(Originally written July 21, 2018 in Book 17)
Timaeus & Critias
Plato
The Timaeus was the first Ancient Greek text to give an account of creation of the world by a divine creator. Other, earlier Greek accounts were either mythical, centering around sexual reproduction or treated as a haphazard evolution.
"The primary purpose of the Timaeus is theological, that is to say, to give a religious and teleological account of the origin of the world and of the phenomena of nature" (Plato, 7).
On a side note, the teleological has been widely discarded by science. But, I wonder, if we are simply matter and synapses and electrical currents then we are exactly like what the rest of the cosmos is in terms of stuff. But, we, as human beings, obviously do things with a purpose. Thus, we are teleological beings. If we are merely stuff like everything in the cosmos then that stuff is teleological. If matter is then teleological then why is it limited to human beings? That would seem an arbitrary statement.
The creation account of the Timaeus is not a god synonymous with the Christian God or even other Greek gods.
The philosophical basis for the Timaeus begins with Plato's distinction between Being and Becoming. The world of Being contains the Platonic Forms, the principles of logic and mathematics - that which can be known by reason. The world of Becoming is what we perceive by the senses.
"The function of the creator is to account for the intelligibility of the universe" (Plato, 110. Plato believed the cosmos was something we could understand and it could be understood because there is an intelligent force underlying it.
Plato argues that there is a goodness inherent in the actions of the Creator. Thus, when we see traces of divine design we can infer goodness.
The Timaeus and the Critias belong to the late period of Plato's works. They are probably his penultimate works before he wrote the Laws, which he left unfinished on account of his death in 348 BC.
Timaeus
Socrates begins by summarizing the ideal society
- separating the people by occupation/craft/class
- each class gets a single occupation appropriate to it
- the ruling class would thus, only be rulers and have no other occupation
- the rulers must be gentle to their subjects
- the rulers must be trained physically and mentally
- the rulers must not have private property
- no marriage among the rulers. all children were to be children to all and not now their parents. The good men should be assigned to the good women (and the bad paired up) by secret, fixed ways
Critias then begins to tell a story about the travels of Solon. Solon went to Egypt, to the city of Sais. There, Solon learned from the priests about antiquity.
Solon learns about Deucalion and Pyrrha who survived a great flood. But, the old priest criticizes Solon for childish thinking and small-thinking. "You remember only one deluge, though there have been many, and you do not know that the finest and best race of men that every existed lived in your country; you and your fellow citizens are descended from the few survivors that remained" (Plato, 36).
Then Timaeus speaks. He intends to speak an account of how the universe began.
First we must distinguish between "that which always is and never becomes from that which is always becoming but never is" (Plato, 40). Distinguishes between Being and Becoming.
Being is knowable by reason and intellect. Becoming is understood through opinion and irrational sensation. Being has no cause. Becoming always has a cause.
The cosmos falls into the category of becoming because it can be sensed. Since it is sensible it has a cause.
Why did the creator choose to create the cosmos? The creator is good and therefore wishes all things to be as like him as possible. "God thererfore, wishing that all things should be good, and so far as possible nothing be imperfect" (Plato, 42). The creator took the chaos and reduced it to order.
The Creator created the cosmos to have soul in it, not in any indiviudal part, but in its entirety. That soul is diffuse throughout its entirety.
Showing posts with label Socrates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Socrates. Show all posts
Saturday, July 21, 2018
Thursday, July 19, 2018
Philebus Notes 3
(Originally written July 19, 2018 in book 17)
Philebus
Plato
(continued)
"Bad men, then, delight for the most part in false pleasures, good men in true ones" (Plato, 77).
False pleasures are a 'ridiculous imitation' of true pleasures.
There are three types of life:
1) The pleasant
2) The painful
3) The painless, joyless life.
To be without pain is not the same as to feel pleasure.
The greatest pleasures and pains occur not when the body or soul is healthy, but when they are sick.
Ignorance is always an evil.
Pleasure belongs to the class of becoming, i.e. the pleasure one has involves the process of being thirsty. Thus, pleasure is not pure Being. The Good in pure Being and does not involve process and is thus, not becoming. Being is higher than becoming. Thus, pleasure cannot be the Good because as the Good it must be the highest.
Socrates claims that dialectic has the greatest claim to discovering pure truth. He concedes that while Gorgias' act of persuasion may acheive more utility, it does not have a strong claim as does dialectic to understanding the truth of a thing.
"We find fixity, purity, truth and what we have called perfect clarity, either in those things that are always unchanged, unaltered and free of all admixture, or in what is most akin to them; everythign else must be called inferior and of secondary iporantce" (Plato, 122).
There is a Greek proverb about the need for repeating a good thing 'once and twice and once again' - use this in Future Modern Ancient Greeks for comedic effect
Philebus claims that pleasure and the pursuit of it is the Supreme Good of all living Creatures. Socrates claims they are different and intelligence has more claim to be ranked as good than pleasure.
Knowledge of things unchanged is greater than knowledge of changing things. Knowledge of pure Being is greather than knowledge of becoming.
THe mixture that comes to the threshold of the Good is all knowledge, the knowledge of both unchanging and changing things and those pleasures that do not have folly attached to them. The pleasures of a temperate existence are allowed in, but those that cause ruin or disturbance are not.
Beauty, proportion and Truth are synonymous. The mixture will be good if these three things are in it. These things make the mixture good.
Socrates' heiarchy of what is closest to the Good:
1) Whatever is measured or appropriate
2) Whatever is proportional and beautiful
3) Reason and intelligence
4) That which belongs to the soul itself (Science, Art, Right Opinions
5) Pure pleasures of the soul, some attached to knowledge, some to sensation
Philebus
Plato
(continued)
"Bad men, then, delight for the most part in false pleasures, good men in true ones" (Plato, 77).
False pleasures are a 'ridiculous imitation' of true pleasures.
There are three types of life:
1) The pleasant
2) The painful
3) The painless, joyless life.
To be without pain is not the same as to feel pleasure.
The greatest pleasures and pains occur not when the body or soul is healthy, but when they are sick.
Ignorance is always an evil.
Pleasure belongs to the class of becoming, i.e. the pleasure one has involves the process of being thirsty. Thus, pleasure is not pure Being. The Good in pure Being and does not involve process and is thus, not becoming. Being is higher than becoming. Thus, pleasure cannot be the Good because as the Good it must be the highest.
Socrates claims that dialectic has the greatest claim to discovering pure truth. He concedes that while Gorgias' act of persuasion may acheive more utility, it does not have a strong claim as does dialectic to understanding the truth of a thing.
"We find fixity, purity, truth and what we have called perfect clarity, either in those things that are always unchanged, unaltered and free of all admixture, or in what is most akin to them; everythign else must be called inferior and of secondary iporantce" (Plato, 122).
There is a Greek proverb about the need for repeating a good thing 'once and twice and once again' - use this in Future Modern Ancient Greeks for comedic effect
Philebus claims that pleasure and the pursuit of it is the Supreme Good of all living Creatures. Socrates claims they are different and intelligence has more claim to be ranked as good than pleasure.
Knowledge of things unchanged is greater than knowledge of changing things. Knowledge of pure Being is greather than knowledge of becoming.
THe mixture that comes to the threshold of the Good is all knowledge, the knowledge of both unchanging and changing things and those pleasures that do not have folly attached to them. The pleasures of a temperate existence are allowed in, but those that cause ruin or disturbance are not.
Beauty, proportion and Truth are synonymous. The mixture will be good if these three things are in it. These things make the mixture good.
Socrates' heiarchy of what is closest to the Good:
1) Whatever is measured or appropriate
2) Whatever is proportional and beautiful
3) Reason and intelligence
4) That which belongs to the soul itself (Science, Art, Right Opinions
5) Pure pleasures of the soul, some attached to knowledge, some to sensation
Monday, July 16, 2018
Philebus Notes 2
(Originally written July 16, 2018 in Book 17)
Philebus
Plato
(continued)
Socrates maintains that neither pleasure nor intelligence are identical with the good.
The good must be perfect, must be adequate and when one recognizes the good, one must desire it and go after it.
Socrates shows Protarchus that a life lived in the whole enjoyment of pleasure without intelligence would be impossible. Without intelligence one couldn't even judge that his life was pleasurable. It wouldn't be a human life, but a life of some beast.
Socrates and Protarchus also agree that a life of complete and perfect intelligence without pleasure (or even pain) would not be desireable either.
Since a life devoted to pleasure and a life devoted to intelligence both prove to be inadequate than neither intelligence nor pleasure can be the good.
Socrates points out that while pleasure and his own personal reasons are not the good; it might be that, "the tru, divine, reason, I fancy, is in rather a different position" (Plato, 35).
4 Classes of Existence:
1) Limitless - that which can be more or less, that which is becoming, that which contains a quality of "compared to such-and-such", i.e. a thing is hotter when it is compared to something. it continues on being hotter and hotter (or colder and colder) when compared.
2) The limited - that which posseses a quality of a fixed ratio or is equal to something else.
3) A mix of the limitless and the limited - this is the balance and perfection. By combining pitches in music we arrive at a harmony. "it is here that we find the source of fair weather and all other beautiful things" (Plato, 48).
Socrates uses the example of law and the wickedness of man. Socrates contends that the lawlessness and wickedness of man is due to the limitless nature of man's pleasure and his appetite for it. When Law and Order was instituted then limits were imposed. Thus the limitlessness and the limited were combined to produce balance. Socrates maintains against Philebus that rather than spoiling the capacity for pleasure this imposition of limitedness preserved man.
4) The thing that causes the mixture of the limited and unlimited. This is greather than the thing that is mixed because the caused always comes after the cause.
Socrates claims that mind and soul belong to the category 4, the cause of things.
Socrates points out pain must be discussed in any thought of pleasure. He places both pain and pleasure in the third, combined category.
He describes pain as a disturbance of harmony in any creature and pleasure as the occurrence when that harmony is restored. "When the natural state of a living organism, constituted, as I have maintained, of the unlimited and the limit, is destroyed and that destruction is pain; conversely, when such organisms return to their own true nature, this reversion is invariably pleasure" (Plato, 60).
Socrates argues that all desires come from the soul, not the body. Likewise pain and pleasure are in the soul, not the body.
Socrates points out that feeling a pleasure is on the same level of holding an opinion. Since opinion can be either true or false, pleasures can likewise be either true or false.
If a pleasure has rightness then it is a right pleasure. But if a pleasure has badness, it is a bad pleasure.
Socrates compares our souls to a book. When memories with attached feelings "write" on our souls what is true, then true opinions spring up in us. But when those memories and attached feelings are false, false opinions spring up in us.
Philebus
Plato
(continued)
Socrates maintains that neither pleasure nor intelligence are identical with the good.
The good must be perfect, must be adequate and when one recognizes the good, one must desire it and go after it.
Socrates shows Protarchus that a life lived in the whole enjoyment of pleasure without intelligence would be impossible. Without intelligence one couldn't even judge that his life was pleasurable. It wouldn't be a human life, but a life of some beast.
Socrates and Protarchus also agree that a life of complete and perfect intelligence without pleasure (or even pain) would not be desireable either.
Since a life devoted to pleasure and a life devoted to intelligence both prove to be inadequate than neither intelligence nor pleasure can be the good.
Socrates points out that while pleasure and his own personal reasons are not the good; it might be that, "the tru, divine, reason, I fancy, is in rather a different position" (Plato, 35).
4 Classes of Existence:
1) Limitless - that which can be more or less, that which is becoming, that which contains a quality of "compared to such-and-such", i.e. a thing is hotter when it is compared to something. it continues on being hotter and hotter (or colder and colder) when compared.
2) The limited - that which posseses a quality of a fixed ratio or is equal to something else.
3) A mix of the limitless and the limited - this is the balance and perfection. By combining pitches in music we arrive at a harmony. "it is here that we find the source of fair weather and all other beautiful things" (Plato, 48).
Socrates uses the example of law and the wickedness of man. Socrates contends that the lawlessness and wickedness of man is due to the limitless nature of man's pleasure and his appetite for it. When Law and Order was instituted then limits were imposed. Thus the limitlessness and the limited were combined to produce balance. Socrates maintains against Philebus that rather than spoiling the capacity for pleasure this imposition of limitedness preserved man.
4) The thing that causes the mixture of the limited and unlimited. This is greather than the thing that is mixed because the caused always comes after the cause.
Socrates claims that mind and soul belong to the category 4, the cause of things.
Socrates points out pain must be discussed in any thought of pleasure. He places both pain and pleasure in the third, combined category.
He describes pain as a disturbance of harmony in any creature and pleasure as the occurrence when that harmony is restored. "When the natural state of a living organism, constituted, as I have maintained, of the unlimited and the limit, is destroyed and that destruction is pain; conversely, when such organisms return to their own true nature, this reversion is invariably pleasure" (Plato, 60).
Socrates argues that all desires come from the soul, not the body. Likewise pain and pleasure are in the soul, not the body.
Socrates points out that feeling a pleasure is on the same level of holding an opinion. Since opinion can be either true or false, pleasures can likewise be either true or false.
If a pleasure has rightness then it is a right pleasure. But if a pleasure has badness, it is a bad pleasure.
Socrates compares our souls to a book. When memories with attached feelings "write" on our souls what is true, then true opinions spring up in us. But when those memories and attached feelings are false, false opinions spring up in us.
Monday, July 2, 2018
Philebus Notes 1
(Originally written July 2, 2018 in Book 17)
This book hasn't been written in for nearly eleven years. But it seems a waste not to fill the pages. Thus, I'll continue with my Plato reading project that has dragged on for nearly two years now.
Plato's Philebus
trans. R. Hackforth
Cambridge at the University Press
1972
Introduction
Philebus is from the later career of Plato.
Philebus is not a real person; he is an embodiment of an irrational dogmatic hedonism.
The main concept of Philebus is that pleasure is an 'unlimited thing'.
Philebus
Philebus: pleasure is the good for all loving creatures; it is the right aim for all creatures and they ought to seek it.
"Hedonism and Socratism have this much in common, that they both find the human good within ourselves" (Plato, 12).
Socrates: thought, intelligence, memory and true reasoning are more valuable than pleasure.
This book hasn't been written in for nearly eleven years. But it seems a waste not to fill the pages. Thus, I'll continue with my Plato reading project that has dragged on for nearly two years now.
Plato's Philebus
trans. R. Hackforth
Cambridge at the University Press
1972
Introduction
Philebus is from the later career of Plato.
Philebus is not a real person; he is an embodiment of an irrational dogmatic hedonism.
The main concept of Philebus is that pleasure is an 'unlimited thing'.
Philebus
Philebus: pleasure is the good for all loving creatures; it is the right aim for all creatures and they ought to seek it.
"Hedonism and Socratism have this much in common, that they both find the human good within ourselves" (Plato, 12).
Socrates: thought, intelligence, memory and true reasoning are more valuable than pleasure.
Tuesday, October 24, 2017
Goodreads review of Meno
(Originally written October 24, 2017)
From my Goodreads review.
This is one of my favorite dialogues because it encapsulates Socrates' style without being overly repetitive. It's also an interesting conclusion that virtue cannot be taught or acquired; but, is rather given to virtuous men by the divine. In a Christian understanding of it we might say that Socrates is a good guide by virtue of having a right opinion of imago dei. Certainly he can't have had knowledge of it, but if it leads to the right destination then it is just as useful as knowledge. But, that is just a thought very off topic.
From my Goodreads review.
This is one of my favorite dialogues because it encapsulates Socrates' style without being overly repetitive. It's also an interesting conclusion that virtue cannot be taught or acquired; but, is rather given to virtuous men by the divine. In a Christian understanding of it we might say that Socrates is a good guide by virtue of having a right opinion of imago dei. Certainly he can't have had knowledge of it, but if it leads to the right destination then it is just as useful as knowledge. But, that is just a thought very off topic.
Friday, September 29, 2017
Quick Thoughts on The Symposium
I just finished The Symposium by Plato last night. It was probably the third or fourth time I've read it in my recent (and slow paced) journey through all of Plato's works. I've taken notes in my notebooks that will eventually find their way on to this blog in the future, so I won't spend too much time here other than to give my overarching thoughts on it. Here is what I wrote on my Goodreads page: "In the Symposium not all speeches are equal. This is one of my favorite dialogues of Plato, but surprisingly not because of Socrates. Aristophanes' speech about the fantastically weird original humans and Alcibiades' drunken entrance are exceptional pieces of literature - humorously and babbingly brilliant". I'm not going to add much more to this here, but I read this book again, even though I had read this particular dialogue in two or three collections of dialogues earlier because I wanted to reread the speech of Aristophanes. I don't know why it is so fascinating to me. It could be that it's just so odd I can't help just be attracted to it.
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
Apology (B)
(Originally written November 22, 2016 in Book 26)
Apology (Continued)
Plato
Socrates maintains that he has wronged no one and will not start now by wronging himself by offering a less evil penalty for his conviction that Meletus has (and is the customary practice of the court). Besides, he still isn't convinced death is a wrong at all. "Am I then to choose in preference to this something that I know very well to be an evil...?" (Plato, 39).
"The unexamined life is not worth living for men" (Plato, 39).
He sets his penalty at that which will not hurt him. Since he is poor he sets it at one mina of silver. But than sets it at 30 minas.
Socrates addresses those who sentenced him to death, stating that he would rather die after offering his manly and virtuous defense than survive by debasing himself and offering a defense that is full of emotive qualities.
He thinks it's wrong to avoid death in war or at trial at all costs.
It is easier to avoid death then wickedness: Socrates has caught by death but his accusers have been caught by wickedness. "They are condemned by truth to wickedness and injustice" (Plato, 40).
Socrates prophesies that by killing him they will not be able to live life unchallenged but will face more men like Socrates, and younger ones at that! They will test the men. "To escape such tests is neither possible nor good, but it is best and easiest not to discredit it others but to prepare oneself to be as good as possible" (Plato, 41).
Socrates tells the jurors who voted for his acquittal that death is not an evil; for if it was an evil the god who prevented Socrates from doing evil would have prevented him from saying that which got him sentenced to death.
Death is either nothingness or a relocating process where the soul goes to another place where he could converse and test good men and wise men.
"A good man cannot be harmed in life or in death, and that his affairs are not neglected by the gods" (Plato, 42).
The jurors who voted for death are only doing the will of the divine which is good; but, they are to be blamed because they intended harm.
Socrates' parting words to the jurymen who voted for acquittal: "I go to die, you go to live. Which of us goes to the better lot is known to no one, except the god" (Plato, 42).
Apology (Continued)
Plato
Socrates maintains that he has wronged no one and will not start now by wronging himself by offering a less evil penalty for his conviction that Meletus has (and is the customary practice of the court). Besides, he still isn't convinced death is a wrong at all. "Am I then to choose in preference to this something that I know very well to be an evil...?" (Plato, 39).
"The unexamined life is not worth living for men" (Plato, 39).
He sets his penalty at that which will not hurt him. Since he is poor he sets it at one mina of silver. But than sets it at 30 minas.
Socrates addresses those who sentenced him to death, stating that he would rather die after offering his manly and virtuous defense than survive by debasing himself and offering a defense that is full of emotive qualities.
He thinks it's wrong to avoid death in war or at trial at all costs.
It is easier to avoid death then wickedness: Socrates has caught by death but his accusers have been caught by wickedness. "They are condemned by truth to wickedness and injustice" (Plato, 40).
Socrates prophesies that by killing him they will not be able to live life unchallenged but will face more men like Socrates, and younger ones at that! They will test the men. "To escape such tests is neither possible nor good, but it is best and easiest not to discredit it others but to prepare oneself to be as good as possible" (Plato, 41).
Socrates tells the jurors who voted for his acquittal that death is not an evil; for if it was an evil the god who prevented Socrates from doing evil would have prevented him from saying that which got him sentenced to death.
Death is either nothingness or a relocating process where the soul goes to another place where he could converse and test good men and wise men.
"A good man cannot be harmed in life or in death, and that his affairs are not neglected by the gods" (Plato, 42).
The jurors who voted for death are only doing the will of the divine which is good; but, they are to be blamed because they intended harm.
Socrates' parting words to the jurymen who voted for acquittal: "I go to die, you go to live. Which of us goes to the better lot is known to no one, except the god" (Plato, 42).
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
Euthyphro
(Originally written November 16, 2016 in Book 26)
The Trial and Death of Socrates
3rd Edition
Plato
Hackett, 2000
Introduction
Socrates was 70 in 399 BC, the date of his trial and execultion.
- Lived through the Periclean age of Athens at its pinnacle of power
- But saw the Peloponnesian War and the defeat of Athens in 404 BC
Taught philosophy like a street preacher, exposing the ignorance of any self-proclaimed wise men
Euthyphro
This dialogue concerns the nature of piety. It is one of Socrates' searches for the universal definition of an ethical term.
Euthyphro appears to be a professional priest who "considers himself an expert on ritual and on piety generally, and, it seems, is generally so considered" (Plato, 1).
Meletus has indicted Socrates; but, of what, Euthyphro asks: "Strange things". Socrates is a maker of gods (he worships these new gods while neglecting belief in the old ones).
Euthyphro figures Meletus has brought the charge out of envy of Socrates.
Eurthyphro is prosecuting his father for murder. He must do it and distance himself from his father because "the pollution is the same if you knowingly keep company with such a man and do not cleanse yourself and him by bringing him to justice" (Plato, 4).
The notion of bringing one to justice as a way to cleanse the wrong-doer is an interesting one.
Euthyphro has a high view of himself: "I should be of no use, Socrates, and Euthyphro would not be superior to the majority of men, if I did not have accurate knowledge of all such things" (Plato, 5).
All such things: what is pious and what is pious.
Socrates: What is pious?
To prosecute the wrong-doer, whether he is a relative or a stranger is the pious. To not prosecute is impious.
Euthyphro claims his prosecution of his father is pious because Zeus prosecuted his father piously.
Socrates doesn't accept this initial definition because it is just one description of one pious action.
"What is dear to the gods is pious; what is not is impious" (Plato, 7).
Socrates then points out that the gods are, at various times, at war with one another so a thing can be both god-loved and god-hated. Thus, a thing can be both pious and impious.
Socrates points out that Euthyphro's prosecution may be pleasing to Zeus but displeasing to Cronus and Uranus.
Euthyphro agrees to a narrowing definition of piety and its opposite: "the pious is what all the gods love, and the opposite, what all gods hate, is the impious" (Plato, 11).
Euthyphro - "the godly and pious is the part of the just that is concerned with the care of the gods, while that concerned with the care of men is the remaining part of justice" (Plato, 15).
The Trial and Death of Socrates
3rd Edition
Plato
Hackett, 2000
Introduction
Socrates was 70 in 399 BC, the date of his trial and execultion.
- Lived through the Periclean age of Athens at its pinnacle of power
- But saw the Peloponnesian War and the defeat of Athens in 404 BC
Taught philosophy like a street preacher, exposing the ignorance of any self-proclaimed wise men
Euthyphro
This dialogue concerns the nature of piety. It is one of Socrates' searches for the universal definition of an ethical term.
Euthyphro appears to be a professional priest who "considers himself an expert on ritual and on piety generally, and, it seems, is generally so considered" (Plato, 1).
Meletus has indicted Socrates; but, of what, Euthyphro asks: "Strange things". Socrates is a maker of gods (he worships these new gods while neglecting belief in the old ones).
Euthyphro figures Meletus has brought the charge out of envy of Socrates.
Eurthyphro is prosecuting his father for murder. He must do it and distance himself from his father because "the pollution is the same if you knowingly keep company with such a man and do not cleanse yourself and him by bringing him to justice" (Plato, 4).
The notion of bringing one to justice as a way to cleanse the wrong-doer is an interesting one.
Euthyphro has a high view of himself: "I should be of no use, Socrates, and Euthyphro would not be superior to the majority of men, if I did not have accurate knowledge of all such things" (Plato, 5).
All such things: what is pious and what is pious.
Socrates: What is pious?
To prosecute the wrong-doer, whether he is a relative or a stranger is the pious. To not prosecute is impious.
Euthyphro claims his prosecution of his father is pious because Zeus prosecuted his father piously.
Socrates doesn't accept this initial definition because it is just one description of one pious action.
"What is dear to the gods is pious; what is not is impious" (Plato, 7).
Socrates then points out that the gods are, at various times, at war with one another so a thing can be both god-loved and god-hated. Thus, a thing can be both pious and impious.
Socrates points out that Euthyphro's prosecution may be pleasing to Zeus but displeasing to Cronus and Uranus.
Euthyphro agrees to a narrowing definition of piety and its opposite: "the pious is what all the gods love, and the opposite, what all gods hate, is the impious" (Plato, 11).
Euthyphro - "the godly and pious is the part of the just that is concerned with the care of the gods, while that concerned with the care of men is the remaining part of justice" (Plato, 15).
Sunday, November 13, 2016
Introducing Plato (B)
(Originally written November 13, 2016 in Book 26)
Introducing Plato
D. Robinson & J. Groves
The Sophists sold their wisdom for profit. They treated philosophy as a self-help method to earn political position.
Plato & Socrates were hostile to the Sophists for two reasons:
1. The Sophists debased philosophy
2. The Sophists sold their teaching to whoever could pay, not just the Aristocracy
Sophists were on a sliding scale, but preached cultural and ethical relativism and ethical skepticism. The worst held ethical nihilism as a viewpoint.
Protagoras (490-420 BC)
- Agnostic
- Ethical relativist
While Protagoras was a relativist and Sophist he did garner some respect from Plato and Socrates, which is more than the cynical Callicles in the Gorgias got.
The Meno:
Concludes that virtue cannot be taught, it must be recalled.
"For Plato, knowledge is something we are already born with, and so 'learning' is simply forcing this knowledge to resurface into our conscious minds" (Robinson, 44).
Learning is anamnesis - recalling something imparted from the divine to the pre-existant souls of men.
The Republic:
Thrasymachus argues that society and the state are artificial constructs to limit the natural state of men.
Thrasymachus' views on morality predicted the views of Nietzsche and Marx.
Glaucon has a very negative view of humanity and posits a psychological egoist viewpoint. Humans are vicious, predatory beasts. Thomas Hobbes adopted this view and advocated strong governments to enforce morality.
Plato chooses not to argue against this as "psychological egoist explanations of all human behavior usually tend to be self-confirming and difficult to refute (Robinson, 60).
Introducing Plato
D. Robinson & J. Groves
The Sophists sold their wisdom for profit. They treated philosophy as a self-help method to earn political position.
Plato & Socrates were hostile to the Sophists for two reasons:
1. The Sophists debased philosophy
2. The Sophists sold their teaching to whoever could pay, not just the Aristocracy
Sophists were on a sliding scale, but preached cultural and ethical relativism and ethical skepticism. The worst held ethical nihilism as a viewpoint.
Protagoras (490-420 BC)
- Agnostic
- Ethical relativist
While Protagoras was a relativist and Sophist he did garner some respect from Plato and Socrates, which is more than the cynical Callicles in the Gorgias got.
The Meno:
Concludes that virtue cannot be taught, it must be recalled.
"For Plato, knowledge is something we are already born with, and so 'learning' is simply forcing this knowledge to resurface into our conscious minds" (Robinson, 44).
Learning is anamnesis - recalling something imparted from the divine to the pre-existant souls of men.
The Republic:
Thrasymachus argues that society and the state are artificial constructs to limit the natural state of men.
Thrasymachus' views on morality predicted the views of Nietzsche and Marx.
Glaucon has a very negative view of humanity and posits a psychological egoist viewpoint. Humans are vicious, predatory beasts. Thomas Hobbes adopted this view and advocated strong governments to enforce morality.
Plato chooses not to argue against this as "psychological egoist explanations of all human behavior usually tend to be self-confirming and difficult to refute (Robinson, 60).
Thursday, November 10, 2016
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.
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.
Tuesday, August 2, 2016
Two Short ideas concerning Socrates
1) Write a dialogue in Platonic style called Asclepius' Cock. Have him wonder why Socrates gave him the cock upon his death. The end of the story is that Socrates was giving him a cock, as is customary when one recovers from illness and the illness that Socrates has just recovered from was life.
2) Write a short story about the executioner of Socrates and his reaction to the whole mess.
Monday, July 18, 2016
Book notes on Plato
(Originally written July 18, 2016 in Book 26)
History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter 17: Plato's Cosmogony
What can be known by the intellect and reason is unchanging. What is sensed is changing.
The world was created by God who made it patterned after the eternal.
The world is harmonized by proportion (each element is proportional to the others).
"The soul is compounded of the individisble - unchangeable and the divisible-changeable; it is a third and intermediate kind of essence" (Russell, 144).
There are four kinds of animals: gods, birds, fish and land animals
"Souls have sensation, love, fear and anger; if they overcome these, they live righteously, but if not, not. If a man lives well, he goes, after death, to live happily forever in his star. But, if he lives badly, he will, in the next life, be a woman; if he (she) persists in evil-doing, he (or she) will become a brute, and go on through transmigrations until at last reason conquers" (Russell, 145) [God created one star for every soul he created]
Future Modern Ancient Greeks - Use this, but souls got lonely and moved to planets. Through their traveling the soul picked up bits of stuff until they found themselves trapped in bodies
Man contains two souls, one mortal and created by the gods (the first creation of God) and one immortal (created by God). The gods mingled the two into one to form man.
Chapter 18 - Knowledge and perception in Plato
The dialogue, Theaetetus, is concerned with finding a suitable definition for knowledge.
Perception cannot be knowledge because everything including the perception possessor is constantly changing. Thus perceiving is constantly becoming not-perceiving and knowing becomes not-knowing. Thus, knowledge becomes and is not-knowledge.
Also knowlege cannot be perception because we can know things like sounds and different than colors even though we can't sense a color with our ears or a sound with out eyes.
"Only the mind can reach existence, and we cannot reach truth if we do not reach existence" (Russell, 152-53). Only the mind can know.
Knowlege consists of reflecting, not sensing.
The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
Chapter 4 - Plato: The theory of forms
Plato was a product of his environment. Born in Athens circa 427 BC, he was a veteran of the Peloponnesian War and experienced the dissatisfaction associated with losing the war. He was also a nobleman by birth, descended from both Solon and the god Poseidon
The biggest impact on Plato though was Socrates
Socrates "combined an intensely realistic and down-to-earth common sense with a passionate mysticism, a cool and dispassionate scepticism about ordinary beliefs and opinions with a deep religious sense" (Jones, 110).
Socrates lived by and taught his own morals in opposition to tradition and the mores of his day.
Socrates on death: "To fear death, gentlemen, is nothing else than to think one is wise when one is not; for it is thinking one knows what one does not know. For no none knows whether death be not the greatest of all blessings to man, but they find it is the greatest of evils" (Jones, 113).
Chris - "Then we ought neither to requite wrong with wron, nor to do evil to anyone, no matter what he may have done us" (Jones, 116).
Plato believed, "The discovery of truth is always, he thought, a joint word in which friends discouss together" (Jones, 118)
History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter 17: Plato's Cosmogony
What can be known by the intellect and reason is unchanging. What is sensed is changing.
The world was created by God who made it patterned after the eternal.
The world is harmonized by proportion (each element is proportional to the others).
"The soul is compounded of the individisble - unchangeable and the divisible-changeable; it is a third and intermediate kind of essence" (Russell, 144).
There are four kinds of animals: gods, birds, fish and land animals
"Souls have sensation, love, fear and anger; if they overcome these, they live righteously, but if not, not. If a man lives well, he goes, after death, to live happily forever in his star. But, if he lives badly, he will, in the next life, be a woman; if he (she) persists in evil-doing, he (or she) will become a brute, and go on through transmigrations until at last reason conquers" (Russell, 145) [God created one star for every soul he created]
Future Modern Ancient Greeks - Use this, but souls got lonely and moved to planets. Through their traveling the soul picked up bits of stuff until they found themselves trapped in bodies
Man contains two souls, one mortal and created by the gods (the first creation of God) and one immortal (created by God). The gods mingled the two into one to form man.
Chapter 18 - Knowledge and perception in Plato
The dialogue, Theaetetus, is concerned with finding a suitable definition for knowledge.
Perception cannot be knowledge because everything including the perception possessor is constantly changing. Thus perceiving is constantly becoming not-perceiving and knowing becomes not-knowing. Thus, knowledge becomes and is not-knowledge.
Also knowlege cannot be perception because we can know things like sounds and different than colors even though we can't sense a color with our ears or a sound with out eyes.
"Only the mind can reach existence, and we cannot reach truth if we do not reach existence" (Russell, 152-53). Only the mind can know.
Knowlege consists of reflecting, not sensing.
The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
Chapter 4 - Plato: The theory of forms
Plato was a product of his environment. Born in Athens circa 427 BC, he was a veteran of the Peloponnesian War and experienced the dissatisfaction associated with losing the war. He was also a nobleman by birth, descended from both Solon and the god Poseidon
The biggest impact on Plato though was Socrates
Socrates "combined an intensely realistic and down-to-earth common sense with a passionate mysticism, a cool and dispassionate scepticism about ordinary beliefs and opinions with a deep religious sense" (Jones, 110).
Socrates lived by and taught his own morals in opposition to tradition and the mores of his day.
Socrates on death: "To fear death, gentlemen, is nothing else than to think one is wise when one is not; for it is thinking one knows what one does not know. For no none knows whether death be not the greatest of all blessings to man, but they find it is the greatest of evils" (Jones, 113).
Chris - "Then we ought neither to requite wrong with wron, nor to do evil to anyone, no matter what he may have done us" (Jones, 116).
Plato believed, "The discovery of truth is always, he thought, a joint word in which friends discouss together" (Jones, 118)
Monday, July 11, 2016
Chapter 16 - Plato's theory of immortality
(Originally written July 11, 2016 in Book 26)
History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter 16: Plato's theory of immortality
Socrates is shown by Plato not to fear death. He is wrongly condemned, but will not escape (which the Athenians who convicted him might have preferred) because he would then be returning injustice for injustice. Neither will he commit suicide because, "There is a doctrine whispered in secret that man is a prisoner who has no right to open the door and run away" (Russell, 134).
Socrates is convinced (as much as possible) he will encounter gods who are wise and good in the afterlife. He is also, though less so, convinced he will encounter good men as well.
Death for Socrates is the separation of body and soul.
"The distinction between mind and matter, which has become a commonplace in philosophy, science and popular thought, has a religious origin, and began as the distinction of soul and body" (Russell, 134).
For the Platonic Socrates, existence is revealed through ure thought and not through the senses. "The soul in herself must behold things in themselves: and then we shall attain the wisdom which we desire, and of which we say we are lovers; not while we live, but after death: for while in comany with the body the soul cannot have pure knowledge, knowledge must be attained after death, if at all" (Russell, 137).
Socrates reasons for believing in the survival of the soul after death:
1) Opposites generate one another. Life generates death. Death generates life.
2) Knowledge is recollection (hence we know what things like true equality or logical truths are without experiencing them)
The soul of the philosopher (the one who disdains the body for truth) will depart the body and enter into bliss with the gods. The impure soul will restlessly haunt as a ghost or enter the body of an animal.
The fate of souls after heaven:
good -> Heaven
Bad -> Hell
Intermediate -> Purgatory
History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Chapter 16: Plato's theory of immortality
Socrates is shown by Plato not to fear death. He is wrongly condemned, but will not escape (which the Athenians who convicted him might have preferred) because he would then be returning injustice for injustice. Neither will he commit suicide because, "There is a doctrine whispered in secret that man is a prisoner who has no right to open the door and run away" (Russell, 134).
Socrates is convinced (as much as possible) he will encounter gods who are wise and good in the afterlife. He is also, though less so, convinced he will encounter good men as well.
Death for Socrates is the separation of body and soul.
"The distinction between mind and matter, which has become a commonplace in philosophy, science and popular thought, has a religious origin, and began as the distinction of soul and body" (Russell, 134).
For the Platonic Socrates, existence is revealed through ure thought and not through the senses. "The soul in herself must behold things in themselves: and then we shall attain the wisdom which we desire, and of which we say we are lovers; not while we live, but after death: for while in comany with the body the soul cannot have pure knowledge, knowledge must be attained after death, if at all" (Russell, 137).
Socrates reasons for believing in the survival of the soul after death:
1) Opposites generate one another. Life generates death. Death generates life.
2) Knowledge is recollection (hence we know what things like true equality or logical truths are without experiencing them)
The soul of the philosopher (the one who disdains the body for truth) will depart the body and enter into bliss with the gods. The impure soul will restlessly haunt as a ghost or enter the body of an animal.
The fate of souls after heaven:
good -> Heaven
Bad -> Hell
Intermediate -> Purgatory
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
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.
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.
Wednesday, August 12, 2015
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).
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).
Sunday, August 9, 2015
Zeno
Zeno
The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
1980
Zeno's Paradoxes
1) Motion is impossible. Before you go some place you must go half-way there. These half-way theres are infinite. It is impossible to go distances infinite in number. Therefore, motion is impossible.
2) Achilles and the Tortoise - Achilles if he is chasing a tortoise will never actually overtake the tortoise in spite of seeming to be faster. No matter how fast Achilles runs he never catches where the tortoise is because of something akin to the half-way theres paradox. Achilles always ends up at a starting point of the tortoise.
Early Greek Philosophy
Jonathan Barnes
2001
Plato writes a fictional encounter between Zeno and Socrates in his dialogue Parmenides.
-Zeno was 40 when Parmenides was 65 (it was said the two were lovers)
-Zeno visited Athens for a festival when Socrates was very young
-The interaction between Zeno and Socrates has Zeno claiming that while it may seem counterintuitive to assume that only one thing exists, the opposite is actually true. By embracing monism you get less ridiculous logical outcomes than by embracing dualism or pluralism.
Zeno argues that pluralism demands that everything be infinitely divisible. If things are divided so often eventually the parts that constitute the whole will become so small they will decrease to nothing. Nothing cannot exist so there can be no division whatsoever. In this way he aims to show that the pluralists have even more crazy assertions than the monists because if everything is made up of infinitely divisible things then everything is made from things that are essentially nothing, which is a logical absurdity. This is the puzzle of dichotomy.
The whole point of Zeno's puzzles or paradoxes are not to do away with the One of Parmenides, "but rather with a plurality of things (by showing that those who hypothesize a plurality are committed to inconsistencies), thus confirming Parmenides' argument that what exists is one" (Barnes, 104).
Aristotle was not exactly kind to Zeno in his book Physics. He states that Zeno argues fallaciously and that he set up arguments simply to embarrass people. Aristotle tallies some arguments Zeno gives against motion:
1) The infinite half-way there paradoxes
2) Achilles and the tortoise
3) The traveling arrow stands still (based on the half-distances and the Achilles one)
Aristotle argues that Zeno's paradoxes are based on an erroneous presumption that time is made up of instances. But Aristotle argues that time is the limitless thing.
Zeno argues against space and places saying that if anything exists it will be in a place. But if a place exists then it will be in a place and if the place that holds the place exists it will too have to be in a place. Zeno uses the infinite regression to argue that places therefore can't exist.
Another quote from Zeno (though its veracity is doubted) about the impossibility of motion is "What is moving moves neither in the place in which it is nor in the place in which it is not" (Barnes, 108).
The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
1980
Zeno's Paradoxes
1) Motion is impossible. Before you go some place you must go half-way there. These half-way theres are infinite. It is impossible to go distances infinite in number. Therefore, motion is impossible.
2) Achilles and the Tortoise - Achilles if he is chasing a tortoise will never actually overtake the tortoise in spite of seeming to be faster. No matter how fast Achilles runs he never catches where the tortoise is because of something akin to the half-way theres paradox. Achilles always ends up at a starting point of the tortoise.
Early Greek Philosophy
Jonathan Barnes
2001
Plato writes a fictional encounter between Zeno and Socrates in his dialogue Parmenides.
-Zeno was 40 when Parmenides was 65 (it was said the two were lovers)
-Zeno visited Athens for a festival when Socrates was very young
-The interaction between Zeno and Socrates has Zeno claiming that while it may seem counterintuitive to assume that only one thing exists, the opposite is actually true. By embracing monism you get less ridiculous logical outcomes than by embracing dualism or pluralism.
Zeno argues that pluralism demands that everything be infinitely divisible. If things are divided so often eventually the parts that constitute the whole will become so small they will decrease to nothing. Nothing cannot exist so there can be no division whatsoever. In this way he aims to show that the pluralists have even more crazy assertions than the monists because if everything is made up of infinitely divisible things then everything is made from things that are essentially nothing, which is a logical absurdity. This is the puzzle of dichotomy.
The whole point of Zeno's puzzles or paradoxes are not to do away with the One of Parmenides, "but rather with a plurality of things (by showing that those who hypothesize a plurality are committed to inconsistencies), thus confirming Parmenides' argument that what exists is one" (Barnes, 104).
Aristotle was not exactly kind to Zeno in his book Physics. He states that Zeno argues fallaciously and that he set up arguments simply to embarrass people. Aristotle tallies some arguments Zeno gives against motion:
1) The infinite half-way there paradoxes
2) Achilles and the tortoise
3) The traveling arrow stands still (based on the half-distances and the Achilles one)
Aristotle argues that Zeno's paradoxes are based on an erroneous presumption that time is made up of instances. But Aristotle argues that time is the limitless thing.
Zeno argues against space and places saying that if anything exists it will be in a place. But if a place exists then it will be in a place and if the place that holds the place exists it will too have to be in a place. Zeno uses the infinite regression to argue that places therefore can't exist.
Another quote from Zeno (though its veracity is doubted) about the impossibility of motion is "What is moving moves neither in the place in which it is nor in the place in which it is not" (Barnes, 108).
Parmenides
Parmenides
The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
1980
The first physicists and cosmologists to use the new geometric method of deductive reasoning from self-evident starting positions found that their logical conclusions clashed with the real world experience they had. 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 claiming that there is no nothing is that it is impossible to think of nothing.
FUTURE MODERN ANCIENT GREEKS - The Parmenides - An Oxygen Like Bar where the users imbibe on a vapor that allows them to conceptualize nothing. It often drives its users to depression, madness and suicide. But, occasionally genius is borne out of using. Not recommended for persons on their first few cycles of birth and death.
From his two self-evident tautologies he deemed that what is, is uncreated, indestructible, eternal and unchangeable.
- 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 he assumed that there is only that one something.
-It is indestructible because to destroy it would make it become nothing. There is no nothing. Therefore it is indestructible.
-It is eternal because it is uncreated and indestructible.
-It is unchangeable because there is nothing it can change into in a monist system. Also, if it did change the old thing it was would become nothing. There is no nothing, so change is impossible.
History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
1974
Heraclitus: everything changes
Parmenides: nothing changes
-From Elea, Southern Italy
-flourished circa 5th century BC
-Met with Socrates circa 450 BC
-Invented metaphysics based on logic
-believed the senses to be deceptive
-believed that the multitude of things was illusionary
-had two strands of thought: the way of truth and the way of opinion
Way of Truth: can't think about nothing, there is no nothing. there is no becoming and no passing away.
"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 and not nothing. Therefore, the meaning of the word must have some existence. This argument relies on the notion that the meaning of words is unchanging.
Because of the continual 'existence' that words guarantee, there really is 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 deceptive 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 - This is the basis for the Parmenides Engine. Think of the place that you are going and you are there. This allows for the space explorer to travel the vastness of space in short periods of time without massive amounts of fuel. The problem is that it can only be piloted by someone able to focus their mind completely on a single object. Distracted pilots have had disastrous results with this type of engine. Sometimes they end up half in one place and half in another. Sometimes they end up somewhere as something else. Sometimes they end up nowhere, if they have recently imbibed on the Parmenides vapor. This is actually the origin of black holes.
"[Parmenides] was the first to declare that the earth is spherical and lies in the middle [of the universe] - Diogenes Laertius" (Barnes, 89).
The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
1980
The first physicists and cosmologists to use the new geometric method of deductive reasoning from self-evident starting positions found that their logical conclusions clashed with the real world experience they had. 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 claiming that there is no nothing is that it is impossible to think of nothing.
FUTURE MODERN ANCIENT GREEKS - The Parmenides - An Oxygen Like Bar where the users imbibe on a vapor that allows them to conceptualize nothing. It often drives its users to depression, madness and suicide. But, occasionally genius is borne out of using. Not recommended for persons on their first few cycles of birth and death.
From his two self-evident tautologies he deemed that what is, is uncreated, indestructible, eternal and unchangeable.
- 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 he assumed that there is only that one something.
-It is indestructible because to destroy it would make it become nothing. There is no nothing. Therefore it is indestructible.
-It is eternal because it is uncreated and indestructible.
-It is unchangeable because there is nothing it can change into in a monist system. Also, if it did change the old thing it was would become nothing. There is no nothing, so change is impossible.
History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
1974
Heraclitus: everything changes
Parmenides: nothing changes
-From Elea, Southern Italy
-flourished circa 5th century BC
-Met with Socrates circa 450 BC
-Invented metaphysics based on logic
-believed the senses to be deceptive
-believed that the multitude of things was illusionary
-had two strands of thought: the way of truth and the way of opinion
Way of Truth: can't think about nothing, there is no nothing. there is no becoming and no passing away.
"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 and not nothing. Therefore, the meaning of the word must have some existence. This argument relies on the notion that the meaning of words is unchanging.
Because of the continual 'existence' that words guarantee, there really is 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 deceptive 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 - This is the basis for the Parmenides Engine. Think of the place that you are going and you are there. This allows for the space explorer to travel the vastness of space in short periods of time without massive amounts of fuel. The problem is that it can only be piloted by someone able to focus their mind completely on a single object. Distracted pilots have had disastrous results with this type of engine. Sometimes they end up half in one place and half in another. Sometimes they end up somewhere as something else. Sometimes they end up nowhere, if they have recently imbibed on the Parmenides vapor. This is actually the origin of black holes.
"[Parmenides] was the first to declare that the earth is spherical and lies in the middle [of the universe] - Diogenes Laertius" (Barnes, 89).
Tuesday, August 4, 2015
Heraclitus
Heraclitus
The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
1980
-For Heraclitus, the original stuff is fire. "This world...was ever, is now, and ever shall be an everlasting fire" (Jones, 14).
-Heraclitus was influenced by the Milesian three, but was more subtle and refined
-Heraclitus' notion to resolve the problem of how one thing becomes every thing and is still one was to make the 'one thing' a non-material thing. For Heraclitus, the one thing then was the process itself.
-For Heraclitus, who like most men have difficulty in truly thinking abstractly, let alone communicating abstract thoughts, he called this process 'fire', which is always changing and yet still fire.
-The problem for the Milesian three was they held a belief in unity and still needed to reconcile the fact that things changed. Heraclitus however in proclaiming process as the one thing went to the extreme and created the problem of permanence. Because everything was fire and process, everything was always changing. This is the state of flux.
-Flux accounts for the change. Permanence is accounted for by accepting that the thing that is changing appears permanent because the rate of change is always the same.
-In addition to the Milesian three's problem of one and the many, Heraclitus has the problem of the world as it appears and the world as it really is.
-Heraclitus did not stop at describing the physical world as the Milesian three did. He dabbled into more areas.
-He used the eternal flux in describing how politics works as well. The political system is a constant tension of opposites. For example, without strife peace could not exist.
-Heraclitus' political theory was representative of his time. There was constant strife between the various city states and peace only existed when neither of the warring city states had enough power to overcome the other. Likewise, in the individual city states the nobles and the commoners only achieved a balance of peace when neither party was powerful enough to impose their will on the other. Heraclitus was on the side of the nobility.
-Heraclitus was contemptuous of the masses.
-In addition to social theory, Heraclitus showed an interest in religion. For Heraclitus, his aristocratic contempt for the masses extended to his religious sentiments. Accepting the scientific nature of the Milesian three, he rejected the contemporary religion of the masses.
-Heraclitus is quoted as saying 'the wisest man is an ape compared to God, just as the most beautiful ape is ugly compared to man'
-Heraclitus sometimes identifies his god as the process of flux
-Heraclitus' god was not personal. It was indifferent to human conceptions of right and wrong, justice and was immune to men's prayer.
-Heraclitus equated the flux/process sometimes with 'logos'.
-Some passages indicate that Heraclitus' ethics held that the chief good of man is to listen to the logos and even become absorbed by the logos
-Heraclitus was both a scientific and religious philosopher.
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
1972
[The Greeks] "discovered mathematics and the art of deductive reasoning. Geometry, in particular, is a Greek invention, without which modern science would have been impossible" (Russell, 39). The limitation to this Greek way of thinking though is that it is reasoned deductively from self-evident facts rather than inductively from empirical observations.
-Heraclitus was an aristocratic person from Ephesus.
-famous for his theory that everything is in a state of flux
-He was mystical in thought
-Fire was the fundamental substance
-everything is born by the death of something else
-there was a unity in the world, but that unity came out of the combination of opposites
-believed that mankind was so inherently bad that only force would compel them to act for their own good
-believed that War was necessary and good
-believed that strife was justice and that all things come into being and pass away through strife
-"His ethic is a kind of proud asceticism, very similar to Nietzsche's" (Russell, 42).
-The soul was a mix of fire and water, the fire being the noble part.
-Claimed the 'dry' soul was the best, but that it is pleasurable to the soul to get 'wet'. Hence, the asceticism
-He was hostile to the Bacchic religion, for example he wrote "They vainly purify themselves by defiling themselves with blood, just as if one who had stepped into the mud were to wash his feet in mud. Any man who marked him doing this, would deem him mad" (Russell, 43).
-Perpetual change was the state of the world.
-The unity in the world was a result from diversity.
-His god did not care about mankind - "To God all things are fair and good and right, but men hold some things wrong and some right" (Russell, 44).
-Like Hegel, Heraclitus seems to believe that a synthesis of opposites creates the world as it is.
-Heraclitus has a sense of cosmic justice in his system as no single thing can ever prevent one thing from totally taking over its opposite
-For Heraclitus, his God is distinct from the gods. His God is the embodiment of cosmic justice.
-Both Plato and Aristotle agreed that Heraclitus taught that nothing ever is, everything is always becoming.
-"The doctrine of perpetual flux, as taught by Heraclitus, is painful, and science, as we have seen, can do nothing to refute it. One of the main ambitions of philosophers has been to revive hopes that science seemed to have killed. Philosophers, accordingly, have sought, with great persistence, for something not subject to the empire of Time. This search begins with Parmenides" (Russell, 47).
Early Greek Philosophy
Jonathan Barnes
2001
-Heraclitus came from Ephesus in Asia Minor, circa 500 BC
-He was nicknamed 'The Obscure' and 'The Riddler'
-Even Socrates, when given a book of Heraclitus by Euripides states what he understood was splendid and was sure that what he didn't understand was splendid as well.
-Heraclitus rebuked and condemned a lot of people for their ignorance in his writings
-He claims all things are one, 'day and dusk - for they are one', 'the path of the carding-comb is straight and crooked', 'the path up and down is one and the same', etc.
-He was very critical of everyone he disagreed with, which was basically everyone. "Much learning does not teach thought - or it would have taught Hesiod and Pythagoras, and again Xenophanes and Hecataeus" (Barnes, 53).
-He defines wisdom as the ability to grasp the knowledge of how all things are steered through all.
-He was regarded by some of the ancients as arrogant and purposefully obscure
-He claimed that all things were made of fire and perished back into the fire
-Everything that exists is harmonized by the transformation of opposites
-Everything is full of souls and spirits
-He distrusted sensory perception
John Stobaeus quotes a couple of interesting Heraclitus sayings:
-It is better to hide folly than to make it public
-It is not good for men to get what they want
-To be self-controlled is the greatest excellence. And wisdom is speaking the truth and acting with knowledge in accordance with nature.
-All men can know themselves and control themselves
Again, he is not very complimentary of the common man: "For what thought or sense, he says, do they have? They follow the popular singers and they take the crowd as their teacher, not knowing that most men are bad and few good" (Barnes, 58).
He claims that most men satisfy themselves like beasts. The best men seek fame from mortals.
He is especially critical of Pythagoras. "Pythagoras, son of Mnesarchus, practiced inquiry more than any other man, and selecting from these writings he made a wisdom of his own - much learning, mere fraudulence" (Barnes, 59).
-He held that the world was uncreated
Stobaeus says "Heraclitus said that a man's character is his fate" (Barnes, 62).
On God Plutarch remarks that Heraclitus believed "In all respects superior to us, [god] is especially unlike and different from us in his acts; but of divine acts, the majority, according to Heraclitus, escape our knowledge through lack of trust" (Barnes, 66).
He claimed that philosophical men must be versed in many things
He distrusted the senses - bad witnesses for men are eyes and ears of those who have foreign souls (the mark of a foreign soul is to trust in non-rational perceptions)
War is to be praised in Heraclitus because it brings about strife, which is justice.
Aristotle describes his cosmology as the harmony achieved through the blending of the most contrary principles.
Again, he's not real complimentary of the masses, claiming that donkeys would prefer rubbish to gold.
The Classical Mind
W.T. Jones
1980
-For Heraclitus, the original stuff is fire. "This world...was ever, is now, and ever shall be an everlasting fire" (Jones, 14).
-Heraclitus was influenced by the Milesian three, but was more subtle and refined
-Heraclitus' notion to resolve the problem of how one thing becomes every thing and is still one was to make the 'one thing' a non-material thing. For Heraclitus, the one thing then was the process itself.
-For Heraclitus, who like most men have difficulty in truly thinking abstractly, let alone communicating abstract thoughts, he called this process 'fire', which is always changing and yet still fire.
-The problem for the Milesian three was they held a belief in unity and still needed to reconcile the fact that things changed. Heraclitus however in proclaiming process as the one thing went to the extreme and created the problem of permanence. Because everything was fire and process, everything was always changing. This is the state of flux.
-Flux accounts for the change. Permanence is accounted for by accepting that the thing that is changing appears permanent because the rate of change is always the same.
-In addition to the Milesian three's problem of one and the many, Heraclitus has the problem of the world as it appears and the world as it really is.
-Heraclitus did not stop at describing the physical world as the Milesian three did. He dabbled into more areas.
-He used the eternal flux in describing how politics works as well. The political system is a constant tension of opposites. For example, without strife peace could not exist.
-Heraclitus' political theory was representative of his time. There was constant strife between the various city states and peace only existed when neither of the warring city states had enough power to overcome the other. Likewise, in the individual city states the nobles and the commoners only achieved a balance of peace when neither party was powerful enough to impose their will on the other. Heraclitus was on the side of the nobility.
-Heraclitus was contemptuous of the masses.
-In addition to social theory, Heraclitus showed an interest in religion. For Heraclitus, his aristocratic contempt for the masses extended to his religious sentiments. Accepting the scientific nature of the Milesian three, he rejected the contemporary religion of the masses.
-Heraclitus is quoted as saying 'the wisest man is an ape compared to God, just as the most beautiful ape is ugly compared to man'
-Heraclitus sometimes identifies his god as the process of flux
-Heraclitus' god was not personal. It was indifferent to human conceptions of right and wrong, justice and was immune to men's prayer.
-Heraclitus equated the flux/process sometimes with 'logos'.
-Some passages indicate that Heraclitus' ethics held that the chief good of man is to listen to the logos and even become absorbed by the logos
-Heraclitus was both a scientific and religious philosopher.
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
1972
[The Greeks] "discovered mathematics and the art of deductive reasoning. Geometry, in particular, is a Greek invention, without which modern science would have been impossible" (Russell, 39). The limitation to this Greek way of thinking though is that it is reasoned deductively from self-evident facts rather than inductively from empirical observations.
-Heraclitus was an aristocratic person from Ephesus.
-famous for his theory that everything is in a state of flux
-He was mystical in thought
-Fire was the fundamental substance
-everything is born by the death of something else
-there was a unity in the world, but that unity came out of the combination of opposites
-believed that mankind was so inherently bad that only force would compel them to act for their own good
-believed that War was necessary and good
-believed that strife was justice and that all things come into being and pass away through strife
-"His ethic is a kind of proud asceticism, very similar to Nietzsche's" (Russell, 42).
-The soul was a mix of fire and water, the fire being the noble part.
-Claimed the 'dry' soul was the best, but that it is pleasurable to the soul to get 'wet'. Hence, the asceticism
-He was hostile to the Bacchic religion, for example he wrote "They vainly purify themselves by defiling themselves with blood, just as if one who had stepped into the mud were to wash his feet in mud. Any man who marked him doing this, would deem him mad" (Russell, 43).
-Perpetual change was the state of the world.
-The unity in the world was a result from diversity.
-His god did not care about mankind - "To God all things are fair and good and right, but men hold some things wrong and some right" (Russell, 44).
-Like Hegel, Heraclitus seems to believe that a synthesis of opposites creates the world as it is.
-Heraclitus has a sense of cosmic justice in his system as no single thing can ever prevent one thing from totally taking over its opposite
-For Heraclitus, his God is distinct from the gods. His God is the embodiment of cosmic justice.
-Both Plato and Aristotle agreed that Heraclitus taught that nothing ever is, everything is always becoming.
-"The doctrine of perpetual flux, as taught by Heraclitus, is painful, and science, as we have seen, can do nothing to refute it. One of the main ambitions of philosophers has been to revive hopes that science seemed to have killed. Philosophers, accordingly, have sought, with great persistence, for something not subject to the empire of Time. This search begins with Parmenides" (Russell, 47).
Early Greek Philosophy
Jonathan Barnes
2001
-Heraclitus came from Ephesus in Asia Minor, circa 500 BC
-He was nicknamed 'The Obscure' and 'The Riddler'
-Even Socrates, when given a book of Heraclitus by Euripides states what he understood was splendid and was sure that what he didn't understand was splendid as well.
-Heraclitus rebuked and condemned a lot of people for their ignorance in his writings
-He claims all things are one, 'day and dusk - for they are one', 'the path of the carding-comb is straight and crooked', 'the path up and down is one and the same', etc.
-He was very critical of everyone he disagreed with, which was basically everyone. "Much learning does not teach thought - or it would have taught Hesiod and Pythagoras, and again Xenophanes and Hecataeus" (Barnes, 53).
-He defines wisdom as the ability to grasp the knowledge of how all things are steered through all.
-He was regarded by some of the ancients as arrogant and purposefully obscure
-He claimed that all things were made of fire and perished back into the fire
-Everything that exists is harmonized by the transformation of opposites
-Everything is full of souls and spirits
-He distrusted sensory perception
John Stobaeus quotes a couple of interesting Heraclitus sayings:
-It is better to hide folly than to make it public
-It is not good for men to get what they want
-To be self-controlled is the greatest excellence. And wisdom is speaking the truth and acting with knowledge in accordance with nature.
-All men can know themselves and control themselves
Again, he is not very complimentary of the common man: "For what thought or sense, he says, do they have? They follow the popular singers and they take the crowd as their teacher, not knowing that most men are bad and few good" (Barnes, 58).
He claims that most men satisfy themselves like beasts. The best men seek fame from mortals.
He is especially critical of Pythagoras. "Pythagoras, son of Mnesarchus, practiced inquiry more than any other man, and selecting from these writings he made a wisdom of his own - much learning, mere fraudulence" (Barnes, 59).
-He held that the world was uncreated
Stobaeus says "Heraclitus said that a man's character is his fate" (Barnes, 62).
On God Plutarch remarks that Heraclitus believed "In all respects superior to us, [god] is especially unlike and different from us in his acts; but of divine acts, the majority, according to Heraclitus, escape our knowledge through lack of trust" (Barnes, 66).
He claimed that philosophical men must be versed in many things
He distrusted the senses - bad witnesses for men are eyes and ears of those who have foreign souls (the mark of a foreign soul is to trust in non-rational perceptions)
War is to be praised in Heraclitus because it brings about strife, which is justice.
Aristotle describes his cosmology as the harmony achieved through the blending of the most contrary principles.
Again, he's not real complimentary of the masses, claiming that donkeys would prefer rubbish to gold.
Sunday, April 19, 2015
Eudaimaniacs
Eudaimonia is the Greek philosophical notion, of the highest good of human kind.
There was debate in the Ancient philosophy of Greece on what that highest good was. Socrates taught that eudaimonia was taking good care of the soul so that it is in the best possible shape (having the most virtue). In Plato the eudaimonia also rested with the soul, but rather than having the most virtue possible, it was that the soul was perfectly balanced. In Aristotle eudaimonia was using, to the fullest extent possible reason - which set man apart from the animals. Epicurus was hedonistic, but a long-term hedonist. For him, the eudaimonia was the long term best pleasure with as little bit of pain as possible. In Plato, Socrates and Aristotle, eudaimonia was an end. In Epicurus, eudaimonia was a means toward happiness.
Using these four basic stances I think a short story could come together about four persons living out these philosophies to the nth degree. Living there lives totally dedicated to the highest good of human kind, but in a post-apocalyptic setting and the characters could be crazed and delusional and thus, Eudaimaniacs.
There was debate in the Ancient philosophy of Greece on what that highest good was. Socrates taught that eudaimonia was taking good care of the soul so that it is in the best possible shape (having the most virtue). In Plato the eudaimonia also rested with the soul, but rather than having the most virtue possible, it was that the soul was perfectly balanced. In Aristotle eudaimonia was using, to the fullest extent possible reason - which set man apart from the animals. Epicurus was hedonistic, but a long-term hedonist. For him, the eudaimonia was the long term best pleasure with as little bit of pain as possible. In Plato, Socrates and Aristotle, eudaimonia was an end. In Epicurus, eudaimonia was a means toward happiness.
Using these four basic stances I think a short story could come together about four persons living out these philosophies to the nth degree. Living there lives totally dedicated to the highest good of human kind, but in a post-apocalyptic setting and the characters could be crazed and delusional and thus, Eudaimaniacs.
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Anaxagoras & the Atomists according to Russell
(Originally Written February 12, 2014 on scrap paper now lost)
Snow in Georgia, maybe two inches. Of course, everything is shut down. The power is out.
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Book I
Chapter VIII - Anaxagoras
Anaxagoras introduced philosophy to Athens around 412 BC - 432 BC.
Anaxagoras taught that mind was the source of all motion.
Anaxagoras rejected the notions of necessity and chance. But he also did not believe in providence.
Anaxagoras was very much scientifically inclined and explained things as mechanically as often as he could.
Chapter IX - The Atomists
The Atomist movement was founded by Leucippus and Democritus. Leucippus is older and much less well known (legendary/mythical). Democritus was a contemporary of Socrates (5th century BC).
Atomists believed that everything was comprised of infinite atoms that were indivisible and in constant motion.
Atomists were strict determinists. Everything happened according to natural laws.
Atomists explained the universe in terms that do not need a final cause or purpose. There is no teleology.
"All causal explanations, therefore, must have an arbitrary beginning" (Russell, 67).
"There was no very sharp distinction, in ancient times, between empirical observation and logical argument" (Russell, 68)
The Atomists, like their contemporaries were concerned with Parmenides' denial of change and the obvious fact that change happens.
Snow in Georgia, maybe two inches. Of course, everything is shut down. The power is out.
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Book I
Chapter VIII - Anaxagoras
Anaxagoras introduced philosophy to Athens around 412 BC - 432 BC.
Anaxagoras taught that mind was the source of all motion.
Anaxagoras rejected the notions of necessity and chance. But he also did not believe in providence.
Anaxagoras was very much scientifically inclined and explained things as mechanically as often as he could.
Chapter IX - The Atomists
The Atomist movement was founded by Leucippus and Democritus. Leucippus is older and much less well known (legendary/mythical). Democritus was a contemporary of Socrates (5th century BC).
Atomists believed that everything was comprised of infinite atoms that were indivisible and in constant motion.
Atomists were strict determinists. Everything happened according to natural laws.
Atomists explained the universe in terms that do not need a final cause or purpose. There is no teleology.
"All causal explanations, therefore, must have an arbitrary beginning" (Russell, 67).
"There was no very sharp distinction, in ancient times, between empirical observation and logical argument" (Russell, 68)
The Atomists, like their contemporaries were concerned with Parmenides' denial of change and the obvious fact that change happens.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)