DOCSLIB.ORG

Early Greek Philosophy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

John Burnet's EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY John Burnet, 3rd edition (1920). London: A & C Black INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 2 NOTEONTHESOURCES ...............................................................................................................22 A.—PHILOSOPHERS ................................................................................................................23 B.—DOXOGRAPHERS.............................................................................................................24 I.DOXOGRAPHERSPROPER ...............................................................................................25 II.BIOGRAPHICALDOXOGRAPHERS .............................................................................27 C.—BIOGRAPHERS...................................................................................................................28 D.—CHRONOLOGISTS ...........................................................................................................28 CHAPTERI.,THEMILESIANSCHOOL......................................................................................30 I.THALES......................................................................................................................................31 II.ANAXIMANDER...................................................................................................................36 III.ANAXIMENES......................................................................................................................46 CHAPTERII.,SCIENCEANDRELIGION..................................................................................60 I.PYTHAGORASOFSAMOS..................................................................................................63 II.XENOPHANESOFKOLOPHON....................................................................................77 CHAPTERIII.,HERAKLEITOSOFEPHESOS ..........................................................................96 CHAPTERIV.,PARMENIDESOFELEA...................................................................................126 THEWAYOFTRUTH.............................................................................................................129 THEWAYOFBELIEF ............................................................................................................130 CHAPTERV., EMPEDOKLESOFAKRAGAS..........................................................................146 CHAPTERVI.,ANAXAGORASOFKLAZOMENAI..............................................................186 CHAPTERVII.,THEPYTHAGOREANS....................................................................................206 CHAPTERVIII.,THEYOUNGERELEATICS..........................................................................229 I.ZENOOFELEA....................................................................................................................230 II.MELISSOSOFSAMOS.......................................................................................................236 CHAPTERIX.,LEUKIPPOSOFMILETOS ...............................................................................246 CHAPTERX., ECLECTICISMANDREACTION.....................................................................260 I.HIPPON OFSAMOS ............................................................................................................261 II.DIOGENESOFAPOLLONIA11 ......................................................................................262 III.ARCHELAOSOFATHENS.............................................................................................266 1 INTRODUCTION I. TheCosmologicalCharacterofEarlyGreekPhilosophy II. TheTraditionalViewoftheWorld III. Homer IV. Hesiod V. Cosmogony VI. GeneralCharacteristcsofGreekCosmology VII. Physis VIII. MotionandRest IX. TheSecularCharacterofIonianScience X. AllegedOrientalOriginofPhilosophy XI. EgyptianMathematics XII. BabylonianAstronomy XIII. TheScientificChracteroftheEarlyGreek Cosmology XIV. SchoolsofPhilosophy I. The Cosmological Character of Early Greek Philosophy IT was not till the traditional view of the worldand the customary rules of life hadbrokendown, that the Greeks began tofeel the needs whichphilosophies of nature andof conduct seek to satisfy. Nor were those needs felt all at once. The ancestral maxims of conduct were not seriously questionedtill the oldview of nature hadpassedaway; and, for this reason, the earliest philosophers busied themselves mainly with speculations about the worldaroundthem. Indue season, Logic was calledintobeing tomeet a freshwant. The pursuit of cosmological inquiry had brought to light a wide divergence between science and common sense, whichwas itself a problem that demandedsolution, andmoreover constrainedphilosophers tostudy the means of defending their paradoxes against the prejudices of the unscientific. Later still, the prevailing interest inlogical matters raisedthe questionof the originandvalidity of knowledge; while, about the same time, the break-down of traditional morality gave rise to Ethics. The period which 2 precedestheriseofLogic andEthicshasthusadistinctivecharacterofitsown,andmayfitlybetreated apart.1 II. The Traditional View of the World It must, however, be rememberedthat the worldwas already very oldwhenscience andphilosophy began. Inparticular, the Aegean Sea hadbeen the seat of a high civilisation from the Neolithic age onwards, a civilisation as ancient as that of Egypt or of Babylon, andsuperior to either inmost things that matter. It is becoming clearer every day that the Greek civilisation of later days was mainly the revival and continuation of this, though it no doubt receivedcertainnew andimportant elements from the less civilisednorthern peoples whofor a time arrested its development. The original Mediterranean population must have far outnumbered the intruders, and must have assimilated and absorbed them in a few generations, except in a state like Sparta, which deliberately set itself to resist the process. At any rate, it is to the older race we owe Greek Art andGreek Science.2 It is a remarkable fact that every one of the menwhose work we are about to study was an Ionian, except Empedokles of Akragas, and this exception is perhaps more apparent thanreal. Akragas was foundedfrom the Rhodiancolony of Gela, its οἰκιστήςwas himself a Rhodian, andRhodes, thoughofficially Dorian, hadbeena centre of the early Aegeancivilisation. We may fairly assume that the emigrants belongedmainly tothe older populationrather thantothe new Dorianaristocracy. Pythagoras foundedhis society inthe Achaiancity of Kroton, but he himself was anIonianfromSamos. This being so, we must be preparedtofindthat the Greeks of historical times whofirst triedto understandthe world were not at all inthe positionof men setting out ona hithertountroddenpath. The remains of Aegeanart prove that there must have beena tolerably consistent view of the worldin existence already, though we cannot hope to recover it in detail till the records are deciphered. The ceremony representedon the sarcophagus of Hagia Triada implies some quite definite view as tothe state of the dead, andwe may be sure that the Aegeanpeople were as capable of developing theological speculationas were the Egyptians andBabylonians. We shall expect tofindtraces of this inlater days, andit may be saidat once that things like the fragments of Pherekydes of Syros are inexplicable except as survivals of some suchspeculation. There is nogroundfor supposing that this was borrowedfrom Egypt, thoughnodoubt these early civilisations all influencedone another. The Egyptians may have borrowed from Crete as readily as the Cretans from Egypt, and there was a seed of life in the sea civilisationwhichwassomehowlackinginthatofthegreatrivers. Onthe other hand, it is clear that the northerninvaders have assistedthe free development of the Greek genius by breaking upthe powerful monarchies of earlier days and, above all, by checking the growthof a superstitionlike that whichultimately stifledEgypt andBabylon. That there was once a real danger of this is suggested by certain features in the Aegean remains. On the other hand, the 3 worshipof Apolloseems tohave beenbrought from the Northby the Achaians,3 andindeedwhat has beencalledthe Olympian religionwas, sofar as we cansee, derivedmainly from that source. Still, the artistic form it assumedbears the stampof the Mediterraneanpeoples, andit was chiefly inthat form it appealed to them. It could not become oppressive to them as the old Aegean religion might very possibly have done. It was probably due to the Achaians that the Greeks never hada priestly class, and thatmaywellhavehadsomethingtodowiththeriseoffreescienceamongthem. III. Homer We see the working of these influences clearly in Homer. Though he doubtless belongedtothe older race himself andusedits language,4 it is for the courts of Achaianprinces he sings, andthe gods andheroes he celebrates are mostly Achaian.5 That is why we findsofew traces of the traditional view of the worldinthe epic. The gods have become frankly human, andeverything primitive is kept out of sight. There are, of course, vestiges of the early beliefs andpractices, but they are exceptional.6 It has often been noted that Homer never speaks of the primitive custom of purificationfor homicide. The deadheroes are burned, not buried, as the kings of the older race were. Ghosts play hardly any part. Inthe Iliad we
Recommended publications
  • Tasker H. Bliss and the Creation of the Modern American Army, 1853-1930

    Tasker H. Bliss and the Creation of the Modern American Army, 1853-1930

    TASKER H. BLISS AND THE CREATION OF THE MODERN AMERICAN ARMY, 1853-1930 _________________________________________________________ A Dissertation Submitted to the Temple University Graduate Board __________________________________________________________ in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY __________________________________________________________ by Thomas R. English December 2014 Examining Committee Members: Richard Immerman, Advisory Chair, Temple University, Department of History Gregory J. W. Urwin, Temple University, Department of History Jay Lockenour, Temple University, Department of History Daniel W. Crofts, External Member,The College of New Jersey, Department of History, Emeritus ii © Copyright 2014 By Thomas R. English All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT A commonplace observation among historians describes one or another historical period as a time of “transition” or a particular person as a “transitional figure.” In the history of the United States Army, scholars apply those terms especially to the late- nineteenth century “Old Army.” This categorization has helped create a shelf of biographies of some of the transitional figures of the era. Leonard Wood, John J. Pershing, Robert Lee Bullard, William Harding Carter, Henry Tureman Allen, Nelson Appleton Miles and John McCallister Schofield have all been the subject of excellent scholarly works. Tasker Howard Bliss has remained among the missing in that group, in spite of the important activities that marked his career and the wealth of source materials he left behind. Bliss belongs on that list because, like the others, his career demonstrates the changing nature of the U.S. Army between 1871 and 1917. Bliss served for the most part in administrative positions in the United States and in the American overseas empire.
  • Chrysippus's Dog As a Case Study in Non-Linguistic Cognition

    Chrysippus's Dog As a Case Study in Non-Linguistic Cognition

    Chrysippus’s Dog as a Case Study in Non-Linguistic Cognition Michael Rescorla Abstract: I critique an ancient argument for the possibility of non-linguistic deductive inference. The argument, attributed to Chrysippus, describes a dog whose behavior supposedly reflects disjunctive syllogistic reasoning. Drawing on contemporary robotics, I urge that we can equally well explain the dog’s behavior by citing probabilistic reasoning over cognitive maps. I then critique various experimentally-based arguments from scientific psychology that echo Chrysippus’s anecdotal presentation. §1. Language and thought Do non-linguistic creatures think? Debate over this question tends to calcify into two extreme doctrines. The first, espoused by Descartes, regards language as necessary for cognition. Modern proponents include Brandom (1994, pp. 145-157), Davidson (1984, pp. 155-170), McDowell (1996), and Sellars (1963, pp. 177-189). Cartesians may grant that ascribing cognitive activity to non-linguistic creatures is instrumentally useful, but they regard such ascriptions as strictly speaking false. The second extreme doctrine, espoused by Gassendi, Hume, and Locke, maintains that linguistic and non-linguistic cognition are fundamentally the same. Modern proponents include Fodor (2003), Peacocke (1997), Stalnaker (1984), and many others. Proponents may grant that non- linguistic creatures entertain a narrower range of thoughts than us, but they deny any principled difference in kind.1 2 An intermediate position holds that non-linguistic creatures display cognitive activity of a fundamentally different kind than human thought. Hobbes and Leibniz favored this intermediate position. Modern advocates include Bermudez (2003), Carruthers (2002, 2004), Dummett (1993, pp. 147-149), Malcolm (1972), and Putnam (1992, pp. 28-30).
  • No. 40. the System of Lunar Craters, Quadrant Ii Alice P

    No. 40. the System of Lunar Craters, Quadrant Ii Alice P

    NO. 40. THE SYSTEM OF LUNAR CRATERS, QUADRANT II by D. W. G. ARTHUR, ALICE P. AGNIERAY, RUTH A. HORVATH ,tl l C.A. WOOD AND C. R. CHAPMAN \_9 (_ /_) March 14, 1964 ABSTRACT The designation, diameter, position, central-peak information, and state of completeness arc listed for each discernible crater in the second lunar quadrant with a diameter exceeding 3.5 km. The catalog contains more than 2,000 items and is illustrated by a map in 11 sections. his Communication is the second part of The However, since we also have suppressed many Greek System of Lunar Craters, which is a catalog in letters used by these authorities, there was need for four parts of all craters recognizable with reasonable some care in the incorporation of new letters to certainty on photographs and having diameters avoid confusion. Accordingly, the Greek letters greater than 3.5 kilometers. Thus it is a continua- added by us are always different from those that tion of Comm. LPL No. 30 of September 1963. The have been suppressed. Observers who wish may use format is the same except for some minor changes the omitted symbols of Blagg and Miiller without to improve clarity and legibility. The information in fear of ambiguity. the text of Comm. LPL No. 30 therefore applies to The photographic coverage of the second quad- this Communication also. rant is by no means uniform in quality, and certain Some of the minor changes mentioned above phases are not well represented. Thus for small cra- have been introduced because of the particular ters in certain longitudes there are no good determi- nature of the second lunar quadrant, most of which nations of the diameters, and our values are little is covered by the dark areas Mare Imbrium and better than rough estimates.
  • Global Change Education Resource Guide. INSTITUTION National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC

    Global Change Education Resource Guide. INSTITUTION National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC

    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 402 175 SE 059 389 AUTHOR Mortensen, Lynn L., Ed. TITLE Global Change Education Resource Guide. INSTITUTION National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC. Office of Global Programs. SPONS AGENCY Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.; National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, D.C. PUB DATE [96] NOTE 680p. AVAILABLE FROMNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Global Programs, 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1225, Silver Spring, MD 20910. PUB TYPE Collected Works Conference Proceedings (021) Guides Non-Classroom Use (055) Audiovisual /Non -Print Materials (100) EDRS PRICE MF04/PC28 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Climate Change; *Decision Making Skills; Ecology; *Environmental Education; *Global Warming; *Greenhouse Effect; *Science Curriculum; Secondary Education; Videotape Recordings ABSTRACT This guide is intended as an aid to educators who conduct programs and activities on climate and global change issues for a variety of audiences. The selected set of currently available materials are appropriate for both formal and informal programs in environmental education and can help frame and clarify some of the key issues associated with changes in the global environment. Sections in the guide are as follows: natural climate variability, greenhouse effect, sea-level rise, ozone depletion, ecosystem response, and decision-making under scientific uncertainty, and an extensive bibliography. Fact sheets, articles, learning activities, full-color overhead transparencies, and duplicate slides are included within each topic area. The fact sheets display short summaries of current information and data. Scripts for the overhead color transparencies, an edited videotaped version of the proceedings of a national video conference for educators about global change, and a collection of satellite photographs of the earth's changing surface are also provided.
  • Glossary Glossary

    Glossary Glossary

    Glossary Glossary Albedo A measure of an object’s reflectivity. A pure white reflecting surface has an albedo of 1.0 (100%). A pitch-black, nonreflecting surface has an albedo of 0.0. The Moon is a fairly dark object with a combined albedo of 0.07 (reflecting 7% of the sunlight that falls upon it). The albedo range of the lunar maria is between 0.05 and 0.08. The brighter highlands have an albedo range from 0.09 to 0.15. Anorthosite Rocks rich in the mineral feldspar, making up much of the Moon’s bright highland regions. Aperture The diameter of a telescope’s objective lens or primary mirror. Apogee The point in the Moon’s orbit where it is furthest from the Earth. At apogee, the Moon can reach a maximum distance of 406,700 km from the Earth. Apollo The manned lunar program of the United States. Between July 1969 and December 1972, six Apollo missions landed on the Moon, allowing a total of 12 astronauts to explore its surface. Asteroid A minor planet. A large solid body of rock in orbit around the Sun. Banded crater A crater that displays dusky linear tracts on its inner walls and/or floor. 250 Basalt A dark, fine-grained volcanic rock, low in silicon, with a low viscosity. Basaltic material fills many of the Moon’s major basins, especially on the near side. Glossary Basin A very large circular impact structure (usually comprising multiple concentric rings) that usually displays some degree of flooding with lava. The largest and most conspicuous lava- flooded basins on the Moon are found on the near side, and most are filled to their outer edges with mare basalts.
  • A History of Cynicism

    A History of Cynicism

    A HISTORY OF CYNICISM Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com A HISTORY OF CYNICISM From Diogenes to the 6th Century A.D. by DONALD R. DUDLEY F,llow of St. John's College, Cambrid1e Htmy Fellow at Yale University firl mll METHUEN & CO. LTD. LONDON 36 Essex Street, Strand, W.C.2 Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com First published in 1937 PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN Downloaded from https://www.holybooks.com PREFACE THE research of which this book is the outcome was mainly carried out at St. John's College, Cambridge, Yale University, and Edinburgh University. In the help so generously given to my work I have been no less fortunate than in the scenes in which it was pursued. I am much indebted for criticism and advice to Professor M. Rostovtseff and Professor E. R. Goodonough of Yale, to Professor A. E. Taylor of Edinburgh, to Professor F. M. Cornford of Cambridge, to Professor J. L. Stocks of Liverpool, and to Dr. W. H. Semple of Reading. I should also like to thank the electors of the Henry Fund for enabling me to visit the United States, and the College Council of St. John's for electing me to a Research Fellowship. Finally, to• the unfailing interest, advice and encouragement of Mr. M. P. Charlesworth of St. John's I owe an especial debt which I can hardly hope to repay. These acknowledgements do not exhaust the list of my obligations ; but I hope that other kindnesses have been acknowledged either in the text or privately.

  • Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-48303-2 — the Moon in the Greek and Roman Imagination Karen Ní Mheallaigh Index More Information

    Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-48303-2 — The Moon in the Greek and Roman Imagination Karen ní Mheallaigh Index More Information Index Achilles’ shield. See Homer Callimachus, – Aëtius, – celestial bowls, – Aglaonice, – Cicero, Somnium Scipionis, –, , See Alcmaeon of Croton, , – selēnoskopia (or ‘view from Moon’) Alcman Cleomedes, , Partheneia (Maiden Songs), – cognitive estrangement. See selēnoskopia (view from Alexander of Abonouteichos, – Moon) amphiphōntes, Colin Webster, , – analogical drift, Corinna, – Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, , –, –, cup of Helios, – Cyrano de Bergerac, , n Anaximander of Miletus, – Anaximenes of Miletus, – Demetrius Triclinius, n, , – Ancient Greek calendar, See also parapēgmata Democritus of Abdera, –, Antiphanes of Berge, – Diogenes of Apollonia, antiphraxis, – dioptra. See Lucian, True Stories Antonius Diogenes, The incredible things beyond Thule earthshine, – and scholarly hoax, – Earthy Moon Theory (EMT), –, –, and the Arctic, – See Plutarch, De facie and the Moon, – problems/challenges, , – narrative complexity, – eclipse Apollo Noumēnios, lunar eclipse, – Apuleius mechanism of eclipse, – lunam despumari, – solar eclipse, , – Aristarchus of Samos, , Empedocles of Acragas, –, , – Aristotle Empedotimus, fire creatures on the Moon, – Endymiones, , – on nature of Moon, Ennius’ dream, – theory of elements, Epimenides of Crete, – Astraeus, Eratosthenes of Cyrene, astral travel. See soul projection Hermes. See selēnoskopia (or ‘view from astronomical observation, , See mountains Moon’) astronomy
  • The Mechanical Problems in the Corpus of Aristotle

    The Mechanical Problems in the Corpus of Aristotle

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department Classics and Religious Studies July 2007 The Mechanical Problems in the Corpus of Aristotle Thomas Nelson Winter University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/classicsfacpub Part of the Classics Commons Winter, Thomas Nelson, "The Mechanical Problems in the Corpus of Aristotle" (2007). Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department. 68. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/classicsfacpub/68 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Classics and Religious Studies at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications, Classics and Religious Studies Department by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Th e Mechanical Problems in the Corpus of Aristotle Th omas N. Winter Lincoln, Nebraska • 2007 Translator’s Preface. Who Wrote the Mechanical Problems in the Aristotelian Corpus? When I was translating the Mechanical Problems, which I did from the TLG Greek text, I was still in the fundamentalist authorship mode: that it survives in the corpus of Aristotle was then for me prima facie Th is paper will: evidence that Aristotle was the author. And at many places I found in- 1) off er the plainest evidence yet that it is not Aristotle, and — 1 dications that the date of the work was apt for Aristotle. But eventually, 2) name an author. I saw a join in Vitruvius, as in the brief summary below, “Who Wrote Th at it is not Aristotle does not, so far, rest on evidence.
  • Chapter Two Democritus and the Different Limits to Divisibility

    Chapter Two Democritus and the Different Limits to Divisibility

    CHAPTER TWO DEMOCRITUS AND THE DIFFERENT LIMITS TO DIVISIBILITY § 0. Introduction In the previous chapter I tried to give an extensive analysis of the reasoning in and behind the first arguments in the history of philosophy in which problems of continuity and infinite divisibility emerged. The impact of these arguments must have been enormous. Designed to show that rationally speaking one was better off with an Eleatic universe without plurality and without motion, Zeno’s paradoxes were a challenge to everyone who wanted to salvage at least those two basic features of the world of common sense. On the other hand, sceptics, for whatever reason weary of common sense, could employ Zeno-style arguments to keep up the pressure. The most notable representative of the latter group is Gorgias, who in his book On not-being or On nature referred to ‘Zeno’s argument’, presumably in a demonstration that what is without body and does not have parts, is not. It is possible that this followed an earlier argument of his that whatever is one, must be without body.1 We recognize here what Aristotle calls Zeno’s principle, that what does not have bulk or size, is not. Also in the following we meet familiar Zenonian themes: Further, if it moves and shifts [as] one, what is, is divided, not being continuous, and there [it is] not something. Hence, if it moves everywhere, it is divided everywhere. But if that is the case, then everywhere it is not. For it is there deprived of being, he says, where it is divided, instead of ‘void’ using ‘being divided’.2 Gorgias is talking here about the situation that there is motion within what is.
  • Aristoxenus Elements of Rhythm: Text, Translation, and Commentary with a Translation and Commentary on Poxy 2687

    Aristoxenus Elements of Rhythm: Text, Translation, and Commentary with a Translation and Commentary on Poxy 2687

    © 2009 Christopher C. Marchetti ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ARISTOXENUS ELEMENTS OF RHYTHM: TEXT, TRANSLATION, AND COMMENTARY WITH A TRANSLATION AND COMMENTARY ON POXY 2687 by CHRISTOPHER C. MARCHETTI A Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School-New Brunswick Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in Classics written under the direction of Prof. Thomas Figueira and approved by ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ New Brunswick, New Jersey May, 2009 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Aristoxenus’ Elements of Rhythm: Text, Translation, and Commentary with a Translation and Commentary on POxy 2687 By Christopher C. Marchetti Dissertation Director: Prof. Thomas Figueira Aristoxenus of Tarentum makes productive use of Aristotelian concepts and methods in developing his theory of musical rhythm in his treatise Elements of Rhythm. He applies the Aristotelian distinction between form and material and the concept of hypothetical necessity to provide an explanation for why musical rhythm is manifested in the syllables of song, the notes of melody, and the steps of dance. He applies the method of formulating differentiae, as described in Aristotle’s Parts of Animals, to codify the formal properties of rhythm. Aristoxenus’ description of the rhythmic foot presents several interpretive challenges. Our text is fragmentary, and we lack Aristoxenus’ definitions of several key terms. This study seeks to establish the meanings of these terms on the basis of a close examination of the structure of Aristoxenus’ argument. Parallel passages in Aristides Quintilianus’ On Music are considered in detail for ii their consistency or lack thereof with Aristoxenian usage.
  • Anaximander's Ἄπειρον

    Anaximander's Ἄπειρον

    1 Pulished in: Ancient Philosophy Volume 39, Issue 1, Spring 2019 Anaximander’s ἄπειρον: from the Life-world to the Cosmic Event Horizon Norman Sieroka Pages 1-22 https://doi.org/10.5840/ancientphil2019391 1 Current affiliation of author (July 2020): Theoretische Philosophie, Universität Bremen www.uni-bremen.de/theophil/sieroka Abstract Scholars have claimed repeatedly that Anaximander’s notion of the ἄπειρον marks the first metaphysical concept, or even the first theoretical entity, in Western thought. The present paper scrutinizes this claim. Characterizing natural phenomena as ἄπειρος— that is, as being inexhaustible or untraversable by standard human means—was common in daily practice, especially when referring to landmasses and seas but also when referring to vast numbers of countable objects. I will deny the assumption that Anaximander’s notion started off as being a theoretical answer to a specific philosophical question. That said, the aforementioned everyday notion of ἄπειρος could still lead to the development of theoretical concepts. Based on the observations Anaximander did with seasonal sundials, the inexhaustible landmasses and seas just mentioned became depicted on his world map by means of concentric circles. These circles then marked the bounds of experience and, by being fixed and finite, suggested the possibility of traversing beyond what is directly experienced. Evaluating claims from recent Anaximander scholarship, the paper ends with a brief comparison with concepts from modern physics which play an analogous role of demarcating the bounds of experience. Anaximander’s ἄπειρον: from the Life-world to the Cosmic Event Horizon Norman Sieroka Interest in Anaximander (c. 610-c. 547 BC) has increased in recent years.
  • Plato's Basic Metaphysical Argument Against Hedonism and Aristotle's Presentation of It at Eudemian Ethics 6.11

    Plato's Basic Metaphysical Argument Against Hedonism and Aristotle's Presentation of It at Eudemian Ethics 6.11

    Plato's Basic Metaphysical Argument against Hedonism David Wolfsdorf and Aristotle's Presentation of It at Eudemian Ethics 6.11 1. Introduction At Eudemian Ethics 6.11 (= Nicomachean Ethics 7.11) Aristotle introduces several views that others hold regarding pleasure's value. In particular I draw your attention to the following one. Aristotle writes that some believe that: A. No pleasure is a good thing, either in itself or incidentally. οὐδεµία ἡδονὴ εἶναι ἀγαθόν, οὔτε καθ᾽ αὑτὸ οὔτε κατὰ συµβεβηκός. (1152b8-9) Aristotle proceeds to give several reasons for this position. One is that: R. Every pleasure is a perceived genesis toward a nature, but no genesis is of the same kind as its ends, for example no building of a house is of the same kind as a house. (1152b13-15) πᾶσα ἡδονὴ γένεσίς ἐστιν εἰς φύσιν αἰσθητή, οὐδεµία δὲ γένεσις συγγενὴς τοῖς τέλεσιν, οἷον οὐδεµία οἰκοδόµησις οἰκίᾳ. Who are the believers of A and R that Aristotle is reporting? I suggest that the evidence leads us back to Plato's Philebus. There a view very similar to R is developed, and a view very similar to A is argued to depend on it. That the views Aristotle here reports can be traced back to Plato does not confirm that Plato himself held them. An argument is always necessary when inferring from a thesis stated or advanced in some Platonic text to a thesis maintained by Plato himself. But— setting that problem aside— I also said that A and R are "very similar to," I did not say that they were identical to the views expressed in Plato's Philebus.