Complementarity in Organizations:

Strategy, Leadership, Management,

Talent and Engagement in the Fourth
Industrial Revolution Paul Turner
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/complementarity-in-organizations-strategy-leadership
-management-talent-and-engagement-in-the-fourth-industrial-revolution-paul-turner/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Employee Engagement in Contemporary Organizations:

Maintaining High Productivity and Sustained
Competitiveness 1st Edition Paul Turner

https://ebookmass.com/product/employee-engagement-in-
contemporary-organizations-maintaining-high-productivity-and-
sustained-competitiveness-1st-edition-paul-turner/

Constructing Leadership 4.0: Swarm Leadership and the

Fourth Industrial Revolution 1st Edition Richard Kelly

https://ebookmass.com/product/constructing-leadership-4-0-swarm-
leadership-and-the-fourth-industrial-revolution-1st-edition-
richard-kelly/

Student and Skilled Labour Mobility in the Asia Pacific

Region: Reflecting the Emerging Fourth Industrial
Revolution Shingo Ashizawa

https://ebookmass.com/product/student-and-skilled-labour-
mobility-in-the-asia-pacific-region-reflecting-the-emerging-
fourth-industrial-revolution-shingo-ashizawa/

Higher Education in the Era of the Fourth Industrial

Revolution 1st ed. 2018 Edition Nancy W. Gleason

https://ebookmass.com/product/higher-education-in-the-era-of-the-
fourth-industrial-revolution-1st-ed-2018-edition-nancy-w-gleason/
Strategic Leadership and Management in Nonprofit
Organizations: Theory and Practice 2nd Edition Martha
Golensky

https://ebookmass.com/product/strategic-leadership-and-
management-in-nonprofit-organizations-theory-and-practice-2nd-
edition-martha-golensky/

Digital Strategies in a Global Market: Navigating the

Fourth Industrial Revolution 1st ed. 2021 Edition
Natalia Konina

https://ebookmass.com/product/digital-strategies-in-a-global-
market-navigating-the-fourth-industrial-revolution-1st-
ed-2021-edition-natalia-konina/

Employee Engagement in Nonprofit Organizations: Theory

and Practice Kunle Akingbola

https://ebookmass.com/product/employee-engagement-in-nonprofit-
organizations-theory-and-practice-kunle-akingbola/

Global Technology Management 4.0: Concepts and Cases

for Managing in the 4th Industrial Revolution Pratim
Milton Datta

https://ebookmass.com/product/global-technology-
management-4-0-concepts-and-cases-for-managing-in-the-4th-
industrial-revolution-pratim-milton-datta/

Strategy, Leadership, and AI in the Cyber Ecosystem

Hamid Jahankhani

https://ebookmass.com/product/strategy-leadership-and-ai-in-the-
cyber-ecosystem-hamid-jahankhani/
 Complementarity in
Organizations
Strategy, Leadership, Management,
Talent and Engagement in the Fourth
Industrial Revolution
Paul Turner
Complementarity in Organizations
 Paul Turner

Complementarity in
Organizations
Strategy, Leadership, Management,
Talent and Engagement in the Fourth
Industrial Revolution
Paul Turner
Leeds Business School- Associate
Leeds Beckett University-Associate
Leeds, UK

ISBN 978-3-031-10653-8    ISBN 978-3-031-10654-5 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10654-5

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2022
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
To Violet Renee Turner
 Acknowledgements

Liz Barlow
Karthika Devi
Professor Martin Reynolds
And to the support and happiness given by Gail, Jane-Marie, Annette,
Harrison, Ellis, Sebastian, Jacob, Gary, Will
Heart like Roses

vii
 Contents

1 From Singularity to Complementarity  1

2 The Fourth Industrial Revolution 31

3 The Origins of Complementarity 59

4 Complementarity and Business Strategy 87

5 Complementarity in Leadership and Management115

6 Complementarity in Talent and Workforce Engagement143

7 Complementarity in Organisation173

8 Complementarity and Competence-­knowledge, Skills,

Attitudes, and Behaviours203

ix
x Contents

9 Complementarity
 in Business Organisations- 20 Important
Conclusions233

Index261
 About the Author

Paul Turner has held Professorial appointments at Universities in Leeds,

Birmingham, Nottingham and Cambridge. His business career included
Executive and Director positions in FTSE and Fortune companies, and
as Vice President of the CIPD. He was Chair of Human Asset, People
Innovation and the European Talent for Tomorrow Conferences as well
as being a judge on the Middle East HR, European HR Excellence and
the CIPD People Management Awards. Paul is the author or co-author
of The Making of the Modern Manager (2021), Employee Engagement
(2020), Leadership in Healthcare (2018), Talent Management in Healthcare
(2017), Make Your People Before You Make Your Products (2014), Workforce
Planning (2010), The Admirable Company (2008), Talent Strategy,
Management and Measurement (2007), Organisational Communication
(2003) and HR Forecasting and Planning (2002). He has written articles
for academic and business journals and the International Press. Paul has
a first degree from the University of East Anglia, a Ph.D. from the
University of Sheffield and is a Companion of the CIPD.

xi
 List of Figures

Fig. 1.1 Business progression—complementarity, strategy and devel-

opment16
Fig. 1.2 Complementarity—at the core and at the periphery 22
Fig. 2.1 The Fourth Industrial Revolution—characteristics, impact and
response33
Fig. 4.1 Complementarity and business strategy five areas of potential 96
Fig. 5.1 Leadership and management competences for complementarity 124
Fig. 6.1 A model for developing talent management and workforce
engagement to achieve complementarity 160
Fig. 7.1 Organising for Complementarity 180

xiii
 1
From Singularity to Complementarity

 ompetitive Progression—Achieving Economic

C
Growth with a Positive Effect on Society
All business organisations strive for progression.
Progression is achieved through movement towards an objective by
converting energy within an organisation from latent potential to actual
force, and orchestrating assets and resources in support of this move-
ment. In addition, it means development- providing foundations for
future growth—by balancing a focus on short term gains with invest-
ments that will pay back in the longer term.
Progression manifests itself by results—profit, return on investment,
or the maximisation of shareholder value and by the successful adapta-
tion to contemporary environments including social objectives -fair-
trade practices, contribution to social welfare, respect for and
understanding about the environment, diversity, and equality of oppor-
tunity. It may be said that in a modern context, business progression
means achieving economic growth taking account of wider societal needs
and expectations. It means not only achieving competitive advantage but
investing to sustain that advantage in a positive, inclusive way.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 1

P. Turner, Complementarity in Organizations,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10654-5_1
2 P. Turner

There is a panoply of strategic thought as to how organisations can

achieve such advantage. A potential contributor to this process is that of
complementarity in which one capability reinforces the impact of
another capability. In this concept, the organisation would seek to exploit
its unique resources by combining them with others to produce a for-
mula that is difficult to imitate on the part of competitors. Whilst there
is no universal definition, one interpretation that is relevant to a business
context, is where both tangible and intangible assets combine and com-
plement each other rather than stand alone; where strategy, stewardship
and policy facilitate such combinations and where human resources
know what to do to make them effective. This holistic view is based on
the potential benefits of synergies or linkages between each of the organ-
isation’s elements from manufacturing or operations to marketing to sup-
ply chain management. The existence of complementarity across
management practices is put forward as an explanation for unit-level pro-
ductivity differences. (Cavaco & Crifo, 2014; Hong et al., 2015) It is an
idea that has evolved over time with both a scientific and economic foun-
dation. Its applications stretch from government policy to global finan-
cial regulation, from technological development to individual behaviour.
(Samuelson, 1974; Teece, 1986; Lenfant, 2006) It is also used to explain
the outstanding performance of organisations such as Amazon and
Disney as they apply complementarity principles across their business
units. Furthermore, in their definitive article Brynjolfsson, E. and
Milgrom, P. (2013) noted that organisations such as Wal-Mart, or Toyota
‘enjoyed sustained periods of high performance. As a result, they were
heavily studied by competitors, consultants and researchers, and many of
their methods were documented in great detail. Nonetheless, even when
competitors aggressively sought to imitate these methods, they did not
have the same degree of success as these market leaders. Complementarities
in organisations can help explain why.’ Identifying and utilising comple-
mentary assets will be potential success factors in the age of the Fourth
Industrial Revolution.
But the initiatives to do so require clarity about what the term means
in the context of business and the organisation. A reasonable option
therefore would be a definition of complementarity that will enable those
seeking business benefits—from functional synergy to competitive
 1 From Singularity to Complementarity 3

advantage—to craft how they go about leveraging any potential comple-

mentarities they may have. Hence, from the many definitions and inter-
pretations, which will be discussed in more detail later, and for the
purposes of this book:

Complementarity is the interaction of business strategies and manage-

ment practices to produce coherent, aligned and mutually reinforcing
systems and processes that give superior outcomes (such as shareholder
value, profit, customer satisfaction, market share or cost reduction) over
those that would occur if such strategies or practices had taken place
independently of one another. It is where the complementary agency of
those strategies produces superior results, where the relations of inde-
pendent units or their evolution creates higher value than their indi-
vidual operation.

How to apply this interpretation will depend on those responsible

integrating activities into the organisation’s systems and processes. It will
be affected by the organisation’s dynamics and requires agility in a way
that enables new initiatives. Guiding all is the language of vision or mis-
sion, articulated in the form of objectives, strategy, stewardship, and pol-
icy, and brought to life by leadership, management, and a talented,
engaged workforce. In this respect, a good business strategy will focus on
all of these elements and seek coherence—an alignment between expecta-
tion and reality; congruence—where elements of the strategy are inte-
grated and reinforce each other; and consistency—between intention and
action. Their implementation will be through the application of the con-
cepts of business management, their language, systems, and processes—
which are locked into every aspect of organisational life. But, as the
Fourth Industrial Revolution gathers momentum, the scale and velocity
of change in the global economy is creating new challenges and causing
reflection about how to make tried and tested business theories and prac-
tices work in a radically different context. Whilst a confluence of new
technologies offers significant opportunity, business managers will face
an environment that is unlike anything that has gone before, transform-
ing conventional models of strategy, and forcing companies to redesign
both internal and external structures if they are to remain successful.
4 P. Turner

(Rumelt, 2011; Schoenwaelder, 2019; Lanteri, 2021) An understanding

of how the core concepts of strategy and management evolved and their
characteristics over time may provide pointers to how they may change in
future scenarios involving complementarity initiatives.

 usiness Strategy—More than a Reflexive,

B
Intuitive Reaction to Market Forces
The primary concept upon which organisational performance depends is
its strategy, and its numerous, elaborate, definitions, models and method-
ologies, which proliferated as competition amongst industrial and com-
mercial organisations increased in intensity into the twentieth century.
The perception was that more was required than a reflexive, intuitive
reaction to market forces. Business strategy evolved with the scale and
increasing diversification of organisations and the concomitant increase
in levels of investment, which in turn led to the demand for a better
understanding of the time and place for a return on that investment.
It was from this milieu that corporate planning emerged in the 1960’s,
portfolio planning in the 1970’s and a greater focus on market analysis in
the 1980’s. Different approaches to strategy were informed by SWOT,
PESTLE, Gap analysis or Balanced Scorecards and used a wide variety of
strategic frameworks such as the iconic Ansoff and BCG strategic
decision-­making matrices. Each of these was underpinned by a dominant
rationalist approach to strategic thinking—scan the environment, assess
strengths and weaknesses, formulate the strategy, and then proceed with
implementation. The view was that business strategists could apply analy-
sis to help shift the competitive equilibrium. From the mid 1980’s the
work of Michael Porter, five forces analysis, the value chain and the theo-
ries of competitive advantage, cemented the rationalist approach and, for
many, confirmed the assumption that there were benefits to an explicit
process of strategy formulation to ensure that policies and actions were
coordinated and directed to a common set of goals. Porter’s work was the
most comprehensive and influential of all the strategy concepts whereby
‘competitive advantage grows fundamentally out of the value a firm is
 1 From Singularity to Complementarity 5

able to create for its buyers that exceeds the firm’s cost of creating it.’ He
argued that competitive advantage was influenced by the choice of com-
petitive scope and the range of a firm’s activities. (Porter, 1980, 1985;
Henderson, 1989; Kay et al., 2006)
Overarching all of these considerations was the belief that the maximi-
sation of shareholder value would not come about by serendipity but by
clear objectives, a well thought through strategy and plans, and an under-
standing of the value chain and the importance of each link in it. But the
greater depth of analysis implied in strategy setting brought a diversifica-
tion of strategic theory and practice. The literature of strategy prolifer-
ated, with a variety of distinct ‘schools,’ including design, planning,
positioning, entrepreneurial, learning, the cognitive school, the environ-
mental school, and the configuration school. Some of these were pre-
scriptive, concerned with models of how strategy should be formulated.
Some were about positioning the organisation, others about learning and
others still about charismatic leadership. (Ahlstrad et al., 1998)
Subsequently, a resource-based view of strategy and the exploitation of
core competences were enthusiastically embraced as alternatives. There
were plenty of models from which those involved in strategy could choose.
But the lack of consensus on the best way to approach strategy
prompted questions. Martin (2014) argued for example that a too rigid
approach could create a series of ‘comfort traps’ which would lull the
strategists into a false sense of control. Strategic planning and cost-based
thinking were often bound by ‘self-referential planning frameworks’
based on what the company could control thereby limiting a focus on
what it couldn’t. Further reservations were raised about the very processes
of strategic planning. Earlier, and to counter such perceived rigidity,
Henry Mintzberg wrote of the concept of emergent or crafted strategy
(1978 and 1987) that presented an approach requiring agility; a respon-
siveness to unanticipated events and the ability to ‘craft’ as opportunity
became clearer, using its resources to build advantage. At each end of a
spectrum Porter believed that the essence of strategy not only included
decisions about what to do but also choices about what not to do; whilst
Mintzberg viewed strategy as a pattern based on a stream of decisions.
There are multiple positions between these two points of view. One of
which, the Resource Based View (Barney, 1991) is of particular interest,
6 P. Turner

given its focus on the exploitation of internal resources in the achieve-

ment of competitive advantage—when resources are valuable, rare,
imperfectly imitable, and non-substitutable, they could create competi-
tive advantages, which explain the differences in overall performance.
Complementarity is the process by which such resources are allocated to
benefit the whole organisation (Hsu, 2013).
As the Fourth Industrial Revolution gathers momentum, there is a
panoply of strategic theory and practice from which organisations can
choose as they navigate their way through the transformed environment.
In its most explicit form, competitive advantage can be achieved by dif-
ferentiation or by being a lowest cost provider; it can be based on exploit-
ing unique competences or resources that exist within the organisation. It
can be based on a planned and systematic analysis of markets, or it can be
based on opportunistic agility to respond to whatever the environment
produces. Strategy can be concerned with adaptation to new environ-
ments, or developments within those environments; it can be concerned
with dealing with chaos or getting to grips with radical change. ‘At its
limit, strategy formation is not just about values or competences, and
capabilities, but also about ‘crisis and commitment, organisational learn-
ing and punctuated equilibrium, industrial organisation and social revo-
lution.’ (Ahlstrad et al., 1998) The shock to global order which came
about in the second decade of the twenty-first century added significantly
to the necessity to deal with crisis however this was manifested. Business
strategy has evolved from being less of a mould into which corporate
ingredients could be poured and a fully formed figure emerging, to more
like clay on a turntable, fashioned and crafted into shape.
Whatever model was used, it was not enough to have strategy setting
in isolation from other functions and so theories and practices of leader-
ship, general management, talent management and workforce engage-
ment developed—sometimes synchronised and sometimes in parallel—in
response to economic, social and technology dynamics. As the quest for
understanding of competitive advantage grew, so did questions about
what needed to be done to achieve it—what is good strategy, what makes
an effective leader, what is the role of the modern manager, how do we
define talent, what makes employees engaged- and the recognition of
their importance to business performance. In the contemporary
 1 From Singularity to Complementarity 7

organisation, the agency of strategy, stewardship, and policy provide the

direction; talented leaders and managers decide on the allocation of
resource and navigate a course; a committed and skilled workforce carry
out operations, innovating and improving processes along the way. In
each of the functions, responsiveness to change has been remarkable.

Leadership and Management—Influencing

a Group to Commit Willingly
to a Common Goal
Accompanying the rise of theories about strategy and a surfeit of strategic
models, was a renewed focus on the type of leadership needed to match
corporate ambitions. From one perspective, leadership was seen as some-
thing that would be transformational, based on an individual’s charisma.
In some cases, leaders built enduring greatness through a blend of per-
sonal humility and professional will whilst some had emotional aware-
ness which allowed them to achieve more than those without (ie they
have high levels of emotional intelligence). For some, leadership was con-
cerned with authenticity, for others it required a ‘shift’ to a new level
where purpose, mastery, autonomy, and trust were characteristics of the
organisation and whose leaders shared aligned values and aspirations.
(Greenleaf, 1977; Burns, 1978; Bass, 1985; Conger & Kanungo, 1998;
Goleman, 1996, 1998; Collins, 2001; Goffee & Jones, 2006; Hlupic,
2014) In most cases, leaders were those people who could ‘mobilise oth-
ers to want to get extraordinary things done in organisations… transform
values into actions, visions into realities, obstacles into innovations, sep-
arateness into solidarity, risks into rewards … create a climate in which
people turn challenging opportunities into remarkable successes’ (Kouzes
& Posner, 2007). Leaders were people who could influence a group to
commit willingly to a common goal.
Analysis of the many and varied perspectives on leadership summarised
the approaches as, Person based which associated with the traits pertain-
ing to a leader’s character or personality including having a clear vision
and strategic objectives, decisiveness, being an inspiring communicator,
8 P. Turner

integrity, trust and delegation, honesty, and consistency. Or leadership

could be results based which is founded on realising potential as a distin-
guishing feature of the leader’s actions. Process based leadership on the
other hand used the assumption that ‘people that we attribute the term
leadership to, act differently to non-leaders.’. Position based leadership
defines the term as a spatial position i.e where a person sits in the organ-
isation’s hierarchy. Leadership has been categorised as trait, behaviour,
power-influence, situational, integrative or intra individual; as well as
being defined into generic groupings (such as that based on trait or
behaviour) and local leadership theories including functional leadership
or group and team leadership. (Alimo-Metcalfe & Alban-Metcalfe, 2003;
Grint, 2005; Yukl, 2010; Edger, 2012) Theories sometimes distinguished
between a leader who sits at the head of an organisation, department or
business unit and leadership which is a social phenomenon that occurs
at many organisational levels and points.
Given a wide array of leadership theories, there is support for Kilburg
and Donohue’s conclusion (2011) that ‘leadership is a complex, multidi-
mensional, emergent process in which the leader and followers use their
characteristics, capabilities, thoughts, feelings, and behaviours to create
mutually influencing relationships that enable them to coevolve strate-
gies, tactics, structures, processes, directions, and other methods of build-
ing and managing human enterprises.’ Nevertheless, and not for want of
trying, there is no universally accepted theory of leadership. Some 300
definitions, means that an analysis of leadership is more like looking
through the lens of a kaleidoscope rather than that of a microscope
because with each turn it changes shape and colour and hue. (Turner, 2019)
The subject of management is equally vibrant, and its genesis can be
traced back to the First Industrial Revolution and the principles of divi-
sion of labour as articulated in Adam Smith’s seminal work of classical
economy the Wealth of Nations in 1776. This was the beginning of the
organisational hierarchy, of planning and forecasting, the transformation
of the nature of work, the workforce to deliver it and the skills of the
people required to organise its production; the latter being known vari-
ously as executives, directors, managing partners, agents, foremen, under-­
agents, over-men, corporals, supervisors, or stewards; but collectively as
leaders or managers. (Turner, 2021) During the nineteenth century the
 1 From Singularity to Complementarity 9

seeds of Scientific Management were sown and cultivated. However, an

awareness that time clocks, stop watches and slide rules could only go so
far in informing how people should be managed, led to the growth of a
more human emphasis on management and from the early twentieth
century the emergence of Behavioural Management theories. At around
the time of the Third Industrial Revolution new approaches arose. Hence
Management Science underpinned new management theories, followed
by the importance of the organisational environment. In this latter
Management as Practice is of particular importance and within this
area, the innovations in practice introduced by successful global corpora-
tions that came out of the economies of Asia. There are many excellent
analyses which cover the various stages of management theory (Drucker,
1954, 1974; Child, 1969; Wilson & Thomson, 2009; Muldoon et al.,
2020) supporting a conclusion that management could be an economic
resource performing a series of technical functions which comprise the
organising and administering of other resources; or a system of authority
through which policy is translated into the execution of tasks; or an elite
social grouping which maintains the associated systems of authority. The
kaleidoscope’s lens would show management as shifting in form, some-
times expanding, sometimes contracting, always changing.
The final consideration has been that of how leaders differ from man-
agers and how leadership differs from management. This subject is one of
continuing debate in spite of the observations that ‘it is obvious that a
person can be a leader without being a manager (e.g. an informal leader),
and a person can be a manager without leading.’ (Yukl, 2010) There have
been attempts to distinguish between them. Two of the leading thinkers
on these subjects had clear points of view in answer to the question. Peter
Drucker was extremely forthright in his response; ‘as for separating man-
agement from leadership, that is nonsense—as much nonsense as separat-
ing management from entrepreneurship. Those are part and parcel of the
same job. They are different to be sure, but only as different as the right
hand from the left or the nose from the mouth. They belong to the same
body.’ Whilst Henry Mintzberg noted that ‘leadership cannot simply del-
egate management; instead of distinguishing managers from leaders, we
should see leaders as managers, and leadership as management practiced
well.’ Mintzberg’s belief that delineations between leadership and
10 P. Turner

management were wrong because ‘managing is controlling and doing and

dealing and thinking and leading and deciding and more.’ (Mintzberg,
2011) it would appear that there are more things that bind the concepts
of leadership and management together than separate them. Those con-
templating the nature of leadership and management in Industry 4.0.
organisations have a wide range of options.

F rom Exclusive to Inclusive—Defining Talent

and Engagement
With a strategy in place, leaders ready to transform and managers focused
on objectives, there is the question of productivity—what talent exists for
innovation and how engaged is the workforce with the organisation’s
direction and their roles in it. Recognition of the importance of effective
people management—in particular, talent and workforce engagement—
too often regarded adjuncts to the financial aspects of the strategic plan,
has increased. However, as in the case of strategy and leadership, opinions
abound about the precise meaning of both terms.
The greater focus on talent came about with the seminal work of
Chambers et al. (1998a) who captured the talent zeitgeist of a period in
which talent shortages were prevalent from the mid 1990’s. In the War for
Talent, publications (Chambers et al., 1998a, 1998b) ‘C suite’ executives
were found to be in short supply because of demographics (insufficient
people within the normal experience range of executives and senior man-
agers) and demand side economic growth forecasts. An imbalance
between the two, created intense competition for the best people and the
position was deemed to be so dire that the shortage of executive talent
was a threat to business survival. But it was soon clear that talent short-
ages were not confined to those in a narrow group of people in executive
positions and with the growing recognition that talent management was
necessary organisation wide and was a strategic issue (Cappelli, 2008;
Collings & Mellahi, 2009, 2013; Tarique & Schuler, 2010; Collings
et al., 2015; Cascio & Boudreau, 2016). The perceived inequality of hav-
ing only a few people as being identified with talent in the exclusive
approach; the experience of global organisations in their quest to fill the
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The religion of
Plutarch
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

Title: The religion of Plutarch

A pagan creed of apostolic times

Author: John Oakesmith

Release date: January 15, 2024 [eBook #72730]

Language: English

Original publication: London: Longmans, Green, and co, 1902

Credits: Turgut Dincer and the Online Distributed Proofreading

Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced
from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE

RELIGION OF PLUTARCH ***
THE RELIGION OF PLUTARCH

THE RELIGION OF
PLUTARCH
A PAGAN CREED OF APOSTOLIC TIMES

AN ESSAY

BY
JOHN OAKESMITH, D.Litt., M.A.

Διὸ καὶ φιλόμυθος ὁ φιλόσοφός τώς ἐστιν.

Arist., Meta., i. 2.

LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.

39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON
NEW YORK AND BOMBAY
1902
All rights reserved
 INTRODUCTORY NOTE
The following pages are practically a reprint of a volume which
was issued for private circulation some twelve months ago, under
the title “The Religion of Plutarch as expounded in his ‘Ethics.’” The
main difference between the present volume and its predecessor
consists in the translation or removal of various quotations from
Greek and Latin sources which were given in full in the first edition of
the book. The references to these sources have, of course, been
retained. Verbal corrections have been made here and there, and a
few pages of new matter have been introduced into the “Preface.” In
other respects the two impressions are substantially the same.
I cannot allow this opportunity to pass without expressing my
gratitude to J. E. Sandys, Esq., Litt.D., Public Orator in the University
of Cambridge, and Examiner in Greek at the University of London,
who kindly placed at my disposal his own copy of the original essay,
in which he had made numerous suggestions on points of style, and
on questions of scholarship in general. These suggestions have, for
the most part, been adopted in the preparation of the present edition.
My thanks are also owing to my colleagues in the Civil Service,
especially to those in the General Post Office, London, to whose
encouragement it is largely due that this essay, in its present form, is
able to see the light.
As the Athenæum, in reviewing the original edition (Athenæum,
2nd of August, 1902), suggested that “the present essay is probably
the forerunner of a larger and more elaborate book,” it may be
desirable to explain that the following pages do not constitute “the
larger and more elaborate book” which the Athenæum is right in
forecasting.
JOHN OAKESMITH.
 PREFACE
When the student of Plutarch leaves the familiar ground of the
“Parallel Lives,” and turns, for the first time, to the less thoroughly
explored region of the “Ethics,” he is struck with wonder at the many-
sided excellence of the writer whose special gift he has been
accustomed to regard as consisting in the composition of
biographies more remarkable for the presentation of moral truths
than for the accurate narration of historical facts. He learns with
surprise that Plutarch has bequeathed to posterity a mine of
information respecting the period in which he himself lived, as
valuable and as interesting as the view presented in his “Lives” of
that higher antiquity in which his classic heroes moved and worked.
Even the actual bulk of Plutarch’s contribution to what may be called
“general literature” is noteworthy. Apart from the “Lives,” the so-
called “Catalogue of Lamprias” contains the titles of nearly two
hundred works attributed, ostensibly by his son, to Plutarch,[1] and
some fourscore of these have been handed down to our time under
the general, but somewhat misleading, title of “Ethica” or “Moralia.”
Among these surviving essays are to be found contributions, of a
surprising vitality and freshness, to the discussion of Education,
Politics, Art, Literature, Music, Hygiene; serious and studied
criticisms and appreciations of the great philosophic schools of
Greece and their founders; short sermons on minor morals,
illustrated by vivid sketches of character both typical and individual;
conversations on Love and Marriage, and on other topics perpetually
interesting to civilized societies. The longest work of all, the
“Symposiacs,” or “Table Talk,” besides containing a wealth of
material used by Plutarch and his friends in the discussion of current
problems of scientific, literary, and social interest, gives a picture of
Græco-Roman Society in the first Christian century, which, both from
its general character and from the multitude of details it contains on
matters of fact, is of the utmost importance for the accurate study of
the period and its complicated problems. All these various works are
interpenetrated with the character of the writer to such a vivid degree
of personality that their study, from this point of view alone, would
probably cast more light upon Plutarch’s methods as a writer of
history than innumerable minute and difficult inquiries into his
“sources,” and the manner in which he used them in writing his
“Lives.”
Fascinating, however, as is the study of the “Ethics” in these
various aspects, it soon becomes evident that the point of paramount
importance for a proper appreciation of Plutarch’s attitude towards
life and its problems in general, is to be found in the position which
he assumed in face of the religious questions which perplexed the
thinking men of his time and country. What was Plutarch’s view of
that ancient and hereditary faith which was not only the official creed
of the Empire, but which was still accepted as a sufficient spiritual
satisfaction by many millions of the Empire’s subjects? Was it
possible that a man so steeped in the best literature, so keen a
student of the greatest philosophies, could be a believer, to any
serious extent, in those traditions which appear so crude and
impossible in the light of our higher modern ideals? And if he could
think them worthy of credit, by what method of interpretation was this
consummation facilitated? How could he persuade himself and
others to find in them at once the sanction and the inspiration of
virtuous conduct? These are some of the questions which are
constantly before the mind of the reader as he turns the pages of the
“Ethics,” and they are constantly before the mind of the reader
because the author is constantly supplying materials for answering
them. The most important of Plutarch’s general writings are devoted
to the full discussion, from a variety of standpoints, of religious
questions, not only those handed down by the popular tradition, or
embodied in ceremonial observances and legalized worships, but
also those more purely theological conceptions presented in the
various systems of Greek Philosophy. Around Plutarch’s Religion
revolves his conception of life; his numerous contributions to the
discussion of other subjects of human interest unfold their full
significance only when regarded in the light supplied by a knowledge
of his religious beliefs.
 Such, at any rate, is the experience of the present writer after a
close study of the “Ethics” during several years; and it is with the
hope of contributing in some degree to the clearer appreciation of
Plutarch’s manifold activities in other directions, that an investigation
into his religious views has been made the special object of the
following pages.
The text which has been used for the purposes of this essay is
that issued at intervals between the years 1888 and 1896 by Mr. G.
N. Bernardakis, the director of the Gymnasium at Mytilene.[2] The
editor has postponed, for discussion in a subsequent work, many
questions bearing upon the authority of his MSS., and the principles
which he has applied to them in the choice of his readings; his efforts
in the editio minor having been almost wholly confined to presenting
the results of his labours in the shape of a complete and coherent
text. Although, as Dr. Holden has said, “until the appearance of the
promised editio major it is premature to pronounce an opinion on the
editor’s qualifications as a textual critic,”[3] yet Mr. Bernardakis has
exhibited so much combined accuracy and acumen in the
preliminary discussion of various questions connected with his
collation of MSS., and has disposed so completely, as Dr. Holden
admits, of the charges of inaccuracy brought against him by
Professor von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff of Berlin,[4] that the more
general student of Classical Literature may, perhaps, feel some
amount of confidence that in this edition he sees the actual work of
Plutarch himself, and not the ingenious and daring conjectures of
some too brilliant critic. This feeling of confidence will not be
diminished by the evident anxiety displayed by Mr. W. R. Paton, an
English scholar working in the same field, “to induce Mr. Bernardakis
to assist and correct” him in editing a text of the “De Cupiditate
Divitiarum,”[5] and it will be increased by the discovery that, greatly
different as the text of Bernardakis is from that of any other previous
edition, the difference frequently consists in the substitution of plain
sense for undiluted absurdity, or total want of meaning.
Indebtedness to other sources of criticism and information is, the
writer hopes, fully acknowledged in the footnotes as occasion arises.
There has yet been published no work in English dealing with
Plutarch’s “Ethics” at all similar in scope and character either to
Volkmann’s “Leben, Schriften und Philosophie des Plutarch von
Chæronea,”[6] or to Gréard’s “La Morale de Plutarque.”[7] Archbishop
Trench, who speaks slightingly of Gréard’s interesting study, has
himself contributed one or two “Lectures” to some general
observations on this sphere of Plutarch’s activity,[8] while the Rev. J.
P. Mahaffy has given two chapters to the subject in his “Greek World
under Roman Sway.”[9] Chap. xiii., which is headed “Plutarch and
His Times—Public Life,” is devoted partly to Apuleius, and partly to
Plutarch himself, and exhibits, in continuous form, a number of that
author’s best-known and most frequently quoted statements and
opinions on the subjects of Politics and Religion, some ten pages
being set apart for the presentation and criticism of his views on the
latter topic. Chap. xiv. is entitled “Plutarch and His Times—Private
Life,” and intersperses with comments a number of extracts from the
evidence furnished by Plutarch on various matters appertaining to
the social and domestic life of his epoch, giving the gist of passages
selected from the “Table Talk,” from various essays on Education,
and from several tracts on Minor Morals and other themes of general
interest.
Although Professor Mahaffy’s prolonged and extensive researches
into every available sphere of Greek life and thought occasionally
enable him to help out his author’s descriptions by aptly chosen
illustrations from other sources, yet, in dealing with a writer at once
so voluminous and so full of interest as Plutarch, the historian is
hampered by the necessary limits of his appointed task, no less than
by his own diffusive and gossiping style. Mr. Mahaffy’s Clio has
always appeared to us in the light of an amiable and cultured
hostess presiding at Afternoon Tea, gliding graciously hither and
thither among her guests, and introducing topics of conversation
which have only a superficial interest, or which she presents only in
their superficial aspects; while, perhaps unconsciously, conveying
the impression that she reserves for discussion among a few chosen
intimates the more profound and sacred issues of human life. These
two chapters on Plutarch furnish an excellent example of Professor
Mahaffy’s method. They are entertaining in the sense that all well-
conducted gossip is entertaining. A trait of character is chosen here;
a smart saying, or a foolish one, is selected there; a piquant
anecdote is retold elsewhere: but the searchlight is never stationary,
and the earnest student who trusts solely to its assistance will vainly
attempt to see Plutarch steadily and see him whole.
It is, of course, the fact, as already suggested, that, in these
chapters, Professor Mahaffy is dealing with Plutarch only so far as
he furnishes material illustrative of the conception which the historian
has formed as to the character of the age in which his subject lived.
This fact is conspicuously evident in the brief account of Plutarch’s
Religion given in the ten pages from page 311 onwards, where
Professor Mahaffy accepts the belief of so many of his
predecessors, that the age was an age of religious decadence, and
not an age of religious revival; and that, moreover, it was
blameworthy in Plutarch that “he never took pains to understand”
Christianity.[10] Further, it must be added, that the historian’s natural
desire to illustrate Plutarch’s times, rather than to display Plutarch
himself, has led him to commit serious injustice by his uncritical
acceptance of certain spurious tracts as the genuine workmanship of
Plutarch.
The conclusion at which Professor Mahaffy arrives, that Plutarch
was “a narrow and bigoted Hellene,”[11] is intelligible enough to those
who accept the view which we have endeavoured to combat in
Chapter III. of the following essay, a view which is simply a belated
survival of the ancient prejudice which consigns to eternal perdition
the followers of other Religions, because they are wilfully blind to the
light with which our own special Belief has been blessed in such
splendour. But the man who, after even the most casual study of
Plutarch’s utterances on Religion, can seriously describe him as
“narrow and bigoted” will maintain, with equal serenity, that it is the
practice of the sun to shine at midnight. Professor Mahaffy, indeed,
in using such expressions, is at variance with his own better
judgment, inasmuch as he elsewhere concedes that, “had Plutarch
been at Athens when St. Paul came there, he would have been the
first to give the Apostle a respectful hearing.”[12]
 The subject of Plutarch’s “Moralia” has also been touched in a few
contributions to the current Literature of the Reviews. The article on
“Plutarch” appearing over Paley’s initials in the “Encyclopædia
Britannica,” and giving a brief statement of the subjects dealt with in
the different tracts in the “Moralia,” almost entirely exhausts the short
list of English literary contributions to the treatment of this portion of
Plutarch’s work. Paley declared in the article in question that the
“Moralia” were “practically almost unknown to most persons in
Britain, even to those who call themselves scholars.” This sweeping
assertion is not by any means true to-day, although it is still the case
that, so far as the literary presentment of results is concerned, the
“Ethics” of Plutarch are a neglected field of research.
Volkmann, in the “Leben und Schriften” part of his work, carefully
discusses the authenticity of each tract in the generally recognized
list of Plutarch’s writings, while in the volume dealing with the
“Philosophie” he gives an exhaustive analysis of the greater portion
of them. Recognizing that Plutarch had no special philosophical
system of his own, Volkmann endeavours to remedy this deficiency
by the application of a systematic method of treatment with regular
branches of “synthetic” and “analytic” investigation. The “synthetic”
branch of Volkmann’s method is devoted to a discussion of
Plutarch’s philosophic standpoint; to an examination of his polemic
against the Stoics and Epicureans; and to the consideration of his
relation to Plato, which Volkmann regards as the foundation of
Plutarch’s Philosophy. The function of Volkmann’s “analytic” method
is to discover how, on the philosophic basis thus laid down by the
“synthetic” method, Plutarch arranges his positive conclusions in a
coherent relationship with his negative polemic. It is, according to
Volkmann, a natural result of the successful operation of this twofold
system, that the circumstances of Plutarch’s life lose their external
character, and attain to an essential connexion with his philosophical
conceptions. This last assertion is made by way of criticism directed
against Gréard’s “natural and simple” method of arranging Plutarch’s
philosophical utterances under headings descriptive of the various
spheres of life to which they seem appropriate—“la vie domestique,”
“la cité,” “le temple,” &c. Volkmann thinks that under this
arrangement the sense of internal unity is lost; that Plutarch’s views
are presented in it as goodnatured and benevolent, but somewhat
rambling, reflections on the separate aspects of human life, instead
of being treated as the outcome of a consistent philosophy taking
ethical phenomena into systematic consideration.[13] This criticism
has considerable force, though it does not detract from the truth and
charm of M. Gréard’s book. Volkmann himself undoubtedly errs in
the opposite direction. Gréard was quite justified in retorting on his
critic, “Il arrive même qu’en voulant établir trop rationellement la
philosophie de Plutarque, M. Volkmann se trouve conduit à lui prêter
une sorte de système, bien qu’il sache comme personne que nul
moins que le sage de Chéronée n’a porté dans ses écrits une
pensée systématique.”[14] Volkmann, in our opinion, attaches far too
much importance both to Plutarch’s discipular relation to Plato, and
to his polemic against the Stoics and Epicureans. Plutarch’s
opposition to Plato is frequently as strongly marked as his opposition
to Stoics and Epicureans; and his indebtedness to Stoics and
Epicureans is frequently as strongly marked as his indebtedness to
Plato.
Volkmann’s work had been preceded in 1854 by an interesting and
well-written Thesis, entitled “De Apologetica Plutarchi Chæronensis
Theologia.”[15] The author, C. G. Seibert, gives a brief review of
Greek Philosophy, with the object of showing the attitude assumed
by each of the great schools to the gods of the national tradition. He
demonstrates conclusively, and Volkmann follows in his steps, that
Plutarch owed something to all the Schools, to Stoics, to
Peripatetics, and to Epicureans. Yet he, too, insists that Plutarch’s
attitude towards the popular religion was identical with that assumed
by Plato—eadem ratione (qua Plato) Platonis discipuli theologiam
tractarunt, e quibus præ cœteris Plutarchus magistri divini vestigia
secutus est. This, indeed, is the orthodox tendency in the
appreciation of Plutarch, and it has been carried to the extent of
claiming Plutarch as the founder of that special kind of Platonism
distinguished by the epithet “New.” “Plutarch,” says Archbishop
Trench, “was a Platonist with an oriental tinge, and thus a forerunner
of the New Platonists.”—“He might be described with greater truth
than Ammonius as the Founder of Neo-Platonism,” wrote Dr. H. W.
J. Thiersch, who, however, had not freed himself from the idea (the
truth of which even so early a writer as Dacier had doubted, and the
legendary character of which M. Gréard has proved beyond a doubt)
that Plutarch received consular honours at the hands of Trajan.[16]
—“In this essay” (the De Oraculorum Defectu), thinks Mr. W. J.
Brodribb, “Plutarch largely uses the Neo-Platonic Philosophy.”[17]
Even those who do not insist that Plutarch is a Neo-Platonist, or a
“forerunner” of Neo-Platonism, are so anxious to label him with some
designation, that they will hardly allow him to speak for himself. It
may, perhaps, argue presumption on the part of an homo incognitus
nulliusque auctoritatis to suggest that Plutarch faces the teaching of
his predecessors with an independent mind; that he is nullius
addictus jurare in verba magistri; that he tries Plato’s teachings, not
from Plato’s point of view, but from his own.[18]
Such, however, is the view maintained in the pages of the
following essay. It seems to us that, in order to discover the principle
which gives coherence and internal unity to Plutarch’s innumerable
philosophic utterances, it is not necessary to start with the
assumption that he belongs to any particular school. Philosophy is to
him one of the recognized sources of Religion and Morality. Tradition
is another source, and Law or recognized custom another. Plutarch
assumes that these three sources conjointly supply solid sanctions
for belief and conduct. They are the three great records of human
experience, and Plutarch will examine all their contributions to the
criticism of life with a view to selecting those parts from each which
will best aid him and his fellow citizens to lead lives of virtue and
happiness. The great philosophical schools of Greece are regarded
from this point of view—from the point of view of a moralist and a
philosopher, not from the point of view of a Platonist, an anti-Stoic, or
an anti-Epicurean. Plutarch is indebted, as even Volkmann himself
shows, to all the Schools alike. Then why call him a Platonist, or a
Neo-Pythagorizing Platonist, as Zeller has done? Plutarch’s teaching
is too full of logical inconsistencies to be formalized into a system of
Philosophy. But the dominating principle of his teaching, the
paramount necessity of finding a sanction and an inspiration for
conduct in what the wisdom of the past had already discovered, is so
strikingly conspicuous in all his writings that his logical
inconsistencies appear, and are, unimportant. It is this desire of
making the wisdom and traditions of the past available for ethical
usefulness which actuates his attempt to reconcile the
contradictions, and remove the crudities and inconsistencies, in the
three sources of religious knowledge. This is the principle which
gives his teaching unity, and not any external circumstances of his
life, or his attitude in favour of or in opposition to the tenets of any
particular school.
There is no English translation of Plutarch’s “Ethics” which can
claim anything approaching the character of an authorized version.
Almost every editor of Plutarch has felt it necessary to find fault with
his predecessors’ attempts to express Plutarch’s meaning through
the medium of another language. Amyot’s translation is, in the
opinion of the Comte Joseph de Maistre, repellent to “ladies and
foreigners.” Wyttenbach, who makes numerous alterations of
Xylander’s Latin version, also says of Ricard’s French translation,
that “it skips over the difficulties and corruptions in such a manner as
to suggest that the translator was content merely to produce a
version which should be intelligible to French readers.”[19]
Wyttenbach himself is reprehended in the following terms by the
editor of the Didot text of the “Moralia”—“Of the Latin version, in
which we have made numerous corrections, it must be admitted that
Xylander and Wyttenbach, in dealing with corrupt passages, not
infrequently translated conjectures of their own, or suggested by
other scholars, which we have been unable to adopt into the Greek
Text.” In the preface to his English translation of the “De Iside et
Osiride,” the Rev. Samuel Squire, Archdeacon of Bath in 1744, has
some excellent critical remarks on the style of previous translators of
Plutarch, and he somewhat pathetically describes the difficulties
awaiting the author who endeavours to translate that writer—“To
enter into another man’s Soul as it were, who lived several hundred
years since, to go along with his thoughts, to trace, pursue, and
connect his several ideas, to express them with propriety in a
language different from that they were conceived in, and lastly to
give the copy the air and spirit of an original, is not so easy a task as
it may be perhaps deemed by those who have never made the
attempt. The very few good translations of the learned authors into
our own language, will sufficiently justify the truth of the observation
—but if any one still doubts it, let him take the first section of the
book before him, and make the experiment himself.” M. Gréard is
briefer but equally emphatic—“Toute traduction est une œuvre
délicate, celle de Plutarque plus que toute autre peut-être.”
Whatever may be the cause of the perpetuation of this ungracious
tradition of fault-finding, whether the general difficulty specified by
Archdeacon Squire, or the more particular obstacle of a corrupt text
described by other commentators, we do not feel that we are called
upon to make any departure from so long-established a custom. The
quaint charm of most of the translations forming the basis of Dr.
Goodwin’s revision no one will be inclined to deny, although the
reviser’s own remarks make it clear that little dependence is to be
placed upon their accuracy in any instance of difficulty.[20] The two
volumes contained in the well-known “Bohn” series of translations
are utterly misleading, not only as regards the colour which they
infuse into Plutarch’s style, but also as regards their conspicuous
incorrectness in many particular instances.[21] To other translations
of individual tracts reference has been occasionally made in the
notes.
In view of the fact that no dependence was to be placed upon the
accuracy of any translation yet furnished of that portion of our
author’s work with which we were dealing, it was necessary, before
undertaking this essay, to make full translations of considerable
portions of the “Ethics” from the text of Bernardakis; and these
translations, or paraphrases based upon them, are largely employed
in the following pages. Mere references to the text in support of
positions assumed, or statements made, would have been useless
and misleading in the absence of clear indications as to the exact
interpretation placed upon the words of the text. The writer cannot
hope to have succeeded where, in the opinion of competent judges,
there have been so many failures. But he has, at any rate, made a
conscientious attempt to understand his author, and to give
expression to his view of his author’s meaning, without any prejudice
born of the assumption that Plutarch belonged to a particular school,
or devoted his great powers of criticism and research to the
exposition and illustration of the doctrines of any single philosopher.
JOHN OAKESMITH.
Battersea, September, 1902.
 CONTENTS
PAGE

CHAPTER I.
General character of Modern European Religions: their
cardinal appeal to Emotion—Roman Religion: its
sanctions chiefly rational: the causes of its failure: its
place as a factor in Morality taken by Greek Philosophy
—Early Greek Morality based partly on Religion, partly
on Reason, which, in the form of Philosophy, eventually
supplies the main inspiration to Goodness—Gradual
limitation of Philosophy to Ethics 1
CHAPTER II.
Importance of the ethical tendency in pre-Socratic Philosophy
generally under-estimated—Development of this
tendency from Thales to the Sophists, and from the
Sophists to the Stoics and Epicureans—Special
influence of these two Schools, aided by the failure of
political interest, in establishing a practicable ideal of
personal virtue—This ideal, conspicuous in Plutarch’s
“Ethics,” and inculcated by the philosophers of the early
Græco-Roman Empire generally 20
CHAPTER III.
Ethical aspect of Græco-Roman Society in the period of 43
Plutarch: difficulty of obtaining an impartial view of it—
Revival of moral earnestness concurrent with the
establishment of the Empire: the reforms of Augustus a
formal expression of actual tendencies—Evidences of
this in philosophical and general literature—The
differences between various Schools modified by the
 importance of the ethical end to which all their efforts
were directed—Endeavour made to base morality on
sanctions already consecrated by the philosophies and
religious traditions of the Past—Plutarch’s “Ethics” the
result of such an endeavour
CHAPTER IV.
Plutarch’s attitude towards Pagan beliefs marked by a spirit
of reverent rationalism—The three recognized sources of
Religion: Poetry, Philosophy, and Law or Custom—The
contribution of each to be examined by Reason with the
object of avoiding both Superstition and Atheism:
Reason the “Mystagogue” of Religion—Provisional
examples of Plutarch’s method in the three spheres—His
reluctance to press rationalism too far—His piety partly
explained by his recognition of the divine mission of
Rome—Absence of dogmatism in his teaching 62
CHAPTER V.
Plutarch’s Theology—His conception of God not a pure
metaphysical abstraction, his presentment of it not
dogmatic—General acceptance of the attributes
recognized by Greek philosophy as essential to the idea
of God—God as Unity, Absolute Being, Eternity—
God as Intelligence: Personality of Plutarch’s God
intimately associated with his Intelligence—God’s
Intelligence brings him into contact with humanity: by it
he knows the events of the Future and the secrets of the
human heart—From his knowledge springs his
Providence—God as Father and Judge—the De Sera
Numinis Vindicta—Immortality of the Soul 87
CHAPTER VI.
Plutarch’s Dæmonology—Dæmonology as a means of 120
reconciliation between the traditional Polytheism and
Philosophic Monotheism—Dæmonlore in Greek
philosophers and in the popular faith—Growth of a
 natural tendency to identify the gods of the polytheistic
tradition with the Dæmons—Emphasis thus given to the
philosophic conception of the Deity—Dæmons
responsible for all the crude and cruel superstitions
attaching to the popular gods—Function of the Dæmons
as mediators between God and man
CHAPTER VII.
Necessity for a Mediator between God and Man partly met by
Oracular Inspiration—General failure of Oracles in the
age of Plutarch—Plutarch’s “Delphian Essays”—The De
Pythiæ Oraculis: nature of Inspiration: oracles not
verbally inspired—The De Defectu Oraculorum—
Various explanations of Inspiration—Plutarch inclines to
accept that which assumes an original Divine afflatus
placed under the superintendence of Dæmons, whose
activities are subject to the operation of natural causes 138
CHAPTER VIII.
Sincerity of Plutarch’s belief in Dæmons—Function of the
Dæmons as Mediators not confined to oracular
inspiration—Dæmons in their personal relationship with
the human soul—The De Dæmonio Socratis—This
tract not a formal treatise on Dæmonology—Various
explanations of the Socratic “Dæmon”—Ethical value of
the conception of Dæmons as spiritual guardians of
individual men—“Men may rise on stepping-stones of
their dead selves to higher things”—Dangers of the
conception—Superstition: Plutarch’s general attitude
towards that Vice 163
CHAPTER IX.
Relation between Superstition and Atheism: Atheism an 179
intellectual error: Superstition an error involving the
passions: the De Superstitione—Moral fervour of
Plutarch’s attack on Superstition—His comparative
tolerance of Atheism—The greatest safeguard against