The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Ch. XXVI Cynics & Sceptics
Three types of intellectual stances to the world:
1) In harmony with their surroundings, light reformist thinking
2) Radical and revolutionary, major reforms needed and an expectation of radical reforms coming
3) Despair at the current situation and a lack of hope for the world, good only comes from mystical transfiguration
"The psychological preparation for the other-worldliness of Christianity begins in the Hellenistic
period, and is connected with the eclipse of the City State" (Russell, 229). Philosophy shifted from the question of how to make a good state to how to survive in suffering, how can one be good in a world gone bad?
Four famous schools of philosophy formed around the time of Alexander: Epicureans, Stoics, Cynics and Sceptics.
Cynicism began with Antisthenes and Diogenes. Antisthenes was a contemporary of Plato & Socrates, being about 20 years older than Plato. He formed a protocommunism and took up for the uneducated, common man. He believed that anything that can be known can be known by all.
Diogenes, Antisthenes pupil, was the founder of cynicism. He lived like a dog, rejecting every social convention. (Cynic comes from the word canine).
"He sought virtue and moral freedom in liberation from desire: be indifferent to the
goods that fortune has to bestow, and you will be emancipated from fear" (Russell, 231).
All Greek philosophers after Aristotle had a withdrawal sort of look at life, the world is not good, let's learn how to be independent of it.
Cynicism did not teach abstinence to the good things of the world, only an indifference to them.
Scepticism, built on what was good in Cynicism and became a more complete and rounded philosophy.
Pyrrho of Elis, who traveled with Alexander all the way to India, moved back home and founded Scepticism, a formalization and synthesizing of older thoughts.
Scepticism took on a local flavor wherever it was. They adopted the local religious customs, not because they were inherently right, but that they could not be proved wrong and it was beneficial to follow the custom.
Scepticism became popular because it allowed people to not worry about the future. The future was uncontrollable so why not enjoy the present.
After Pyrrho came Timon, who practiced a skepticism similar to Hume. After Pyrrho came Arcesilaus who housed skepticism in Platonic thought. Rather than focusing on Plato's belief in the Forms and the superiority of the immortal soul, Arcesilaus treated the Socratic dialogues as the end, not the means. Most of the dialogues don't end with a positive conclusion and a lot of them argue both sides well. Arcesilaus saw this as the embodiment of skepticism.
The Academy became skeptical for two hundred years after Arcesilaus and produced a number of variations on the school. One of which, that of Clitomachus, seemed to agree with more modern philosophers as he based his skepticism on probabilities: "Probability should be our guide in practice, since it is reasonable to act on the most probable of possible hypotheses" (Russell, 238).
Sextus Empiricus, a Roman skeptic, used the problem of evil and his skepticism to argue against the existence of God, or at least, knowing that God exists: "Those who affirm positively that God exists cannot avoid falling into an impiety. For if they say that God controls everything, they make Him the author of evil things; if, on the other hand, they say that He controls some things only, or that He controls nothing, they are compelled to make God either grudging or impotent, and to do that is quite obviously an impiety" (Russell, 239).
Ancient skepticism had enough power in it to make men dissatisfied with the ancient, traditional and state religion. But it had no answer to fill the void. (Modern skepticism, Russell notes, is "supplemented, in most of its advocates, by an enthusiastic belief in science" (Russell, 239). The hollowing out done by Skepticism paved the way for an invasion of oriental religions that competed with one another until the domination of Christianity.
Showing posts with label Skepticism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Skepticism. Show all posts
Monday, September 23, 2019
Thursday, November 9, 2006
Book Notes - Skepticism
(Originally written November 9, 2006 in Book 11)
Skepticism
Skepticism was the least formal school of post-Alexandrian philosophy.
There are varying degrees of skepticism. Some just denied the dogmatism; others denied all knowledge is possible; and, some just maintained that we know nothing.
Sextus Empiricus
Sextus Empiricus compiled all of the Skeptic doctrines.
Sextus lived circa 200 AD; the first Skeptic Pyrrho died in 275 BC. Sextus' work was a long, advanced theory of 400 years of work.
Sextus Empiricus maintained that he was always in pursuit of knowledge, a lighter skeptic view than knowledge is impossible.
Sextus advocaten equipollence. Equipollence is suspended judgement and consists of opposing affirmation without a contradictory affirmation. Equipollence is seeing that alternative theories are plausible so that no matter what happens we cannot choose until one theory proves to be undeniable.
Carneades
Carneades was one of the most distinguished Academic skeptics.
Carneades maintained that we judge impressions by other impressions. The concurrence of impressions is the criteria of knowledge.
He admits that this infallible, but that the impressions were reliable enough to trust.
The Final Goal of Skepticism
Skepticism was dominated by ethical and religious concerns.
The skeptics searched for peace of mind. Peace of mind came through the realization and acceptance that nothing is absolutely certain.
All post-Alexandrian philosophy were concerned with answering problems of a tired culture. Hope was gone and the philosophy schools hoped to alleviate the hopelessness. "But this natural peace could not hope to complete with the appeal of that deeper peace - the peace that past understanding - that was assured by a transcendent and otherworldly religion" (Jones, 353).
Skepticism
Skepticism was the least formal school of post-Alexandrian philosophy.
There are varying degrees of skepticism. Some just denied the dogmatism; others denied all knowledge is possible; and, some just maintained that we know nothing.
Sextus Empiricus
Sextus Empiricus compiled all of the Skeptic doctrines.
Sextus lived circa 200 AD; the first Skeptic Pyrrho died in 275 BC. Sextus' work was a long, advanced theory of 400 years of work.
Sextus Empiricus maintained that he was always in pursuit of knowledge, a lighter skeptic view than knowledge is impossible.
Sextus advocaten equipollence. Equipollence is suspended judgement and consists of opposing affirmation without a contradictory affirmation. Equipollence is seeing that alternative theories are plausible so that no matter what happens we cannot choose until one theory proves to be undeniable.
Carneades
Carneades was one of the most distinguished Academic skeptics.
Carneades maintained that we judge impressions by other impressions. The concurrence of impressions is the criteria of knowledge.
He admits that this infallible, but that the impressions were reliable enough to trust.
The Final Goal of Skepticism
Skepticism was dominated by ethical and religious concerns.
The skeptics searched for peace of mind. Peace of mind came through the realization and acceptance that nothing is absolutely certain.
All post-Alexandrian philosophy were concerned with answering problems of a tired culture. Hope was gone and the philosophy schools hoped to alleviate the hopelessness. "But this natural peace could not hope to complete with the appeal of that deeper peace - the peace that past understanding - that was assured by a transcendent and otherworldly religion" (Jones, 353).
Book Notes - Marcus Aurelius
(Originally written November 9, 2006 in Book 11)
Marcus Aurelius
Marcus Aurelius (121-180 AD) was a nobleman adopted into the Emperor line by Emperor Hadrian.
Aurelius became Emperor in 161. Despite being a peaceful man his reign was plagued with war with barbarians in the frontier and quelling revolutions.
He instituted a host of social and political reforms.
"His reign and that of Antoninus Pius were, according to Gibbon, 'possibly the only period of history in which the happiness of a great people was the sole object of government'" (Jones, 341).
Aurelius' son and heir, Commodus was incompetent and violent. He marks the beginning of the fall of the Empire.
Aurelius marks the end of an epoch.
Aurelius' Meditations were not intended for instruction, but for his own personal use.
They were random reflections of his doubts and indecisions and faith in philosophy.
While Aurelius does not provide an encompassing philosophical view he does show how deeply Stoicism had penetrated Roman thought.
Conception of Nature
Nature, for Aurelius, was a cosmos that persisted is a Heraclitean flux. Change was orderly and regular. The universe was rational and intelligent. The universe was one living Being. It possessed a single soul.
Man was a portion of this rational cosmos. His reason was how he participated in the rationality of the universe.
Emphasis on Social Duties
Aurelius' temperament and outgoing nature caused him to interpret Stoicism differently than Epictetus.
Aurelius' mantra of that all men as fellow creatures led him to a number of social and political duties.
Plato's and Aristotle's view of man as both rational and civic was used by Aurelius, but Aurelius added the concept of obligation to it.
Aurelius lived in a time when the culture was tired and discouraged. Since their was no real hope, the appeal of Aurelius' brand of Stoicism was to "stiffen the back and endure until the end" (Jones, 343).
Aurelius was wont to say that we are to welcome dear as inevitable, but he thought it was wrong to commit suicide.
The Stoics maintained the notion of moderation. Aurelius was the last to hold this notion for a long time.
Stoicism as an Operative Ideal in Roman Life
The world of the Romans was dying with Aurelius' death. The old Greek schools were to begin to decay.
Law
The law was instituted with new changes due to the change in Roman society. The old ways were finished and the freeing of tons of slaves caused a new law to be needed.
Charity
Humanizing became prevalent in this age.
Charity became commonplace in Roman society.
Jus Naturale
Juris prudence was introduced to the notion of natural law because of Stoicism's influence.
Natural law demanded that everyone be under one law, not just citizens.
Marcus Aurelius
Marcus Aurelius (121-180 AD) was a nobleman adopted into the Emperor line by Emperor Hadrian.
Aurelius became Emperor in 161. Despite being a peaceful man his reign was plagued with war with barbarians in the frontier and quelling revolutions.
He instituted a host of social and political reforms.
"His reign and that of Antoninus Pius were, according to Gibbon, 'possibly the only period of history in which the happiness of a great people was the sole object of government'" (Jones, 341).
Aurelius' son and heir, Commodus was incompetent and violent. He marks the beginning of the fall of the Empire.
Aurelius marks the end of an epoch.
Aurelius' Meditations were not intended for instruction, but for his own personal use.
They were random reflections of his doubts and indecisions and faith in philosophy.
While Aurelius does not provide an encompassing philosophical view he does show how deeply Stoicism had penetrated Roman thought.
Conception of Nature
Nature, for Aurelius, was a cosmos that persisted is a Heraclitean flux. Change was orderly and regular. The universe was rational and intelligent. The universe was one living Being. It possessed a single soul.
Man was a portion of this rational cosmos. His reason was how he participated in the rationality of the universe.
Emphasis on Social Duties
Aurelius' temperament and outgoing nature caused him to interpret Stoicism differently than Epictetus.
Aurelius' mantra of that all men as fellow creatures led him to a number of social and political duties.
Plato's and Aristotle's view of man as both rational and civic was used by Aurelius, but Aurelius added the concept of obligation to it.
Aurelius lived in a time when the culture was tired and discouraged. Since their was no real hope, the appeal of Aurelius' brand of Stoicism was to "stiffen the back and endure until the end" (Jones, 343).
Aurelius was wont to say that we are to welcome dear as inevitable, but he thought it was wrong to commit suicide.
The Stoics maintained the notion of moderation. Aurelius was the last to hold this notion for a long time.
Stoicism as an Operative Ideal in Roman Life
The world of the Romans was dying with Aurelius' death. The old Greek schools were to begin to decay.
Law
The law was instituted with new changes due to the change in Roman society. The old ways were finished and the freeing of tons of slaves caused a new law to be needed.
Charity
Humanizing became prevalent in this age.
Charity became commonplace in Roman society.
Jus Naturale
Juris prudence was introduced to the notion of natural law because of Stoicism's influence.
Natural law demanded that everyone be under one law, not just citizens.
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Parmenides, Empedocles, Anaxagoras and Pythagoras
(Originally Written August 31, 2006 in History I)
The Classical Mind Ch. 1 "Pre-Socratic Philosophy"
Parmenides:
-Saw that Thales' philosophy suffered from the problem of change
-Concerned himself with analyzing the concept of change, not just particular changes
-He was a monist, believing that reality is fundamentally one
-He added two self evident principles:
1. What is, is
2. What is not, is not
-Viewed change as illusionary
-The notion of change is self-contradictory
-His two self-evident premises are true as tautologies, but do not remain true when he adds his whole theory to them
-What is not, is not means that there is no nothing. There can be no object existing as nothing
-Nothing exists is self-contradictory
-Through his monism and his two premises, Parmenides deduced that:
1. Whatever is, is uncreated
2. Whatever is, is indestructible
3. Whatever is, is eternal
4. Whatever is, is unchangeable
-If things were created they were either created from nothing or out of something. There is no nothing, thus if things were created they were created out of something. Monism denies that something else can exist and thus, everything is uncreated
-Things cannot be destroyed because destruction leads to nothing and nothing cannot exist
-Things tat are uncreated and indestructible are obviously eternal
-Things that change produce nothing out of the old thing, thus everything is unchangeable.
Zeno's Paradoxes:
-Zeno was a pupil of Parmenides
-He developed a paradox that showed motion was impossible
-Aristotle's version of the paradox: "Before any distance can be traversed, half the distance must be traversed. These half distances are infinite in number. It is impossible to traverse distances infinite in number"
- Zeno illustrated the paradox with Achilles and a Tortoise. Achilles can begin to pursue the Tortoise but he will never overtake it. Achilles may catch up to where the Tortoise has been but the Tortoise has moved. Achilles gets closer to the Tortoise, but still has not taken him over. The distance becomes shorter and shorter but no matter how close Achilles gets, there is always some distance.
-"These contentions still worry philosophers and mathematicians" (Jones, 23).
-Despite the logical reasoning of Zeno, it is at odds with common sense
-The belief and trust in reason over sense perception by some Greek philosophers led to a profound skepticism
Rationalism and Empiricism
-Logical consistency vs. sensory perception
-Logical consistency has a number of advantages over sense perception, it is indubitable and it is universal
-Rationalists follow logical consistency; empiricists use sense perception to guide them
-Neither pure rationalism nor pure empiricism is satisfactory
The Pluralists:
-Parmenides argument was hypothetical: if the Milesians' monism is correct then change is impossible, therefore change is impossible.
-Parmenides did not question the monism and that is where he got off course
-Monism, at least the materialistic form the Milesians pursued gave way as their premise was questioned and in this questioning of the monism premise, Greek philosophy was born
Empedocles:
-Empedocles was the first known pluralist
-He accepted Parmenides' notion that nothing is created or destroyed
-He denied Parmenides' notion that motion is impossible
-He believed that reality was a plenum, a completely full world
-Pluralism replaced monism and motion occurred when two objects exchanged places
-Motion is possible in a plenum if plurality exists
-He believed that the many were combinations of the four elements: earth, air, fire and water
-Each of the elements was eternal, uncreated, indestructible and unchanging
-There are two types of motions:
1. Love - a motion of uniting different things
2. Strife - a motion of separating two things back to their elemental form
-The world process was a constant cycle of mixing the four elements. Love is the dominant motion here. Then, gradually strife replaces love and the four elements begin to be separated. This ebb and flow process continues on and on.
-The four elements were eternal, the things they created, the things we see were however, unstable and finite
-His process anticipated the survival of the fittest evolutionary theory
-Empedocles called the process 'god' and worshipped it. He denied his god any anthropomorphic qualities
Anaxagoras:
-Aanaxagoras was an Ionian and the first critic of Empedocles
-He was troubled by the thought of four substances miraculously coming together in some mixture to form things like cabbage or a lion
-He believed Parmenides had it right when he said that change was illusionary
-He believed that the stuff of the world was eternal
-He believed that there is a many and that each one of the many is a Parmenidean one
-He believed that there is motion within the plenum
-He denied that change resulting in transformation was possible and maintained that everything existent was a combination of all the stuffs in this world. The stuff that is dominant in each particular thing denotes what that thing is.
-Anaxagoras denied Empedocles' two motions of love and strife and replaced it with a single type of motion, mind
-Mind is material and it sets all thing in order
-By setting mind to set all things right he implied purpose, but he contradictorily contended that mind was purely mechanical in essence
-Mind (the motion of the world) sets up a vortex which separates the various stuffs from the elements
-Eventually the vortex will rotate wide enough so that every stuff will be separated from every other stuff
Estimation of Anaxagoras' Theory:
-The theory of Anaxagoras amounted to the denial of the Milesians' scientific spirit
-Empedocles and Anaxagoras did not solve the basic problems the Milesian school faced, but they did articulate them better
Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans:
-The life of Pythagoras is virtually unknown and his views are nearly indistinguishable from that of his followers
-Pythagoras was reported by Heraclitus to be one of the most scientific men of his age and a religious philosopher
-Pythagoras was born in Samos and then emigrated to Southern Italy circa 530 B.C. He founded a society at Croton
-Croton was a religious fraternity that was very scientific. They believed their science was a part of their worship
The Classical Mind Ch. 1 "Pre-Socratic Philosophy"
Parmenides:
-Saw that Thales' philosophy suffered from the problem of change
-Concerned himself with analyzing the concept of change, not just particular changes
-He was a monist, believing that reality is fundamentally one
-He added two self evident principles:
1. What is, is
2. What is not, is not
-Viewed change as illusionary
-The notion of change is self-contradictory
-His two self-evident premises are true as tautologies, but do not remain true when he adds his whole theory to them
-What is not, is not means that there is no nothing. There can be no object existing as nothing
-Nothing exists is self-contradictory
-Through his monism and his two premises, Parmenides deduced that:
1. Whatever is, is uncreated
2. Whatever is, is indestructible
3. Whatever is, is eternal
4. Whatever is, is unchangeable
-If things were created they were either created from nothing or out of something. There is no nothing, thus if things were created they were created out of something. Monism denies that something else can exist and thus, everything is uncreated
-Things cannot be destroyed because destruction leads to nothing and nothing cannot exist
-Things tat are uncreated and indestructible are obviously eternal
-Things that change produce nothing out of the old thing, thus everything is unchangeable.
Zeno's Paradoxes:
-Zeno was a pupil of Parmenides
-He developed a paradox that showed motion was impossible
-Aristotle's version of the paradox: "Before any distance can be traversed, half the distance must be traversed. These half distances are infinite in number. It is impossible to traverse distances infinite in number"
- Zeno illustrated the paradox with Achilles and a Tortoise. Achilles can begin to pursue the Tortoise but he will never overtake it. Achilles may catch up to where the Tortoise has been but the Tortoise has moved. Achilles gets closer to the Tortoise, but still has not taken him over. The distance becomes shorter and shorter but no matter how close Achilles gets, there is always some distance.
-"These contentions still worry philosophers and mathematicians" (Jones, 23).
-Despite the logical reasoning of Zeno, it is at odds with common sense
-The belief and trust in reason over sense perception by some Greek philosophers led to a profound skepticism
Rationalism and Empiricism
-Logical consistency vs. sensory perception
-Logical consistency has a number of advantages over sense perception, it is indubitable and it is universal
-Rationalists follow logical consistency; empiricists use sense perception to guide them
-Neither pure rationalism nor pure empiricism is satisfactory
The Pluralists:
-Parmenides argument was hypothetical: if the Milesians' monism is correct then change is impossible, therefore change is impossible.
-Parmenides did not question the monism and that is where he got off course
-Monism, at least the materialistic form the Milesians pursued gave way as their premise was questioned and in this questioning of the monism premise, Greek philosophy was born
Empedocles:
-Empedocles was the first known pluralist
-He accepted Parmenides' notion that nothing is created or destroyed
-He denied Parmenides' notion that motion is impossible
-He believed that reality was a plenum, a completely full world
-Pluralism replaced monism and motion occurred when two objects exchanged places
-Motion is possible in a plenum if plurality exists
-He believed that the many were combinations of the four elements: earth, air, fire and water
-Each of the elements was eternal, uncreated, indestructible and unchanging
-There are two types of motions:
1. Love - a motion of uniting different things
2. Strife - a motion of separating two things back to their elemental form
-The world process was a constant cycle of mixing the four elements. Love is the dominant motion here. Then, gradually strife replaces love and the four elements begin to be separated. This ebb and flow process continues on and on.
-The four elements were eternal, the things they created, the things we see were however, unstable and finite
-His process anticipated the survival of the fittest evolutionary theory
-Empedocles called the process 'god' and worshipped it. He denied his god any anthropomorphic qualities
Anaxagoras:
-Aanaxagoras was an Ionian and the first critic of Empedocles
-He was troubled by the thought of four substances miraculously coming together in some mixture to form things like cabbage or a lion
-He believed Parmenides had it right when he said that change was illusionary
-He believed that the stuff of the world was eternal
-He believed that there is a many and that each one of the many is a Parmenidean one
-He believed that there is motion within the plenum
-He denied that change resulting in transformation was possible and maintained that everything existent was a combination of all the stuffs in this world. The stuff that is dominant in each particular thing denotes what that thing is.
-Anaxagoras denied Empedocles' two motions of love and strife and replaced it with a single type of motion, mind
-Mind is material and it sets all thing in order
-By setting mind to set all things right he implied purpose, but he contradictorily contended that mind was purely mechanical in essence
-Mind (the motion of the world) sets up a vortex which separates the various stuffs from the elements
-Eventually the vortex will rotate wide enough so that every stuff will be separated from every other stuff
Estimation of Anaxagoras' Theory:
-The theory of Anaxagoras amounted to the denial of the Milesians' scientific spirit
-Empedocles and Anaxagoras did not solve the basic problems the Milesian school faced, but they did articulate them better
Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans:
-The life of Pythagoras is virtually unknown and his views are nearly indistinguishable from that of his followers
-Pythagoras was reported by Heraclitus to be one of the most scientific men of his age and a religious philosopher
-Pythagoras was born in Samos and then emigrated to Southern Italy circa 530 B.C. He founded a society at Croton
-Croton was a religious fraternity that was very scientific. They believed their science was a part of their worship
Class Notes on the Pre-Socratics
(Originally Written August 31, 2006 in History I)
Class Notes
"Chris' [paper] is a bit wordy and while he produces warm feelings in my heart, he gets the same amount of points" - Jim Spiegel
Major periods of Ancient Philosophy:
1. Pre-Socratic (6th-5th Century B.C.)
- interested with cosmology and physical philosophy
2. Socratic (5th-4th Century B.C.)
-Socrates, Plato & Aristotle
-mostly focused on ethics
3. Hellenistic (3rd century B.C. - Middle Ages)
-Stoicism, Cynicism, Epicureanism, Skepticism
4. Philosophy of the Roman Empire (1st Century B.C. - Middle Ages)
-Stoicism, Neo-Platonism, Early Christian, Neo-Aristotelian, Hellenistic branches
Pre-Socratic Problems:
1. The problem of the one and the many
-Metaphysical: one substance vs. many substances
-Epistemological: universal vs. particulars (what do I know?)
2. The problem of permanence and change
-Metaphysical: flux vs. permanence (What is reality?)
-Epistemological: How do I know perpetual flux or permanence?
Milesian Philosophers:
Thales (circa 624 BC - 546 BC)
-contemporary of Jeremiah, alive during the fall of Jerusalem
-did not write anything
-predicted an eclipse of the sun in 585 BC
-redirected a river for the Ionians during a struggle with Persia
-geometrician of note
-cornered the olive oil market
-very few fragments of his teaching survive:
"all things are water", "all things are full of soul"
-he was a monist, monism: all reality is made of one stuff
-for Thales, the one stuff was water
-he was a materialist, nothing beyond the physical world exists, everything is matter.
-he was a hylozoist, hylozoism - all material substances have life in them
-he was a naturalist, using naturalistic explanations and mechanistic approaches to problems
Anaximander (circa 610 BC - 545 BC)
-pupil of Thales
-engineer/traveler
-first Greek cartographer
-invented the sun dial
-believed in a catastrophic flood because there were marine fossils in the mountains
-believed that life began in the moist of the world
-early evolutionary theorist
-wrote a treatise
-he was a monist, "apeiron" (the boundless) was his one substance.
-The boundless was natural matter with no determinant qualities, it was an eternal substance
-held a cyclical cosmology - periodic creation and destruction of the universe
-he was naturalistic and mechanistic in approach
Anaximenes (circa 585 BC - 525 BC)
-he was a monist, air was his one stuff/substance
-he accounted for change: Fire <-> Air <-> Wind <-> Water <-> Earth <-> Stone
-he was naturalistic and mechanistic in approach
-he was a materialist
Other Pre-Socratics
Heraclitus (circa 544 BC - 484 BC)
-From Ephesus
-aristocratic
-poet/philosopher
-taught Cratylus (Plato named a dialogue after Cratylus)
-wrote in aphorisms
-known as "the obscure"
-pantheistic to varying degrees
-held a low view of humanity and was very pessimistic
1. Basic Cosmic Elements were not primary
2. Divine Fire - most basic/primary substance (Restless fire)
3. Flux - the constant change
4. Logos - the pattern of life, "formula", "Ratio", "Word", "Pattern"
5. Tension of opposites - strife
6. Human Nature - Ethics, the human soul is part of the Divine Fire and will return to the Divine Fire after death
Class Notes
"Chris' [paper] is a bit wordy and while he produces warm feelings in my heart, he gets the same amount of points" - Jim Spiegel
Major periods of Ancient Philosophy:
1. Pre-Socratic (6th-5th Century B.C.)
- interested with cosmology and physical philosophy
2. Socratic (5th-4th Century B.C.)
-Socrates, Plato & Aristotle
-mostly focused on ethics
3. Hellenistic (3rd century B.C. - Middle Ages)
-Stoicism, Cynicism, Epicureanism, Skepticism
4. Philosophy of the Roman Empire (1st Century B.C. - Middle Ages)
-Stoicism, Neo-Platonism, Early Christian, Neo-Aristotelian, Hellenistic branches
Pre-Socratic Problems:
1. The problem of the one and the many
-Metaphysical: one substance vs. many substances
-Epistemological: universal vs. particulars (what do I know?)
2. The problem of permanence and change
-Metaphysical: flux vs. permanence (What is reality?)
-Epistemological: How do I know perpetual flux or permanence?
Milesian Philosophers:
Thales (circa 624 BC - 546 BC)
-contemporary of Jeremiah, alive during the fall of Jerusalem
-did not write anything
-predicted an eclipse of the sun in 585 BC
-redirected a river for the Ionians during a struggle with Persia
-geometrician of note
-cornered the olive oil market
-very few fragments of his teaching survive:
"all things are water", "all things are full of soul"
-he was a monist, monism: all reality is made of one stuff
-for Thales, the one stuff was water
-he was a materialist, nothing beyond the physical world exists, everything is matter.
-he was a hylozoist, hylozoism - all material substances have life in them
-he was a naturalist, using naturalistic explanations and mechanistic approaches to problems
Anaximander (circa 610 BC - 545 BC)
-pupil of Thales
-engineer/traveler
-first Greek cartographer
-invented the sun dial
-believed in a catastrophic flood because there were marine fossils in the mountains
-believed that life began in the moist of the world
-early evolutionary theorist
-wrote a treatise
-he was a monist, "apeiron" (the boundless) was his one substance.
-The boundless was natural matter with no determinant qualities, it was an eternal substance
-held a cyclical cosmology - periodic creation and destruction of the universe
-he was naturalistic and mechanistic in approach
Anaximenes (circa 585 BC - 525 BC)
-he was a monist, air was his one stuff/substance
-he accounted for change: Fire <-> Air <-> Wind <-> Water <-> Earth <-> Stone
-he was naturalistic and mechanistic in approach
-he was a materialist
Other Pre-Socratics
Heraclitus (circa 544 BC - 484 BC)
-From Ephesus
-aristocratic
-poet/philosopher
-taught Cratylus (Plato named a dialogue after Cratylus)
-wrote in aphorisms
-known as "the obscure"
-pantheistic to varying degrees
-held a low view of humanity and was very pessimistic
1. Basic Cosmic Elements were not primary
2. Divine Fire - most basic/primary substance (Restless fire)
3. Flux - the constant change
4. Logos - the pattern of life, "formula", "Ratio", "Word", "Pattern"
5. Tension of opposites - strife
6. Human Nature - Ethics, the human soul is part of the Divine Fire and will return to the Divine Fire after death
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)