The Hellenistic World

The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell

Ch. XXV The Hellenistic World

History of the Greek speaking world can be divided into three periods:
1) The free City States (freedom and disorder)
2) The Macedonian domination (Hellenistic Age)
3) Under the Roman Empire

Alexander tried to meld Greek and barbarian customs into one. But the Greeks were not very impressed with Alexander whom they considered semi-Greek to begin with and not fans of barbarians at all.

After the death of Alexander the Hellenistic world was split into three separate dynasties between some of Alexander's generals: Antigonus controlled the European part, Ptolemy the African, and Seleucus controlled the Asiatic parts.

Ptolemies and the Seleucids ruled as military tyrannies. Ptolemy held sway in Egypt for a time, but it took only two centuries for the Seleucids to fall apart at the seams being gobbled up by Rome and Persia.

India even received a bit of Hellenization, but Asoka (264-28 BC) tried to proselytize the Greeks with Buddhism.

Babylonian and Syria (minus Judea) were completely Hellenized in the urban populations. Only in Judea where the Greeks and the Jews faced off did Hellenization meet stiff resistance.

While Hellenization brought wealth and some stability, it didn't guarantee any individual security. Small dynastic squabbles could up end a populace and its local gentry and leaders instantly. It is no wonder that the religious life of the age found the cult of the goddess Fortune or Luck to be very popular.

"There was widespread social discontent and fear of revolution. The wages of free labour fell,
presumably owing to the competition of eastern slave labour; and meantime the prices of
necessaries rose. One finds Alexander, at the outset of his enterprise, having time to make
treaties designed to keep the poor in their place" (Russell, 225). This was all done to discourage any revolution at a time when civil unrest was ready to burst because of the inequities.

While Hellenization dramatically impacted everywhere the Greeks conquered, the Greeks were themselves conquered in a way by the superstitions of the east. Astrology coming from Babylon took a preeminent role in Greek thought at the time to detriment of Greek thought.

The instability of the age led to a lack of virtue in men. When wealth is only acquired through adventurers despoiling others and that wealth can disappear just as quickly by a stronger adventurer then it becomes almost expected for men to turn bad. Menander notes, "So many cases I have known of men who, though not naturally rogues, became so, through misfortune, by constraint" (Russell, 228).

Early Greek Math & Astronomy

The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell

Ch. XXIV Early Greek Mathematics and Astronomy

The Greeks took a little from the Egyptians and a little from the Babylonians and then developed some sound mathematics.

Euclid was still regarded as the sole textbook on geometry when Bertrand Russell was a schoolboy. 

"Euclid Elements is certainly one of the greatest books ever written, and one of the most perfect
monuments of the Greek intellect. It has, of course, the typical Greek limitations: the method is
purely deductive, and there is no way, within it, of testing the initial assumptions. These
assumptions were supposed to be unquestionable, but in the nineteenth century non-Euclidean
geometry showed that they might be in part mistaken, and that only observation could decide
whether they were so" (Russell, 211)

Like Plato, Euclid had a contempt for the practical utility of his work.

The Buridan's ass argument: two bundles of hay were placed at equal distances to the right and left of the donkey. Therefore, he died of hunger. That could be mined for an interesting short story idea.

In astronomy the Greeks made leaps and strides, with some even moving away from an anthropocentric universe. Of course, it wasn't quite heliocentric yet, but the notion of earth being just one of the planets moving in space paved the way from a heliocentric theory.

Heraclides, a pupil of Plato's school postulated that the earth rotates once on its own axis every twenty-four hours and discovered that Venus and Mercury revolve around the son.

Aristarchus of Samos (310 - 230 BC) "is the most interesting of all ancient astronomers, because he advanced the complete Copernican hypothesis, that all the planets, including the earth, revolve in circles around the sun, and that the earth rotates on its axis once in twenty-four hours" (Russell, 214).
Seleucus, Aristarchus' successor fully adhered to this theory as well, but then was not adopted by any other ancient astronomer.

Eratosthenes estimated the earth's diameter within 50 miles of the actual diameter.

Aristotle's Politics

The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell

Ch. 21 Aristotle's Politics

Aristotle's politics are interesting because of their historical insight into the culture surrounding them. They are not useful for a modern statesman to study to implement something from them.

The State is the highest form of community.

The State is prior to the individual. An individual cannot reach his highest good without functioning within a good state.

"Without law man is the worst of animals" (Russell, 186).

Slavery was natural because some are made to rule and some to be ruled.

Slaves are better off when ruled by masters than if they were free because of their inferior nature. Just like dogs are better off domesticated than feral.

War is justified when the war is waged against those who are inferior and refuse to accept their inferiority. The problem with this theory is it justifies all slavery and the notion that might makes right.

Aristotle was against capitalistic style trade and found the retail trade to be lowly.

Usury was despised. Lending at any profit remained reviled throughout the ancient times right on up to the Reformation.

Aristotle argues against Plato's Utopia. Russell notes that his arguments against Plato are rather weak. "I do not agree with Plato, but if anything could make me do so, it would be Aristotle's arguments against him" (Russell, 189).

Aristotle argues that the greatest crimes come from excess, not want. Nobody becomes a tyrant to avoid being cold.

"A government is good when it aims at the good of the whole community, bad when it cares only
for itself" (Russell, 189).

Three good governments: monarchy, aristocracy & constitutional government.
Three bad governments: tyranny, oligarchy and democracy

External goods being acquired does not create virtue. But, the acquisition of virtue leads to the accumulation of external goods.

Monarchy is the best, followed by aristocracy and then constitutional government. Tyranny is worse than oligarchy. Oligarchy is worse than democracy.

Oligarchy is when the rich rule without a care for the poor. Democracy is when the power is in the hands of the have-nots and they disregard the interest of the rich.

"Democracy, Aristotle says, arises from the belief that men who are equally free should be equal in all respects; oligarchy, from the fact that men who are superior in some respect claim too much. Both have a kind of justice, but not the best kind. 'Therefore both parties, whenever their share in the
government does not accord with their preconceived ideas, stir up revolution'" (Russell, 190).

Three things needed to prevent revolution: government propaganda in education, respect for law and justice being served in law and administration.

Aristotle believed that all men deserved equality according to their proportion. The problems with that are myriad. But, what happens is that virtue, which is difficult to define and quantify becomes connected with money, which is easy to quantify. Thus, in Aristotle's equality according to their proportion will always lead to equality according to their income level.

"All social inequality, in the long run, is inequality of income" (Russell, 191).

Aristotle believes citizens should be the landowning gentry who do not have to work for a living. Tradesmen and merchants need not apply.

Education is reserved for children who can become citizens. Useful arts and trades can be taught to the slaves and lower classes.

Education needs to be catered to the type of government in which the pupils are being taught. Democratic education will thus differ from oligarchical or monarchical.

The purpose of education is virtue, not utility.

"The aim of the State, in his view, is to produce cultured gentlemen - men who combine the aristocratic mentality with love of learning and the arts" (Russell, 194).

The Echo of Greece

From Goodreads

The Echo of Greece
Edith Hamilton

I have enjoyed this book immensely. Hamilton has an exceptionally readable quality to her work. I am sad this book is over. Her interlocking the bits of history into a portrait is done so well that you feel as though you understand the Greeks of 2,000 years ago like you understand a contemporary culture. I can't wait to pick up another of her works sometime soon.

Bulfinch's Mythology

From Goodreads

Greek and Roman Mythology: The Age of Fable
Thomas Bulfinch

While Bulfinch is certainly more thorough in his treatment of mythology I find I personally enjoyed Edith Hamilton more. Don't get me wrong; this book is great. It gets you good and immersed into mythology. I especially enjoyed his Wagner chapter.

The Oresteia

From Goodreads

The Oresteia: Agamemnon, The Libation Bearers, The Eumenides
Aeschylus

I think I enjoyed this more than the Oedipus cycle. However, just like Oedipus, the third part just leaves me wanting. I don't know if it is my lack of understanding but the endings just aren't satisfying. It's like it wraps up too neatly for such messy affairs.

Mythology - Edith Hamilton

From Goodreads

Mythology: Timeless Tales of Gods and Heroes
Edith Hamilton

I love mythology and history. Edith Hamilton does a great job of making the myths easily digestible without dumbing it down. Although she's a little too harsh on Ovid in my opinion.

Odysseus: A Life

From my Goodreads review...

It feels somewhat wrong to give the same number of stars to this book as The Iliad and The Odyssey; however, I've done just that because Charles Rowan Beye has made Odysseus extremely accessible without this book being overly scholarly, and thus, overly dry. The style of the work is good and reconstructs Odysseus' life and times that a neophyte Greek historian like myself can digest. I highly recommend this book to anyone looking to understand either of Homer's works a little more clearly.

I had just finished up the aforementioned books before getting into this one and it was very good to get a recap at the end. I only wish I had read the Aeneid prior, but chest la vie? Now it's on to Ulysses (and if my previous encounter with Joyce is a harbinger of things to come, a commentary on that as well).

Assessment of the Odyssey

I finished The Odyssey earlier this month, but I've been slack on my digitization and compiling of my notes on this here blog. But, I'm trying to catch up. Here is what I wrote, in my Goodreads review.

What a slog! Going back to back on The Iliad and The Odyssey. Don't get me wrong, they are both great. They're just big, wordy books. I think that I prefer The Odyssey, but just slightly.

There are a number of great stories wrapped up into The Odyssey. Some are triumphant, others gory, others happy and some sad. The whole thing oozes emotion. One short little one stuck out to me thought. The little interaction between Argos, Odysseus' dog, was especially poignant. In that tiny bit of a minor passage you see how Homer can weave contradictory powerful emotions together into a unity.

Assessment of the Iliad

I finished The Iliad by Homer over my vacation and am nearly done with The Odyssey. Once upon a time I had read The Odyssey but I don't think I've ever read the unabridged version of The Iliad. Here was my quick goodreads assessment:

"There are few storytellers throughout history who can spar with Homer. The Iliad is a riveting tale of war, love, hate and every emotion that lies between. My only complaint about this book (and this is true of many ancient works or epic poetry in general) is when a commander or a god informs some underling or mortal of some plan of action and on the next page that underling or mortal relays that message in full. The repetition is sometimes a bit much. Otherwise it's a great story, full of complex characters".

It's really amazing to see the violent swings in emotions in the characters in the story. I found myself at times really rooting against Achilles or Agamemnon. Achilles seemed a spoiled brat and Agamemnon is just really unlikeable at times. But then Agamemnon sort of redeems himself. Achilles really doesn't redeem himself too much in the story. I know it's a cultural thing - but I just find Achilles' petulance his most remarkable characteristic.

A History of the World in 6 Glasses

A History of the World in 6 Glasses
Tom Standage

This was a really fun little history book that shows the development of human history through six beverages: beer, wine, spirits, coffee, tea and Coca-Cola. For a history book it really keeps the pages turning and would be a good read for just about anyone. It's not so lofty that only history nerds would like and understand it; but, it isn't so simple that those same nerds would turn their nose up at it.

Here are just some of my highlights from the book.

"To Neolithic drinkers, beer's ability to intoxicate and induce a state of altered consciousness seemed magical" (Standage, 19). - The obvious inference here is that beer is a gift from the gods, which played a central role in many ancient peoples' religions.

An interesting Egyptian myth that would be worth further study and possibly a short story:

"The Egyptians, for example, believed that beer was accidentally discovered by Osiris, the god of agriculture and king of the afterlife. One day he prepared a mixture of water and sprouted grain, but forgot about it and left it in the sun. He later returned to find the gruel had fermented, decided to drink it, and was so pleased with the result that he passed his knowledge on to humankind. (This tale seems to tally closely with the way beer was probably discovered in the stone age)." (Standage, 19).

It is better to be a beer drinker than a non-beer drinker.

"In other words, beer helped to make up for the decline in food quality as people took up farming, provided a safe form of liquid nourishment, and gave groups of beer-drinking farmers a comparative advantage over non-beer drinkers" (Standage, 22).

Philosophy of Religion and History of Religion: An interesting theory on how temples emerged to play a role in society:

"Keeping surplus food in the storehouse was one way to ward off future food shortages; ritual and religious activity, in which the gods were called upon to ensure a good harvest, was another. As these two activities became intertwined, deposits of surplus food came to be seen as offerings to the gods, and the storehouses became temples." (Standage, 22).

"The Mouth of a perfectly contented man is filled with beer.
-Egyptian Proverb, c. 2200 BC."(Standage, 23)

The very definition of civilization is beer.

"The Mesopotamians regarded the consumption of bread and beer as one of the things that distinguished them from savages and made them fully human. Interestingly, this belief seems to echo beer's association with a settled, orderly lifestyle, rather than the haphazard existence of hunter-gatherers in prehistoric times" (Standage, 27).

Another Egyptian Myth worth retelling in short story form:

"One Egyptian tale even credits beer with saving humankind from destruction. Ra, the sun god, learned that humankind was plotting against him, and dispatched the goddess Hathor to exact punishment. But such was her ferocity that Ra feared there would soon be nobody left to worship him, and he took pity on humankind. He prepared a vast amount of beer - seven thousand jars of it, in some versions of the story - dyed it red to resemble blood, and spread it over the fields, where it shone like a vast mirror. Hathor paused to admire her reflection and then stooped to drink some of the mixture. She became intoxicated, fell asleep, and forgot about her bloody mission. Humankind was saved, and Hathor became the goddess of beer and brewing. Versions of this story have been found inscribed of Egyptian kings, including Tutankhamen, Seti I, and Ramses the Great" (Standage, 28-29).

"Quickly, bring me a beaker of wine, so that I may wet my mind and say something clever"
-Aristophanes, Greek comic poet (c. 450-385 BCE)." (Standage, 43).

Plato's wine experiment and "fear drink" to test someone's character:

"Wine could be used in everyday life to reveal truth: It could expose the true nature of those drinking it. While he objected to the hedonistic reality of actual symposia, Plato saw no reason why the practice could not, in theory, be put to good use as a test of personality. Speaking through one of the characters in his book Laws, Plato argues that drinking with someone at a symposium is in fact the simplest, fastest, and most reliable test of someone's character" (Standage, 63-64).

"Baths, wine and sex ruin our bodies. But what makes life worth living except baths, wine and sex?
-Corpus Inscriptions VI, 15258" (Standage, 69).

Another short story that would be worth writing - This might be good as a story of disembodied heads relating their final moments on earth at a party in the afterlife:

"It is not often that choosing one wine over another is a matter of life or death. Yet that is what determined the fate of Marcus Antonius, a Roman politician and a renowned orator. In 87 BCE, he found himself on the wrong side of one of Rome's many interminable power struggles. Gains Marius, an elderly general, had seized power and was ruthlessly hunting down supporters of his rival, Sulla. Marcus Antonius sought refuge in the house of an associate of far lower social status, hoping that nobody would think of looking for him in such a poor man's house. His host, however, unwittingly gave him away by sending his servant out to buy wine worthy of such a distinguished guest. The servant went to the neighborhood wine shop and, after tasting what was on offer, asked for a far better and more expensive wine than usual. When the vintner asked why, the servant revealed the identity of his master's guest. The vintner went straight to Marius, who dispatched a handful of soldiers to kill Marcus Antonius. Yet having burst into his room, the soldiers could not bring themselves to kill him, such was the power of his oratory. Eventually, their commanding officer, who was waiting outside, went in to see what was happening. Denouncing his men as cowards, he drew his sword and beheaded Marcus Antonius himself" (Standage, 75).

A funny account of early English settlers to the New World:

"In 1613 a Spanish observer reported that the three hundred colonists had nothing but water to drink, 'which is contrary to the nature of the English - on account of which they all wish to return and would have done so if they had been at liberty'" (Standage, 113-114).

The Early American Drink:

Rum starts out as the colonial and American drink, but it is supplanted by whiskey with even George Washington getting in on the game. Jefferson however laments this as both a statesman, and a wine aficionado - calling wine, the only antidote to the bane of whiskey. "No nation is drunken where wine is cheap, and none sober where the dearness of wine substitutes ardent spirits as the common beverage" (Standage, 127).

A fascinating account of the origin of coffee

"One tells of an Ethiopian goatherd who noticed that is flock became particularly frisky after consuming the brownish purple cherries from a particular tree. He then tried eating them himself, noted their stimulating powers, and passed his discovery on to a local imam. The imam, in turn, devised a new way to prepare the berries, drying them and then boiling them in water to produce a hot drink, which he used to keep himself awake during overnight religious ceremonies. Another story tells of a man named Omar who was condemned to die of starvation in the desert outside Mocha, a city in Yemen, on the southwestern corner of the Arabian peninsula. A vision guided him to a coffee tree, whereupon he ate some of its berries. This gave him sufficient strength to return to Mocha, where his survival was taken as a sign that God had spared him in order to pass along to humankind knowledge of coffee, which then became a popular drink in Mocha" (Standage, 137).

Might be a funny short story:

Not everyone in the arabic world was thrilled with discovery of coffee. "Religious leaders invoked this rule in Mecca in June 1511, the earliest known of several attempts to ban the consumption of coffee. The local governor, a man named Kha'ir Beg, who was responsible for maintaining public morality, literally put coffee on trial. He convened a council of legal experts and placed the accused - a large vessel of coffee - before them. After discussion of its intoxicating effects, the council agreed with Kha'ir Beg that the sale and consumption of coffee should be prohibited... Within a few months, however, higher authorities in Cairo overturned Kha'ir Beg's ruling, and coffee was soon being openly consumed again. His authority undermined, Kha'ir Beg was replaced as governor the following year" (Standage, 138).

Another funny short story surrounding coffee, might be one reported in the Spectator (London paper) in 1712. 

"There was a fellow in town some years ago, who used to divert himself by telling a lye at Charing Cross in the morning at eight of the clock, and then following it through all parts of town until eight at night: at which time he came to a club of his friends, and diverted them with an account of what censure it had drawn at Will's in Covent Garden, how dangerous it was believed at Child's and what inference they drew from it with relation to stocks at Jonathon's" (Standage, 154).

This was a well-written and well-researched book that I thoroughly enjoyed.

Introducing Plato (A)

(Originally written November 10, 2016 in Book 26)

Introducing Plato
Dave Robinson & Judy Groves

- Born in 427 in Athens, "Probably the most civilized place in the world" (Robinson, 4). The actual city of Athens was small enough for everyone to know everyone.

"Socrates maintained that philosophy couldn't be taught, because it was really an attitude of mind rather than a body of knowledge" (Robinson, 8).

Plato left Athens in disgust when Socrates was executed, traveling around the Mediterranean before settling in Sicily where he met Dion. Dion would eventually get Plato locked up in Syracuse for being his advocate. After Dion was assassinated during a coup attempt Plato gave up actual politics.

Ancient Greeks laid the foundations for Western society; but, were very different to modern Westerners in a few aspects:
1) They were much more tribal than individualistic
2) Teleological viewpoint: "Everything in the world aimed towards an ultimate purpose or design" (Robinson, 15).
3) Religion - the Greek gods were not very worship worthy. Sacrifices were made to appease them. Ethics and political values were held from outside sources rather than religious ones.

What makes the ancient Greeks modern is that they had a critical and investigative mind.

Plato was worried about the survival of Athens as an independent city-state in the post-Peloponnesian War system. Of course, there were the outside threats (Sparta and Persia). But there was an internal threat as well - the Sophists. Plato's Republic was a warning against this danger.

Plato was primarily influenced by Pythagoras, Socrates and Heraclitus.

Pythagoras was a monist of sorts, only his underlying substance was mathematics: everything was numbers.

Pythagoras was responsible for the Greek belief that knowledge had to be universal, permanent, obtained by reason and uncorrupted by the senses.

Heraclitus stated everything changes. The world is in eternal process. Heraclitus' skepticism about empirical knowledge reinforced the rationalism of Pythagoras.

Socrates was different though. He was more interested in how man should act rather than the heady investigations of the underlying stuffs of the natural world.

For Socrates, "the teleological purpose of human beings is to question everything and join in debate with others, in order to get as close as possible to the truth" (Robinson, 23).

Socrates was cautious, but not a skeptic.

For Socrates, "goodness was a kind of knowledge somehow encoded into the structure of the universe itself - there were moral facts. Once these were known, it would be impossible for anyone to do bad things. This means that a wicked man is merely one who is ignorant" (Robinson, 25).

The difference between the acutal Socrates and the Platonic Socrates is difficult to know because Socrates didn't write. It is assumed that the early Platonic dialogues were Socrates' actual thoughts while the middle and later dialogues were more of Plato's individual ideas.

The Euthyphro:

A discussion in the distinction between morality based on religious belief and morality based on philosophical reasoning.

"Only when people turn away from the dogmatism and irrationality of religion can true moral philosophy begin" (Robinson, 29).

The Apology:

An account of Socrates' speeches at his trial.

Socrates claims it is his duty as a man to consider what he is doing, is he acting rightly or wrongly; is he behaving morally?

The Crito:

An account of Socrates' refusal to escape his death sentence for ethical/political reasons.

The Phaedo:

An account of Socrates' death.

Arguments for the immortality of the soul.

"He ironically points out that philosophers have always been an ascetic bunch, uninterested in bodily pleasures, and so, 'half-dead' anyway. Philosophical thinking is a process of freeing the soul from the body: death is merely further separation" (Robinson, 34).

Death comes from life; thus, life must come from death.

Knowledge, for Plato, had to be stable like mathematics to evade the Heraclitian flux and the relativism of the skeptic. Plato acknowledged that truth existed, but knew it was hard to get as humans.

The History of Western Philosophy Ch. 11 - 14

(Originally written June 7, 2016 in Book 26)

What a fantastic day. Bill fixed our Volvo two days ago and then today, boom! The same thing happens. This time though the car died right in the middle of a busy intersection during rush hour. Other than that today was grand. No, I'm actually not too annoyed (and obviously don't blame Bill; though, that first sentence might've seemed to indicate it). The only truly frustrating thing was the car died. C'est la vie?

The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell

Chapter 11 - Socrates

Socrates is a man we may know much or little about because two of his pupils, Xenophon and Plato wrote volumes about him. Those voluemes however don't always sync up to provide a precise picture.

 Xenophon defends Socrates too well. If Xenophon's analysis was wholly correct Socrates would never have been put on trial. But one of the few undisputed facts we know about Socrates is his trial and death in 399 B.C.

Xenophon and Plato both agree that Socrates was concerned with putting the right people into powerful positions.

The problem with taking Xenophon's Socrates as the historical one is the fact that Xenophon makes Socrates so pure he wouldn't have been accused of corrupting the youth. The problem with taking Plato's Socrates as the historical model is Plato's ability as a writer.

Plato's Apology is widely considred as historical. This is Socrates' defense at his trial (which Plato was present at).

The grounds for Socrates' trial seems pretty lear: Socrates was evil, curious and constanly making the right seem wrong and the wrong seem right. The real grounds for the trial also seem clear: he was aristocratic and many of his pupils wre of that class and had acted perniciously while in power.

According to Athenian law, when Socrates was found guilty and stenced to death he was to offer a suitable, lesser punishment for the jury to choose between. Instead he annoyed the court by offering to pay a tiny fine so he would not be mistaken as accepting cupability.

The prosecutors held that Socrates did not follow the religion, introduced noew gods and taught (corrupted) the youth with such ideas.

In his defense Socrates states that he is on trial because the Oracle at Delphi had claimed him to be the wisest man. In pursuit of disproving this he has made many enemeies by exposing those who thought they were wise as being unwise.

In attacking one of his prosecutors he points out that he is on trial for introducting new gods but this prosecutor is accusing him of atheism.

In his defense he states, "fear of death is not wisdom, since no one knows whether death may not be the greater good" (Russell, 87).

After convicted of death, Socrates shames the court, "If you think that by killing men you can prevent someone from censuring your evil lives, you are mistaken; that is not a way of escape which is either possible or honourable; the easiest and the noblest way is not to be disabling others, but to be improving yourselves" (Russell, 89).

On death he contends, either death is a good, dreamless sleep or a migration to another world.

Plato describes him as the Orphic saint: "in the dualism of heavenly soul and earthly body, he had achieved the complete mastery of the soul over the body" (Russell, 91).

Socrates was more concerned with ethical questions than scientific knowledge. He believed however knowledge was important because no one sinned on purpose. Thus, by acquiring knowledge one could abstain from sin.

"The close connection between virtue and knowledge is characteristic of Socrates and Plato. To some degree, it exists in all Greek thought, as opposed to that of Christianity. In Christian ethics, a pure heart is essential, and at least as likely to be found among the ignorant as among the learned. The difference between Greek and Christian ethics has persisted down to the present day" (Russell, 92).

The dialectic, seeking knowledge via question and answer wasn't invented by Socrates; but, he definitely used it and developed it.

Chapter 12 - The Influence of Sparta

To understand philosophers from Plato onward it is necessary to know about Sparta. Sparta had a double impact on Greek thought; first, through reality and second, through myth.

The reality of Sparta was the Spartan defeat of Athens in the Peloponnesian War.

The myth is the impact of Lycurgus, immortalized by Plutarch, and its impact on later philosophies including Rousseau, Nietzsche and National Socialism.

Sparta arose out of some Dorian conquerors in Laconia. They reduced the indigenous population to serfdom. The citizens of Sparta owned the land but were forbidden to cultivate it because of the demeaning nature of the work and its interference with their time as soldiers.

The Helots worked the land. The Helots were Greek and resented the order of things. They rebelled often. The Spartans maintained a Police State apparatus to control the Helots and once a year declared war on them to weed out agitators.

"The sole business of a Spartan citizen was war, to which he was trained from birth" (Russell, 95).

Children who passed their inspection after birth were educated solely to become good and loyal soldiers. Those who did not pass this intial inspection were killed.

Boys became men at 20 (serving in the military). They became citizens at 30.

No Spartan was to be poor or rich. Their currency was made of iron.

Women received the same physical training as the men. They were forbidden to show any emotion that didn't coincide to the state's favor.

Sparta was ruled by two kings from two different hereditary lines. The two kings belonged to the thirty-man Council of Elders. The Council tried criminal cases and prepared matters for the Assembly. The Assembly was a body of all citizens who could only vote yes or no on matters.

In addition to these three bodies there were the Ephors. There were five Ephors who acted as the Supreme civil court and had criminal jurisdiction over the two kings.

Tradition held that Lycurgus laid down the Spartan law in 885 BC.

Most other Greek city-states admired SParta. Paritally as an ideal from a bygone era. Partially as a model of stability. Partially for their near invincible status in battle on land.

Aristotle was intensely critical of the Spartan way of governance. Aristotle probably was writing of the real Sparta whereas Plato and Plutarch wrote of the mythical Sparta. Pultarch's praise of Sparta and Lycurgus was of great importance to post-Renaissance thinkers.

Sparta was isolationist, often foiling pan-Greek alliances and forbade its citizens from travel and allowed very few foreigners into the city for fear of corrupting the values of the state.

Chapter 13 - The Source of Plato's Opinions

Plato and Aristotle are the two most influential philosophers in history, and Plato is more important than Aristotle.

Plato's top ideas: 1) Utopia, 2) Theory of ideas, 3) arguments in favor of immortality, 4) his cosmogony, 5) knowledge as reminiscence rather than reception

Plato was born in 428/7 BC during the early years of the Peloponnesian War into an aristocratic family. He was a young man when Athens was defeated by Sparta and coupled with his aristocratic background was staunchly anti-democratic, blaming it for the Athenian defeat.

He was a pupil of Socrates.

He was an admirere of Spartan government (primarily because of his anti-democratic bent)

He was influenced by Pythagoras, Parmenides, Heraclitus and Socrates, each leading him to a pro-Spartan outlook. From Pythagoras came the other-worldliness, religious and mystical bent. From Parmenides came the beleif that reality is eternal and change illusionary. From Heraclitus came the belief that nothing is permanent in the sensible world. From Socrates he took the obsession with ethics and a teleological view of the universe.

Chapter 14 - Plato's Utopia

Plato's most important dialogue is The Republic. In it is contained the earliest of Utopias.

One conclusion of Plato is that rulers must be philosophers.

The purpose of The Republic is to define justice.

Plato works to define justice by defining an ideally just state.

In this state he divides citizens into three classes:
1) Common people
2) Soldiers
3) Guardians

The guardians are the sole holders of political power, initially selected by a legislator but then passed through hereditary means. (Plato does allow for exceptional men to rise from the other two classes and for an ill-fated guardian to drop).

The guardians, as politcal agents, are Plato's main concern and that main concern begins with the proper education to rule.

Education was divided into Music and Gymnastics. Music covered everything considered today as culture. Gymnastics concerrned physical training. Musical education was about educating the ruling elite to become 'gentlemen'.

The training up of gentlemen began young. Stories were told to children only if they were approved. Homer & Hesiod were not allowed because:
1) They show the gods misbehaving
2) They cause the fear of death

Sidenote (Future Modern Ancient Greeks)

When discussing political systems with some Alien, the hero gets offended when America is not mentioned. The Alien responds, "Oh yes... the great petry dish, the grand experiment politik, the new Rome, a system built on complete contradictions, an aristocracy so perfect it fooled the lower classes into believeing it was egalitarian in nature. It was perfect until you side-tracked into a primitive hero worship of completely unimportant entitites. There's nothing wrong with admiring or even elevating your artists to godlike status but when you elevate your inartistic to artistic and then what you call the artistic to the status of demigods you get a rather sad and debased populace. A pity really becaue everything was going so well. You survived your Punic war with the Soviets but will you survive long enough to allow the rise of a new Parthia to give you the impetus to survive a millenia? Or have you sped up your timeline and already become decadent and too self-obssessed and self-assured to recognize the imminent but slow rot that overtakes all empires? Not of course you, per se, because you are now a child of the stars and without the wherewithal to return home to the decaying America. But even if your America could cut out the corrosion and you found an astronomically improbable way home, would you be satisfied with life back on a primitive planet now that you have seen just a portion of what other worlds have to offer?" The alien continued with his political treatise in soliliqy as (our hero) ost all sense of national pride and pondered a suddenly existential question, if he ever could make it home, would he want to?

Sidenote complete

3) The homeric poems approve of uncontrollable laughter
4) Homer praises lavishness

Homer and Hesiod cannot be taught in the ideal State because the ideal gaurdians of that State must respect religion (misbehaving gods of Homer are unworthy of respect), must be willing to die for the State and thus, cannot fear or mourn death, be in control of their emotion (no great mirth() and be temperate and praise temperance and simplicity.

Education of the gaurdians also forbids any stories where the wicked are happy or where the good are unhappy.

Plato also banned drama because authors and actors would have to portrait either villains or those beneath their status; thus, debasing themselves.

Music, diet and exercise were also strictly monitored for ideal outcomes.

The young gaurdians must also see no ugliness until they are fully trained and then be exposed to temptations that must be found untempting and terrors which must not terrify.

Economically, Plato insisted on a communist approach where the gaurdians have little private property but are not lacking or unhappy. Poverty and wealth both produce ills so both will be banished.

Wives and children will be common to all men who are gaurdians.

Women gaurdians will be equal to all men gaurdians and recieve the same education.

Interestingly, marriage ceremonies where bride and groom will be chosen (they think) by lot will actually be arranged by legislators to produce the best offspring.

Children will not know who their parents are and parents will not know their children. Thus, children are common to all parents.

Women are to bear children between 20-40. Men to father children should be 25-55. ALl sex outside of these ages is fair and free.

All this reorientation of familial structures is to create a loyalty to the State as the primary focus.

The government is to be built on one great lie, "one royal lie", to get the whole thing in motion.

This lie is that God made men of three kinds - gold, silver and brass/iron. The men made of gold are to be the gaurdians. The men made of silver are to be the soldiers. The men made of brass and iron are to do the manual labor.

The lie was well thought out. Plato assumed that the first generation of Utopia wouldn't buy it, but subsequent generations through indoctrination would.

Plato reaches his definition of justice in the three types of men God created living in harmony. The city becomes just when each is doing the job he ought to do without interfering with anyone from another class.

Like philosophers before him, and the poets who lived before the dawn of philosophy, Plato embodies the Greek notion of fate - everything having its place and function. Justice was the harmony of living within the boundaries of this fate.

Plato's definition of justice allows for inequality without injustice. The gaurdians, even though the smallest class, rule because they are the wisest and fated to do so. Injustice would only occur if someone from the lower two classes was wiser than a gaurdian. That is why Plato allowed exceptions for promotion or demotion.

Plato, unlike many later Utopians, saw his Utopia as viably feasible and wished to implement it. Unfortunately he chose to try with Syracuse and it failed. Soon thereafter the rise of Macedonia made the polis antiquated and the notion of establishing a Utopian city-state impossible in the face of empires.

Parmenides and Zeno

(Originally written August 12, 2015)

The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
1980

The first physicists and cosmologists to use the new geometric method of deductive reasoning from self-evident starts found their logical conclusions clashed with real world experience and the problem of perception was born.

Parmenides was consumed with the problem of change.

Parmenides started with monism and added two tautologies:
1. What is, is
2. What is not, is not.

What is not, is not means that there is no nothing. 'Nothing' is essentially a meaningless word. His reasoning for this is that it is impossible to think of nothing. [FUTURE MODERN ANCIENT GREEKS - "Nothingness Bar, where it's truly possible to think of nothing" side effects may include, write an exceptionally long list]

From his two self-evident tautologies he declare that what is, is uncreated, indestructible, eternal and unchangeable.

1. It is uncreated because it was either created out of nothing or something. It can't be created out of nothing because nothing does not exist. It can't be created out of something because as a monist there is only one something.

2. It is indestructible because to destroy it would make it become nothing. There is no nothing.

3. It is eternal because 1+2

4. It is unchangeable because a) monism and b) if it changed into something new the old thing would be nothing. There is no nothing.

Zeno's Paradoxes

1. Motion is impossible. Before you go some place you must go half-way there. These half-ways there are infinite in number. It's impossible to go distances of an infinite number. Therefore, motion is impossible.

2. Achilles and the Tortoise

The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
1974

Heraclitus - Everything Changes
Parmenides - Nothing Changes

Parmenides
-from Elea, Southern Italy
-circa 5th century B.C.
-met with Socrates circa 450 B.C.
-invented metaphysics based on logic
-senses are deceptive
-the multitude of things is an illusion
-had two strands of thought 1) way of truth 2) way of opinion

Way of truth - can't think about nothing, there is no nothing. No becoming, no passing away

Thought and language require objects outside themselves

"Parmenides maintains that not only must George Washington have existed in the past, but in some sense he must still exist since we can use his name significantly" (Russell, 49).

Parmenides argument: if a word can be used significantly it must mean something, not nothing. Therefore, the meaning of the word must have some existence.

Parmenides' argument relies on unchanging meaning of words.

Because of the continual 'existence' that words guarantee, there is really no past. Since there is no past, there is no change.

Early Greek Philosophy
Jonathan Barnes
2001

"What can be said and be thought of must be; for it can be, and nothing cannot" (Barnes, 81).

He warned against the senses and extolled man not to let habit and experience force you to trust the senses.

What is, is un-generated and indestructible. No past, no future, always is.

"Thinking and a thought that it is are the same thing" (Barnes, 83). [FUTURE MODERN ANCIENT GREEKS - the concept behind the Parmenidean Engine]
"Parmenides was the first to declare that the earth is spherical and lies in the middle of the universe - Diogenes Laertius" (Barnes, 89).

Archelaus

(Originally written August 12, 2015)

Early Greek Philosophy
Jonathan Barnes
2001

Archelaus

-First Athenian philosopher
-Student of Anaxagoras
-Teacher of Socrates
- animals come from mud (including humans) but the mud born lived shorter lives than the natural born
- the nobility or ignoble of a thing is based on the perception of the thing and not the thing itself

The Peloponnesian War

The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
1980

Chapter 2 - Education through violence

In order to understand Plato one must understand both the pre-Socratic philosophers and the state of affairs in Athens and greater Greece at the time of Plato's life. Plato grew up in the Peloponnesian War.

Thucydides - "War is a teacher who educates through violence; and he makes men's characters fit their condition" (Jones, 41).

FUTURE MODERN ANCIENT GREEKS - Our traveler must enter in a classroom being conducted by Mr. War, who I envision looks an awful lot like the WWF wrestler The Ultimate Warrior

The Peloponnesian war was brought about by both economic and ideological rivalry between Sparta and Athens.  

Sparta:

- Marriage was a contract to produce the healthiest of children
- It was forbidden for any Spartan to engage in money-making professions
- They were soldiers, the best in Greece but had a small population that ruled over a large population of serfs who had zero political rights
- oligarchical rule

Athens

- Direct Democracy: In Athens the 40,000 native males made up the Assembly that ruled the 400,000 inhabitants of the city. The Assembly was the legislative, judicial and executive branch of the government
- Athens acquired an empire of city-states, mostly on the Aegean islands that paid tribute money for the protection of the Athenian navy

The clash between Athens and Sparta was inevitable. Athens was, in the 5th century BC able to challenge Sparta militarily and crush other commercial centers financially. Eventually, Corinth and Sparta teamed up to stamp out the growing Athenian menace.

The war lasted 27 years and began with Pericles' policy to allow the Spartans and their allies to ravage the countryside, pulling all the population into the city's walls. Pericles thought that with the financial advantages and the naval advantages he could win a war of attrition. He might have been correct had not an overpopulated Athens been ravaged by the plague and rich families bemoan his policies leading to infighting.

Athens still might have won a defensive war had not direct democracy gotten in the way. A young general named Alcibiades convinced the Assembly to attack Syracuse in Sicily that resulted in the decimation of Athens' forces. Still, the war limped on another 10 years before some of the wealthiest families in Athens looked to make peace with Sparta and reclaim some normalcy. They figured that they could be granted political preference by Sparta and restore the old oligarchy. Likewise, they figured that good governance was preferable to the freedom and disorganized and chaotic government that the Assembly provided.

The Atomists: Leucippus & Democritus

History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
1972

Chapter IX - The Atomists

Leucippus
-circa 440 BC
-influenced by Parmenides & Zeno
-questionable/shadowy historical figure

Democritus
-circa 420 BC
-much more concrete of an historical figure than Democritus
-from Thrace
-Contemporary of Socrates

Atomism was an attempted solution and synthesis of monism and pluralism

Everything is composed of indestructible atoms. The atoms are in constant motion, with the first motion seeming to have been a random motion. The collisions of the atoms formed vortices and then created the physical-visible world.

Atomists were strict determinists - everything happened in accordance with natural laws. There was no chance in their system, despite that being the most common argument leveled against them in the ancient world.

"The atomists, unlike Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, sought to explain the world without introducing the notion of purpose or final cause" (Russell 66-67).

As an aside, Russell makes an interesting point about causation on page 67. He points out that both teleology and pure mechanical causation systems can only be applied within reality and not to reality as a whole. If either are applied to reality as a whole they end with an infinite regress or at some arbitrary beginning of reality. While, he is his normal harsh self to those who might have a bent toward teleology his words make me think. "But if a man is so obstinately teleological as to continue to ask what purpose is served by the Creator, it becomes obvious that his question is impious. It is, moreover, unmeaning, since, to make it significant, we  should have to suppose the Creator created by some super-Creator whose purposes He served" (Russell, 67). That made me think of two things: first, the religions of the ancient world who believed in a dualism that had a benevolent and a malevolent creator. But, also the relationship between God the Father and Jesus the Son in authoring and completing creation. Allow me a moment to slip into some thought without taking this as my definitive belief as to regards the nature of creation.

Genesis 1:26 always made me pause when I read it and thought about the radical notion of monotheism often associated with the ancient Hebrews. Why would a radically monotheistic religion write of God saying "Let us make man in our image"? Of course, it could be like the 'royal we', but then when paired with John 1 it makes sense in a trinitarian understanding. "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made" (John 1:1-4). When reading that little paragraph from Russell I suddenly saw that even Russell's logic is binding and correct we have creator and Super-Creator whose purposes He served. What does Christ teach throughout His ministry on earth? That He is doing the will of the Father. If the Father created all things through Christ (the Word) and nothing was made without Christ (the Word) then it stands that the teleological underpinnings are at least internally consistent. But, I digress and return to the pre-Socratic matter at hand, the Atomists.

Leucippus was a thinker of his time - he was concerned with the seemingly irrefutable arguments of Parmenides and the obvious fact that motion occurred. To the Greek thought one had to accept that Parmenides was right and no motion occurred or there had to be a void for motion to occur in. To combine Monism and Pluralism he added the void in which motion could occur. Aristotle sums his theory up nicely "The many move in the void (for there is a void): and by coming together they produce coming-to-be, while by separating they produce passing-away" (Russell, 68-69).

Even the Atomists had to admit though that Parmenides' arguments against the void were logically inscrutable. Parmenides would say that if there is a void than there is a void and that void is not nothing because even in nothing there is air; thus there is no void and motion is impossible. This mixture of logic and empirical observation caused a lot of problems in Greek thought and the Atomists simply chose to ignore the argument and state basically that there is motion and thus, a void, even if we can't quite put our fingers on it.

FUTURE MODERN ANCIENT GREEKS

In essence, Democritus claimed each atom was a Parmenidean One, indivisible and indestructible, never changing. Atoms collide to create everything. "There are many worlds, some growing, some decaying; some may have no sun or moon, some several. Every world has a beginning and an end. A world may be destroyed by collision with a larger world" (Russell, 71-71).\

-Life came from the primeval slime
-there is some fire in every living thing, but most in the brain or the breast
-thought is a kind of motion (and thus can cause motion elsewhere)

"Like Locke, Democritus held that such qualities as warmth, taste, and colour are not really in the object, but are due to our sense-organs, while such qualities as weight, density and hardness are really in the object" (Russell, 72)

-Democritus denied an immaterial soul (it was made of atoms), denied purpose in the universe, and didn't believe in the popular religion of the time.

Early Greek Philosophy
Jonathan Barnes
2001

Chapter 20 - Leucippus

-It is nearly impossible to separate the teachings of Leucippus from his pupil, Democritus
-possibly from Elea or Miletus

The one quote that is readily attributed to him is "No thing happens in vain, but all things for a reason and by necessity" (Barnes, 202). This shows the determinist nature of his thought.

Chapter 21 - Democritus

"He was the most prolific, and ultimately the most influential, of the Presocratic philosophers" (Barnes, 203). This is impressive because not a single of his writings have survived intact and much of his work is fragmented.

Future Modern Ancient Greeks

"Some suppose that the strange things which happen in the world gave us the conception of the gods. Democritus seems to be of this opinion; for he says that men in the distant past, remarking the events of the upper air- thunder and lightning, thunderbotls and conjunctions of stars, and eclipses of sun and moon - were frightened, thinking gods to be their cause - Sextus Empiricus" (Barnes, 220).

Life after death: "Many of the old thinkers, among them the natural scientist Democritus in his writings about Hades, have collected stories of those who are thought to have died and then come to life again - Proclus (Barnes, 222).
"
Really, I tend to ask,,, Is joy and absence of joy "the boundary advantage and disadvantage" (Barnes. 227).

Porphyry makes him out to be a vegetarian, not eating flesh by necessity but being pious. Those that are living badly, unwisely and un-piously aren't actually living, but dying slowly.

A quote: " Do not be eager to know everything lest you become ignorant of everything" (Barnes, 230) - probably good advice from Democritus to me...

In his ethical work he points out that "from the same sources from which good things come to us we may also draw bad" and that "for men, bad things spring from good when they do not know how to manage the good or to preserve them resourcefully".

His ethics had its end in contentment and joy - "It is best for a man to live his life with as much contentment and as little grief as possible; this will come about if he does not take his pleasure in mortal things" (Barnes, 233).

His ethics have an ascetic tone - "Desire for money, if it is not limited by satiety, is far heavier than extreme poverty; for greater desires create greater needs" (Barnes, 237). "It is fitting for men to take account of their souls rather than of their bodies; for a perfect soul corrects wickedness of body, but strength of body without reasoning makes the soul no better at all" (Barnes, 249). But, he isn't totally ascetic - "A life without a feast is a long road without an inn" (Barnes, 238). He seems to be of the mind, moderation is the best way to happiness and that happiness is a state of mind you can choose. "Fortunate is he who is content with moderate goods, unfortunate he who is discontent with many" (Barnes, 247).

In a funny quote that sums up every man from every generation he says, "More men are good by practice than by nature" (Barnes, 240).

"When bad men gain office, the more unworthy they are the more heedless they become and the more they are filled with folly and rashness" (Barnes, 242). Is Democritus anticipating Trump????? Of course he is, because he states, ""anyone who kills any highwayman or pirate is not punishable, whether he does it by his own hand, by issuing an order or by casting a vote" (Barnes, 243). Anticipation is key, homies! Hence he says, "It is hard to be ruled by an inferior"! Amen brother,

Democritus' ethic was ruled by personal shame - feel shame before others and do wrong no more before others than before yourself, your shame should keep you from doing wrong.

His social ethics are interesting and strangely corresponding to Christ's view of wealth. He doesn't rail against acquiring wealth or condemn being wealthy, much like Christ's view. They both simply claim that the love of wealth interferes with the life you ought to live. While Democritus and Christ differ on what that life is, they both agree money ain't everything. "A man enslaved to money will never be just" (Barnes, 249).

Anaxagoras

Anaxagoras

The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
1980

Anaxagoras became the first critic of Empedocles. But, like Empedocles he had similar views on the outset:
1) The stuff of the world is eternal
2) There is a many (pluralism), but each one of the many is a Parmenidean one
3) There is motion

Whereas Empedocles had maintained that everything that exists in the visible world is made up of a mixture of one of the four roots (the elements), Anaxagoras claimed that everything contained miniscule and infinite bits of all the stuffs. We just saw things like flesh or hair as flesh or hair because the flesh bits dominated in flesh and the hair bits dominated in hair.

Whereas Empedocles had Love and Strife as the causation for the mixing of the bits, Anaxagoras had "Mind". Mind is material and it sets all things in order. But, the Mind is purely mechanical in nature and doesn't necessarily mean intention when setting all things in order.

In the beginning, according to Anaxagoras, all the bits and stuffs were so together it would have been impossible to see any particular stuff. Then Mind entered in, creating a vortex and separated off the many stuffs. As the process of separation continues eventually all the infinitely tiny stuffs will be sorted out completely, that just hasn't happened yet.

The problem with Anaxagoras is that while he (like Empedocles) was able to arrive at the problems plaguing Greek thought up to this point, namely 'How does the world get to where its at now, a quantitatively plural amount of things from the qualitatively single stuff?' But, because of the numerous difficulties in his system of separation he introduced an idea of an infinitely plural stuff and killed some of the scientific spirit that was going on in the Greek thought.

The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
1972

Anaxagoras - Chapter 8

-An Ionian from Clazomenae circa 500 BC
-Introduced Athens to philosophy and lived there from 462-432 BC
-Was brought to Athens by Pericles
-Left Athens after the Athenians charged him with some charges amounting to sacrilege
-held that everything was infinitely divisible
-held that every small portion of matter contains some of everything and that things appear as what they contain the most of
-believed that mind entered into the living things and differentiated them from the dead things
-Mind had the power over all things living
-Mind is infinite and mixed with nothing
-mind is the source of motion
-mind is uniform
-"Man's apparent superiority [to animals] is due to the fact that he has hands; all seeming differences of intelligence are really due to bodily differences" (Russell, 63).
-he was probably an atheist
-rejected necessity and chance as being causes, but also did not subscribe to providence

Early Greek Philosophy
Jonathan Barnes
2001

-a follower of Anaximenes, he attempted to revive the Milesian's theories in a post-Parmenidean world of thought
-wasn't really interested in politics and euphemistically called the heavens his country. He also is reported to have said after somebody asked him about dying in a foreign country, 'Wherever you start from, the descent to Hades is the same'.
-believed the sun to be a fiery mass
-believed there to be inhabitants on the moon
-thought is what all things moved by
-"Anaxagoras' universe began as undifferentiated mass. Thought, or mind, worked on the mass, and the articulated world developed. The materials of Anaxagoras' world are uniform and continuous stuffs, not collections of particles or atoms. The cosmic development does not, and cannot, produce any 'pure' stuffs - every stuff always contains a 'portion' or 'share', however small, of every other stuff" (Barnes, 189).
-the mind is unmixed with anything else. it is independent and pure. It has knowledge about everything and the greatest strength; hence, it can control the other stuffs.

-thought has power over whatever exists

-everything shares a portion with everything else

-"each single thing is and was most clearly those things of which it contains most" (Barnes, 193).

-believed in multiple worlds, which were bound up together before the separating process began 

-there is no creation or destruction, only separation (dissociation) and coming together (association)

-argued against the senses: "we are not capable of discerning the truth by reason of their feebleness" (Barnes, 197).

Hippo

Early Greek Philosophy
Jonathan Barnes
2001

-Hippo was a Pythagorean from the 5th century BC
-Aristotle was not exactly kind to Hippo: "One would not propose to place Hippo among these men because of the poverty of his thought" (Barnes, 183).

-Like Thales, Hippo thought the primary substance to be water, he came to this thought by seeing that water gives life to everything and when water is taken away life dries up as well.

Ion of Chios

Early Greek Philosophy
Jonathan Barnes
2001

Ion of Chios

-born circa 485 BC on the island of Chios
-lived most of his life in Athens
-Believed all things are three in nature: intelligence and power and fortune
-Plutarch referred to him and made an interesting observation: even though fortune and wisdom are very dissimilar, both produced similar results: "both will aggrandize States, adorn men and bring glory and power and dominion"(Barnes, 182).