ABSTRACT
This chapter will re-examine the evidence for Heraclides’ literary technique, and attempt to clarify his contribution to the development of the form of the philosophical dialogue.1 It focuses upon the process of Heraclides’ preservation and his reputation among those who could actually read his writings, and tries to establish what kind of writer he was, and more particularly his place as a creator of philosophical dialogue. Many of the other essays in this volume analyse Heraclides’ role in the development of particular philosophical or cosmological
theories. As a necessary preliminary, it is helpful to ask more general questions about Heraclides’ manner of writing, particularly bearing in mind that as a near contemporary of Plato’s, he was active at a point where the forms of philosophical discourse were still fluid. Indeed, if we regard Plato as the founder of a form of philosophical analysis which, however multifarious its progeny, at least bears some resemblance to the uses of the term “philosophy” today, it is worth bearing in mind the possibility that Heraclides stands outside that tradition. Plutarch’s comment that Heraclides wrote a philosophy suitable for children gives that generalization a sharper nuance.2 A parallel is Xenophon, who, in spite of the formal resemblance of some of his writings to Plato’s, is not thought of today as a philosopher at all. Of course, the fact that Heraclides’ writings have barely survived makes a positive characterization of his philosophy difficult. So it is the aim of this chapter to contribute to an understanding of the methodology of approaching Heraclides, and the problems of sifting a complex body of evidence for a form of philosophy that, unlike that of Plato or Aristotle, did not lead to the production of a tradition with which we are more familiar.
