們的碎片沒有大小，那么它們?cè)趺茨軌蚣悠饋順?gòu)成我們開始時(shí)那個(gè)有延伸性的物質(zhì)塊呢？物質(zhì)不能由單純的幾何點(diǎn)組成，即使是無限多個(gè)也不行；所以我們必須得出結(jié)論，可分性有一個(gè)終點(diǎn)，而最小可能的碎片必須是有大小和形狀的物體。

It is these bodies which Democritus called ‘a(chǎn)toms’ (‘a(chǎn)tom’ is just the Greek word for ‘indivisible’).?

正是這些物體被德謨克利特稱為“原子”（“原子”只是希臘語中“不可分割”的意思）。

He believed that they are too small to be detected by the senses, and that they are infinite in number and come in infinitely many different kinds.?

他相信它們太小了，以至于不能被感官所察覺，而且它們的數(shù)量是無限的，而且有無限多種不同的 種類。

They are scattered, like motes in a sunbeam, in infinite empty space, which he called ‘the void’.?

它們散布在無限的空虛之域， 他稱之為“虛空”，就像光束中的微塵。

They have existed for ever, and they are always in motion. They collide with each other and link up with each other; some of them are concave and some convex; some are like hooks and some are like eyes.?

它們永遠(yuǎn)存在著，而且總是在 運(yùn)動(dòng)。 它們相互碰撞和相互連接；其中一些是凹的，一些是凸的；一些像鉤子，一些像眼睛。

The middle-sized objects with which we are familiar are complexes of atoms thus randomly united; and the differences between different kinds of substances are due to the differences in their atoms. Atoms, he said, differed in shape (as the letter A differs from the letter N), in order (as AN differs from NA), and in posture (as N differs from Z).

我們熟悉的中等大小的物體是由這樣隨機(jī) 化合起來的原子組成的；而不同種類的物質(zhì)之間的差異是由于 它們的原子的差異。他說，原子在形狀上有所不同（就像字母A 與字母N不同），在順序上有所不同（就像AN與NA不同），在姿態(tài)上有所不同（就像N 與Z不同）。

Critics of Democritus in antiquity complained that while he explained everything else in terms of the motion of atoms, he had no explanation of this motion itself. Others, in his defence, claimed that the motion was caused by a force of attraction whereby each atom sought out similar atoms.?

古代對(duì)德謨克利特的批評(píng)者抱怨說，他用原子的運(yùn)動(dòng)來解釋了一切 其他事情，但他對(duì)這種運(yùn)動(dòng)本身沒有任何解釋。 其他人為他辯護(hù)，聲稱這種運(yùn)動(dòng)是由一種引力引起的， 每個(gè)原子都尋求與自己相似的原子。

But an unexplained attraction is perhaps no better than an unexplained motion. Moreover, if an attractive force had been operative for an infinite time without any counteracting force (such as Empedocles’ Strife), the world would now consist of congregations of uniform atoms; which is very different from the random aggregates with which Democritus identified the animate and inanimate beings with which we are familiar.

但是一個(gè)沒有解釋的 引力也許并不比一個(gè)沒有解釋的運(yùn)動(dòng)好。而且，如果一個(gè)引力在無限的時(shí)間里一直起作用，沒有任何相抗衡的 力量（比如恩培多克勒的斗爭(zhēng)），那么世界現(xiàn)在就會(huì)由 一致的原子聚集而成；這與德謨克利特認(rèn)為我們熟悉的有生命和無生命的存在是隨機(jī) 聚合物非常不同。

For Democritus, atoms and void are the only two realities: all else was appearance. When atoms approach or collide or entangle with each other, the aggregates appear as water or fire or plants or humans, but all that really exists are the underlying atoms in the void.?

對(duì)于德謨克利特來說，原子和虛空是唯二的現(xiàn)實(shí)：其他一切都是 表象。當(dāng)原子相互靠近或碰撞或糾纏時(shí)，聚合物就呈現(xiàn)出水或火或植物或人類的樣子，但真正存在的只有 在虛空中作為基石的原子。

In particular, the qualities perceived by the senses are mere appearances. Democritus’ most often quoted dictum was: By convention sweet and by convention bitter; by convention hot, by convention cold, by convention colour: in reality atoms and void.

特別是，感官所感知到的品質(zhì)都是表象。德謨克利特最常被引用的格言是：按照約定甜和按照約定苦；按照約定熱，按照約定冷，按照約定顏色：實(shí)際上只有原子和虛空。

When he said that sensory qualities were ‘by convention’, ancient commentators tell us, he meant that the qualities were relative to us and did not belong to the natures of the things themselves. By nature nothing is white or black or yellow or red or bitter or sweet.

當(dāng)他說感官品質(zhì)是“按照約定”的時(shí)候，古代的評(píng)論家 告訴我們，他的意思是這些品質(zhì)是相對(duì)于我們的，而不屬于 事物本身的本性。按照本性，沒有什么是白色或黑色或黃色 或紅色或苦或甜的。

Democritus explained in detail how different flavours result from different kinds of atom. Sharp flavours arise from atoms which are small, fine, angular and jagged. Sweet tastes, on the other hand, originate from larger, rounder atoms.

德謨克利特詳細(xì)地解釋了不同種類的原子如何產(chǎn)生不同的味道。辛辣的味道來自于小而細(xì)、有角和鋸齒狀的原子。另一方面，甜味則來自于更大、更圓的原子。

If something tastes salty, that is because its atoms are large, rough, jagged and angular.

如果某物有咸味，那是因?yàn)樗脑邮谴蟮?、粗糙的、鋸齒狀的和有角的。

Not only tastes and smells, but colours, sounds, and felt qualities are similarly to be explained by the properties and relationships of the underlying atoms. The knowledge which is given us by all these senses – taste, smell, sight, hearing, and touch – is a knowledge which is darkness. Genuine knowledge is altogether different, the prerogative of those who have mastered the theory of atoms and void.

不僅是味道和氣味，而且顏色、聲音和感覺到的品質(zhì)也同樣要用潛在原子的性質(zhì)和關(guān)系來解釋。所有這些感官給予我們的知識(shí)——味覺、嗅覺、視覺、聽覺和觸覺——是一種混沌的知識(shí)。真正的知識(shí)是完全不同的，是那些掌握了原子和虛空理論的人的特權(quán)。

Democritus wrote on ethics as well as physics: the sayings which have been handed down to us suggest that as a moralist he was edifying rather than inspiring. The following remark, sensible but unexciting, is typical of many:?

德謨克利特不僅寫了物理學(xué)，還寫了倫理學(xué)：流傳給我們的格言表明，作為一個(gè)道德家，他是教化性的而不是激勵(lì)性的。下面這句話，明智而平淡，是許多格言的典型：

Be satisfied with what you have, and do not spend your time dreaming of acquisitions which excite envy and admiration; look at the lives of those who are poor and in distress, so that what you have and own may appear great and enviable.

對(duì)你所擁有的感到滿足，不要浪費(fèi)時(shí)間去夢(mèng)想那些激起嫉妒和羨慕的收獲；看看那些貧窮和困苦的人的生活，這樣你所擁有和名下的東西就會(huì)顯得偉大和令人羨慕。

A man who is lucky in his son-in-law, he said, gains a son, while one who is unlucky loses a daughter – a remark that has been quoted unwittingly, and often in garbled form, by many a speaker at a wedding breakfast. Many a political reformer, too, has echoed his sentiment that it is better to be poor in a democracy than prosperous in a dictatorship.

他說，一個(gè)在招女婿上幸運(yùn)的人，得到了一個(gè)兒子，而一個(gè)不幸運(yùn)的人，失去了一個(gè)女兒——這句話被許多在婚禮早餐上發(fā)言的人無意中引用過，而且經(jīng)常是以一種混亂的形式。許多政治改革者也贊同他的觀點(diǎn)，即在民主國(guó)家貧窮比在獨(dú)裁國(guó)家富裕要好。

The sayings which have been preserved do not add up to a systematic morality, and they do not seem to have any connection with the atomic theory which underlies his philosophy. However, some of his dicta, brief and banal as they may appear, are sufficient, if true, to overturn whole systems of moral philosophy.?

保存下來的格言并不能構(gòu)成一個(gè)系統(tǒng)的道德倫理， 而且它們似乎與他的哲學(xué)所基于的原子論沒有任何聯(lián)系。然而，他的一些格言，盡管看起來簡(jiǎn)短而平庸，但如果是真的，就足以推翻整個(gè)道德 哲學(xué)體系。

For instance, The good person not only refrains from wrongdoing but does not even desire it. conflicts with the often held view that virtue is at its highest when it triumphs over conflicting passion. Again, It is better to suffer wrong than to inflict it. It cannot be reconciled with the utilitarian view, widespread in the modern world, that morality should take account only of the consequences of an action, not the identity of the agent.

例如，善良的人不僅不做壞事 而且甚至不想做壞事。 這與經(jīng)常持有的觀點(diǎn)相沖突，即美德在內(nèi)心的善良戰(zhàn)勝邪惡后達(dá)到了至高。再者， 受到傷害比造成傷害要好。 這與現(xiàn)代世界廣泛流行的功利主義觀點(diǎn)不相容， 即道德應(yīng)該只考慮行為的后果，而不是行為者的身份。

In late antiquity, and in the Renaissance, Democritus was known as the laughing philosopher, while Heraclitus was known as the weeping philosopher. Neither description seems very solidly based. However, there are remarks attributed to Democritus which support his claim to cheerfulness, notably A life without feasting is like a highway without inns.

在晚期古代和文藝復(fù)興時(shí)期，德謨克利特被稱為happy貓哲學(xué)家，而赫拉克利特被稱為香蕉貓哲學(xué)家，就知道哭。 這兩種描述似乎都沒有很牢固的依據(jù)。然而，有一些言論 歸于德謨克利特，支持他對(duì)快樂的主張，尤其是“沒有盛宴的生活就像一條沒有旅館的公路”。