Leonid Zhmud The Origin of the History of Science in Classical Antiquity

Griechische Kultur-Entstehungsleh-
ren, Berlin 1924, 6ff.) is highly hypothetical. One of the earliest theories of the ori-
gin of culture belongs to Democritus (for its reconstruction based on later texts, see
Cole,
op. cit.), but even that is believed to have been influenced by his older contem-
porary Protagoras (Uxkull-Gyllenband,
op. cit., 32; Emsbach, M. Sophistik als Auf-
klärung: Untersuchungen zu Wissenschaftsbegriff und Geschichtsauffassung bei
Protagoras, Würzburg 1980, 202ff.).
7
Heinimann, F. Eine vorplatonische Theorie der técnh, Mus. Helv. 18 (1961) 105f.

---

1. The invention of técnh
47
Taken together, “they form a genuine theory of science (
Wissenschaftslehre) –
science understood as técnh, whose final aim is practical use rather than theor-
etical knowledge.”
8
In the traditional pairing of skill and knowledge, it is knowledge that grad-
ually comes into the foreground. Particular attention is paid to its origin, ac-
quisition, and application. In the course of the fifth and the greater part of the
fourth centuries, the notion of ëpist2mh – which originally meant ‘knowledge’
and later came to mean ‘science’ as well – is used as a synonym for técnh.
9
The
newborn scientific disciplines, such as mathematics, are also treated within the
framework of the same model. It is revealing that unlike such old Ionic terms as
@stronomía/@strología and gewmetría, the names of the scientific disci-
plines born in the fifth century – @riqmhtik2, logistik2, and ârmonik2
10
–
are all focused on the notion of técnh; the fourth century added such terms as
mhcanik2, öptik2, and some others.
11
The treatment of scientific disciplines on the model of técnh was strongly
marked by a certain dynamic quality peculiar to this notion. This quality finds
its best expression in the concepts of z2thsi~ and eÛresi~.
12
Técnai are under-
stood as systematic ‘research’, ‘discovery’, or ‘invention’ of new things, new
knowledge or new skills. Everything that is known and accessible today results
either from the ‘discoveries’ made in the course of constant ‘research’ by our
predecessors, or from mímhsi~, imitation.
13
That técnh could be transferred by
8
Ibid., 106.
9
Snell, B.
Die Ausdrücke für den Begriff des Wissens in der vorplatonischen Philo-
sophie, Berlin 1924, 86f.; Schaerer, R. EPISTHMH et TECNH. Etude sur les no-
tions de connaissance et d’art d’Homère à Platon, Mâcon 1930; Isnardi Parente, M.
Techne. Momenti del pensiero greco da Platone ad Epicuro, Florence 1966. Used in
this meaning, ëpist2mh generally designated the part of técnh related to knowledge
and cognition, rather than to practical skills. At the same time, ëpist2mh could refer
to merely practical abilities, as well (Xen.
Oecon. I, 1; VI, 8; Isoc. Antid. 213, 252).
10
Mousik2 (Pind. Ol. I, 15) and ıatrik2 (Hdt. II, 84; III, 129) are soon followed by
@riqmhtik2 and ârmonik2 (Archytas, B 1–3), logistik2 (Archytas, B 3; Xen.
Mem. I,1.7). The widespread use of words with the suffix -iko~ is often associated
with the Sophists, particularly with their attempts at classifying the new técnai
(Ammann, A. N. -iko~ bei Platon, Freiburg 1953, 267f.). Cf. gewdaisía (Arist.
Met. 987b 26) and sterewmetría ([Pl.] Epin. 990d 8; Arist. APo 78b 38), formed
after the model of gewmetría.
11
Mhcanik2 and öptik2 are first mentioned in Aristotle (APo 75b 16, 76a 24, 77b 2,
78b 37;
Met. 997b 20, 1078a 14–16) and in a quotation from an Academic treatise
(Dorandi.