The concept of the modern cosmopolitanism is connected with the ideal of cessation or prevention of wars, as represented in Kant's Toward Perpetual Peace, and it has been claimed that this concept has its origin in ancient Greek philosophy. Martha C. Nussbaum, an American scholar on ancient philosophy as well as on political philosophy, advocates in her article, 'Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism' (Boston Review, 1994), the revaluation of ancient cosmopolitanism as an effective thought for the realization of peace and the protection of human rights across countries' borders. However, she is often criticized for anachronistically importing our enlightenment-derived interpretation into ancient Greek thoughts (cf. Lee Harris, 'The Cosmopolitan Illusion', Policy Review, 2003). Diogenes the Cynic, upon being asked to give the name of his home city, replied 'I am a citizen of the world (cosmoplolites)'. But Cynic cosmopolitanism seems to have been rather negative in that it rejected any ethical obligation. I attempt in this paper to trace cosmopolitanism to its origins, making use of materials from Cynics, early Stoics and Roman writers. My contentions are as follows: 1) Diogenes said that the only true city is that which belongs to cosmos (DL 6, 72). For him no other cities on earth could be genuine. The true city has law just like any other cities, but it is not any such system of rules as adopted in communities on earth. It was rather a system of virtues. 2) Although we know very little about what more Diogenes made of his ideal city, we can at least infer from materials of early Stoics what it was like. The assertion of Epicurean Philodemus(On the Stoics) that Diogenes and Zeno wrote works with the same title, Republic, and that they both had essentially the same opinion, suggests that they actually believed in an ideal city. As to its concrete nature, we know from the criticism of Cassius, a Sceptic, that the ideal city was for Zeno a small community of sages, and this is confirmed for Diogenes too, by relevant passages in Diogenes Laertius. It is thus likely that Diogenes' cosmopolitanism was a negative one, virtually equivalent to anarchism. 3) For Roman philosophers like Plutarch and Epictetus, both Diogenes and Zeno were philanthropists, who treated national origin and location as a matter of secondary importance. It is interesting that they also attributed 'cosmopolitanism' to Socrates. However, Socrates' 'cosmopolitanism' covered too small a part of the world, i. e. Greek world. Hence, their attributions were not exactly correct although they believed that they took Diogenes and Zeno in the right spirit. Thus, such cosmopolitanism as Nussbaum is willing to recognize in ancient world is safely traced to Roman philosophers and their interpretation of Diogenes and Zeno, even though it is difficult to trace it to these two philosophers themselves.
抄録全体を表示