Ancient Philosophy

The Presocratics – The Pluralists

Primary Sources:

• Empedocles, Anaxagoras, Leucippus, and Democritus, Fragments from Baird and Kaufmann, Ancient Philosophy, pp. 31-42.
• Empedocles, Anaxagoras, and Leucippus, Additional Fragments (Handout).

Secondary Source:

• Irwin, “Tendencies”, “Appearance and Nature”, “Nature and Purpose”, “Nature and Cosmic Justice”, from Classical Thought, pp. 43, 47-52.

Background:

From Malcolm Schofield’s Routlegde Online Encyclopedia article on Empedocles:

Empedocles, born in the Sicilian city of Acragas (modern Agrigento), was a major Greek philosopher of the Presocratic period. Numerous fragments survive from his two major works, poems in epic v erse known later in antiquity as On Nature and Purifications.

On Nature sets out a vision of reality as a theatre of ceaseless change, whose invariable pattern consists in the repetition of the two processes of harmonization into unity followed by dissolution into plurality. The force unifying the four elements from which all else is created – earth, air, fire and water – is called Love, and Strife is the force dissolving them once again into plurality. The cycle is most apparent in the rhythms of plant and animal life, but Empedocles’ main objective is to tell the history of the universe itself as an exemplification of the pattern.

The basic structure of the world is the outcome of disruption of a total blending of the elements into main masses which eventually develop into the earth, the sea, the air and the fiery heaven. Life, however, emerged not from separation but by mixture of elements, and Empedocles elaborates an account of the evolution of living forms of increasing complexity and capacity for survival, culminating in the creation of species as they are at present. There followed a detailed treatment of a whole range of biological phenomena, from reproduction to the comparative morphology of the parts of animals and the physiology of sense perception and thinking.

The idea of a cycle involving the fracture and restoration of harmony bears a clear relation to the Pythagorean belief in the cycle of reincarnations which the guilty soul must undergo before it can recover heavenly bliss. Empedocles avows his allegiance to this belief, and identifies the primal sin requiring the punishment of reincarnation as an act of bloodshed committed through 'trust in raving strife'. Purifications accordingly attacked the practice of animal sacrifice, and proclaimed prohibition against killing animals to be a law of nature.

From Malcolm Schofield’s Routlegde Online Encyclopedia article on Anaxagoras:

Anaxagoras of Clazomenae was a major Greek philosopher of the Presocratic period, who worked in the Ionian tradition of inquiry into nature. While his cosmology largely recasts the sixth-century system of Anaximenes, the focus of the surviving fragments is on ontological questions. The often quoted opening of his book – ‘all things were together’ – echoes the Eleatic Parmenides’ characterization of true being, but signals recognition of time, change and plurality. Even so, Anaxagoras is deeply committed to the Eleatic notions that, strictly speaking, there can be no coming into being or going out of existence, nor any separation of one part of reality from any other. His main object is to show how the variety of the world about us is somehow already contained in the primordial mixture, and is explicable only on the assumption that latent within each substance are portions of every other. Whether or not he owed his conception of unlimited smallness to Zeno of Elea, he held that there could be no such thing as a magnitude of least size; and he claimed that there was accordingly no difference in complexity between the large and the small.

Mind, however, is a distinct principle; unlimited, autonomous, free from the admixture of any other substance. Hence Anaxagoras’ decision to make it the first cause of the ordered universe we now inhabit. Mind initiates and controls a vortex, which from small beginnings sucks in an ever-increasing expanse of the surrounding envelope. The vortex brings about an incomplete separation of the ingredients of the original mixture: hot from cold, dry from wet, bright from dark, and so on, with a flat earth compacted at the centre and surrounded by misty air and clearer ether above and below. Contemporaries were scandalized by Anaxagoras’ claim that sun, moon and stars were nothing but incandescent stones caught up in the revolving ether.

From C. C. W. Taylor’s Routlegde Online Encyclopedia article on Leucippus:

The early Greek philosopher Leucippus was the founder of atomism. Virtually nothing is known of his life, and his very existence was disputed in antiquity, but his role as the originator of atomism is firmly attested by Aristotle and Theophrastus, although the evidence does not allow any distinction between his doctri nes and those of his more celebrated successor Democritus. He wrote a comprehensive account of the universe, the Great World-System. The single surviving quotation from his work asserts universal determinism.

Aristotle, followed by Simplicius, sometimes attributes the fundamentals of atomism to Leucippus. Elsewhere, however, and sometimes even in the same context Aristotle refers to Leucippus and Democritus jointly, and not infrequently to Democritus alone (as was the standard practice of later writers). That Leucippus was in some sense the pioneer is undoubted, but it is impossible to determine what elements of the theory of atomism are to be attributed to either, or to what extent their enterprise was collaborative. Of the two most detailed reports of the atomists’ account of the formation of worlds, one is attributed by Diogenes Laertius to Leucippus, and is presumably a summary of the account in the Great World-System. It ascribes the formation of worlds to agglomerations of atoms which, formed by chance collisions, develop a rotation in which atoms of different sizes are sifted out, the smaller being extruded into the infinity of space, the larger forming a spherical structure which gradually differentiates itself into a cosmos as the larger atoms sink to the centre and the smaller are forced to the outside. The rotation of the cosmic aggregates was apparently unexplained, and was according to some sources attributed to chance. This raises the question whether Leucippus believed that some events, such as the cosmic rotation, are objectively random, or are merely ascribed to chance in the weaker sense that their cause is undiscoverable. The single quotation, ‘Nothing happens in vain, but everything from reason and of necessity’, suggests the latter. While it could in isolation be understood as asserting universal purposiveness in nature, the secondary sources, including Aristotle, are unanimous that the atomists denied all purposiveness in natural events. Hence the quotation is best understood as asserting universal determinism; ‘in vain’ is understood as ‘for no reason’, and ‘of necessity’ specifies the reason for which everything happens – namely, the irresistible force of causation. On that interpretation, the cosmic rotation must have had some determinate cause, but a cause undiscoverable to us.

From C. C. W. Taylor’s Routlegde Online Encyclopedia article on Democritus:

A co-founder with Leucippus of the theory of atomism, The Greek Philosopher Democritus developed it into a universal system, embracing physics, cosmology, epistemology, psychology and theology. He is also reported to have written on a wide range of topics, including mathematics, ethics, literary criticism and theo ry of language. His works are lost, except for a substantial number of quotations, mostly on ethics, whose authenticity is disputed. Our knowledge of his principal doctrines depends primarily on Aristotle’s critical discussions, and secondarily on reports by historians of philosophy whose work derives from that of Aristotle and his school.

The atomists attempted to reconcile the observable data of plurality, motion and change with Parmenides’ denial of the possibility of coming to be or ceasing to be. They postulated an infinite number of unchangeable primary substances, characterized by a minimum range of explanatory properties (shape, size, spatial ordering and orientation within a given arrangement). All observable bodies are aggregates of these basic substances, and what appears as generation and corruption is in fact the formation and dissolution of these aggregates. The basic substances are physically indivisible (whence the term atomon, literally ‘uncuttable’) not merely in fact but in principle; (1) because (as Democritus argued) if it were theoretically possible to divide a material thing ad infinitum, the division would reduce the thing to nothing; and (2) because physical division presupposes that the thing divided contains gaps. Atoms are in eternal motion in empty space, the motion caused by an infinite series of prior atomic ‘collisions’. (There is reason to believe, however, although the point is disputed, that atoms cannot collide, since they must always be separated by void, however small; hence impact is only apparent, and all action is at a distance.) The void is necessary for motion, but is characterized as ‘what-is-not’, thus violating the Eleatic principle that what-is-not cannot be.

Democritus seems to have been the first thinker to recognize the observer-dependence of the secondary qualities. He argued from the distinction between appearance and reality to the unreliability of the senses, but it is disputed whether he embraced skepticism, or maintained that theory could make good the deficiency of the senses. He maintained a materialistic account of the mind, explaining thought and perception by the physical impact of images emitted by external objects. This theory gave rise to a naturalistic theology; he held that the gods are a special kind of images, endowed with life and intelligence, intervening in human affairs. The ethical fragments (if genuine) show that he maintained a conservative social philosophy on the basis of a form of enlightened hedonism.

Questions:

• What are the two-levels of reality according to Empedocles? What are the “roots” (“elements”) and how are they related to the things we can see and experience? Do the qualities and properties of these elements carry up from the micro-world to the macro-world? How does his work show the influence of the Eleatics?
• What are the two-levels of reality according to Anaxagoras? What are the “seeds” and how are they related to the things we can see and experience? Do the qualities and properties of these seeds carry up from the micro-world to the macro-world? How does his work show the influence of the Eleatics?
• What are the two-levels of reality according to the Atomists? What are the “atoms” and how are they related to the things we can see and experience? Do the qualities and properties of these seeds carry up from the micro-world to the macro-world? How does their work show the influence of the Eleatics?
• According to Irwin, what is Democritus’ position concerning the senses? How does Democritus defend this position? What two logical principles does Democritus appeal to?
• According to Irwin, do the atomists believe that we are ultimately responsible for our actions? How would the atomists defend their position? Is there any reason or purpose guiding the movements of the atoms? What impact does the answer to this have for the conception of cosmic justice and human behavior?

I love Apache! So should you!