Greek Philosophy

What is Philosophy?

            Philosophy has been a part of human race. Every period, every place, different philosophers with different ideas arose. Great thinkers like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Pythagoras, Parmenides and more others contributed great ideas to Philosophy. However, many people at present do not really understand what Philosophy is. Indeed, it is hard to know the real essence of Philosophy without critical thinking. Some people also attempted to find its essence, yet they failed. What really is Philosophy? Philosophy is the rational, critical and logical manner of understanding the underlying principles and causes behind being. Moreover, it started in ancient Greece, particularly during the time of Thales of Melitus. Starting from his time, many great thinkers arose and started to philosophize. In this paper, I attempt to summarize Ancient Greek Philosophy to find out why I arrived at that such definition of philosophy. This paper tries to answer the question “What is Philosophy?”

            Philosophy started in the time of Thales of Miletus. But how did Thales begin Philosophy? Well, he started Philosophy by demythologizing. In other words, he does not believe on myths. Moreover, he believed that the source of all things is just one and it is water, not the gods. He arrived at this conclusion by his scientific observation in this world because he wanted to know the real truth. Hence, he had observed that water is present in all things; trees, animals, rocks and other more. Thus, he believed that water is the source of all things.

            After Thales, a new Philosopher named “Anaximander” arose. Anaximander criticized Thales’ idea that water is the source of all things. He reasoned out that it is not possible that one of the basic elements (earth, fire, water, air) is the source of all things because too much of one element destroys the other element. For example, too much water destroys fire; too much fire destroys water; and too much air destroys fire. Hence, for Anaximander, the source of all things is what he called the “unbounded”. The unbounded is something that is infinite. For example, the seasons of this world, summer and winter infinitely changes. The cycle of it is infinite. However, Anaximander didn’t really further explained what the “unbounded” really is.

            After Anaximander, Anaximenes arose. Anaximenes also was searching for the origin of all things in this world. And then, he found out and believed that the source of all things is one of the basic elements --- it is air. We have noticed that Anaximenes’ idea is like the idea of Thales. But, even though Anaximenes’ idea is like the idea of Thales that one of the basic element is the source of all things, Philosophy still progressed. Anaximenes explained and gave reasons why air is the source of all things. Anaximenes mentioned about change. He stated that when air is condensed, it becomes water, then to earth to rock. When air is rarefied, it becomes fire. Condensation and rarefaction are both acting on air. Condensation and rarefaction is the reason why air changes to another matter, but in the end, it is still air.

            Thales, Anaximander and Anaximenes are the three Milesian Philosophers who really started Philosophy. In there ideas, as what I have mentioned above, we can notice that their basic question is “what is the origin of all things?” And as I have observed, they arrived at different answer in searching for it. Thales believed that the source of all things is water, Anaximander believed that it is the “unbounded” and Anaximenes believed that it is air. Thus, in the time of the Milesians, Philosophy had focused on the search for the physical principle of being.

            After the three Milesian Philosophers (Thales, Anaximander & Anaximenes), Pythagoras, a new Philosopher came. Pythagoras is a mathematician. Like the Milesian Philosophers, Pythagoras also has an idea of being. However, his idea of being is different from the idea of being of the three Milesian Philosophers. Pythagoras looked reality as conceptual. In other words, he looked being beyond the tangible or physical things. For him, everything has a principle behind it and it is numbers. Moreover, for Pythagoras, reality or being has a structure or skeleton that makes it exist. Furthermore, being has an exact ratio of its components. For example: in constructing a building, there is an exact amount or ration of cement, sand and rocks for its good foundation and another exact amount or ration of cement, sand and rocks for its post. These exact amount or ration of cement, sand and rocks in the building make the building stand and exist. If the amount of cement, sand and rocks is not exact, the building will collapse and will not exist anymore. For Pythagoras, this idea applies to all things in reality.

            After Pythagoras, here is Heraclitus. A little information, Heraclitus is often called “The dark Riddler” or “The dark philosopher”. Heraclitus had contributed to philosophy through his idea of the Logos and change. For him, Logos govern the cosmos and it is common to all things. In other words, there is the principle of the  order and organization of all things in this world. To further explain, Logos here means “unity of opposites”. Opposites work together to maintain balance in this world. Examples of opposites are light and darkness, happiness and sadness, hot and cold, life and death. These opposites maintain the equilibrium because if they do not, it would be unimaginable. If there is only light and no darkness, how can light be defined? If there is only happiness and no sadness, how can happiness be defined? If there is only life and no death, how can life be defined? If there is only hot and no cold, how can hot be defined? In short, we cannot define something without its opposite because its opposite gives meaning to it; death is the absence of life, cold is the absence of hot and so on. However, Logos is experienced by human beings but humans are not aware or they do not understand it. To understand it, one must think of himself in a form of meditation.

            Moreover, Heraclitus also mentioned about change. For him, reality is change. In other words, all things in this world change because there is no permanence in this world. As what has been stated, “Whatever lives, lives by the destruction of something else. Fire lives the death of air, and air of fire; water lives the death of earth that of water” (Guthrie 44). This means that all things live because of the destruction of others and will die later for the life of others. To explain further, I shall give an example: a baby was born, then he becomes a young child, to a teenager and to and adult, to an old man, and later, he dies. This proves that change does exist. Overall, Heraclitus’ concept of reality is all about the Logos (unity of opposites) and change.

            After Heraclitus, a new philosopher named Parmenides came. As what I have read on the works of Parmenides, there are ways of inquiry. The first way is the way of truth; the one that IT IS, and it is not possible for IT NOT TO BE (Freeman 42). To further explain, truth or being is anything that we think of.  Truth is present in our minds. For example, when we see a table, we focus on that object and think of it. Hence, we know that such table exists. . Or even if we haven’t experienced an object yet, if we think of it, it means that it exists.  The second is the one that IT IS NOT, and that IT is bound NOT TO BE (Freeman 42). This second path is a path that cannot be explored. “You could recognise that which is NOT, nor express it” (Freeman 42). Moreover, this second way of inquiry is unthinkable because to know something that IT IS NOT or nothingness includes the process of thinking. In other words to further explain, thinking of nothing is impossible because as what I have mentioned above, if we think of something means that something exists. Thinking is intentional. Therefore, this IT IS NOT or nothingness is not possible.

            A contrary to Heraclitus’ idea, Parmenides do not believe on change, instead he substituted it by the word non-being. For him, IT IS is being and IT IS NOT is non-being and what was mentioned above, nothingness is not possible. Change is not possible because, according to Parmenides, reality is one and fixed. There are no spaces between that may cause motion. For him, motion or change is just an illusion. Moreover, Parmenides believed that reality or being has no generation and no destruction because for him, it is not possible for IT IS NOT to be IT IS. In other words, IT IS will always be IT IS and IT IS NOT will always be IT IS NOT.

            To sum up the whole of Parmenides’ idea, he believed that: 1. There is no Plurality. 2. There is no void or empty space. 3. There is no generation or destruction. 4. There is no motion or change.

            To further explain Parmenides' idea through application, Zeno, his student, made some paradoxes. Zeno mentioned that Achilles cannot defeat a tortoise in a run race. For Zeno, reality comprises of infinite points. This infinite points, is the infinite halves. To make it clear, if our goal is to pass through 1 kilometer, we must pass through 500 meters first, and before reaching the 500 meters, we must pass through the 250 meters first, and so on. So, if Achilles gives a one meter “partida” for the tortoise, every infinite point that the tortoise had passed, Achilles must also pass through those infinite points. However, it is impossible to pass through “infinite” points. Thus, Achilles can never overtake the tortoise. Also, in reaching the finish line, they must also pass through the “infinite” points. Therefore, in the end, no one wins.

            We can observe that Heraclitus' and Parmenides' concept of reality is opposing. But, even though they're idea about change and permanence is contrary to each other, they also have similar ideas. Both of them believed that reality is only one. In other words, there is no plurality. Also, both of them believed that our senses are not reliable to arrive at truth. In other words, what we see, hear, smell, touch and taste are not true. For them, they are just an illusion.

            As time passes by, the pluralist namely Empedocles and Anaxagoras, stood up and responded to Heraclitus' change and Parmenides' permanence. Their concept of being or reality is somewhat a combination or a synthesis of Heraclitus' change and Parmenides' permanence. They are called pluralists because unlike Parmenides, they do not believe that there is no plurality. In other words, for them, being or reality is not only one.

            The first pluralist, Empedocles, in relation to Parmenides' permanence, believed that there is permanence in this world because IT IS will always be IT IS and IT IS NOT will always be IT IS NOT. He also mentioned the four elements. According to him, the four basic elements (fire, air, water, earth) are permanent in this world. In other words, the four basic elements are already here in this world. They are not created and cannot be destroyed. Thus, they are permanent.

            Moreover, Empedocles, in relation to Heraclitus' idea, also believed about motion or change. As he observed reality, different kinds of matter mixed and later on, they will separate. This, he believed that it is because of what he call “Love” and “Strife”. According to him, “Love” is the reason why different things mix together and “Strife” is the cause of their separation. As what was stated in the book of John Burnet, “When Strife begins to enter the Sphere, Love is driven towards its centre, and the four elements (earth, fire, water and air) are gradually separated from one another” (73). However, there is also a reverse process. When Love expands, Strife is driven outwards and the form of matter or the four elements mix together; “Love expands and Strife is driven outwards, passing out of the Sphere once more in proportion a Love occupies more and more of it, just as air is expelled from the klepsyra when water enters it” (Burnet 73). For instance, water is formed through the combination of Hydrogen and Oxygen because of “Love”. Also, later on, these Hydrogen and Oxygen will separate because of “Strife”. For Empedocles, “Love” and “Strife” are forces that cause motion or change. Thus, motion or change really exists.

            The second pluralist is Anaxagoras. In relation to Parmenides' permanence, he also believed that permanence in this world exists because according to him, each thing composes of “all things”. In other words, the ingredients which are present in “all things” can be found in every thing in this world. For example, a cheese contains ingredients from cow, then it also contains substances from grass (because a cow eats grass), then it also contains minerals from the soil (because the grass absorbs minerals from soil), and so on. As we trace the chain, we can observe that it is really true that each thing composes “all things”. However, according to Anaxagoras, even if a particular thing is divided into the smallest piece, its being will still remain. For example, a chair is divided into the smallest piece, its being chair (its ingredient of being a chair) will still remain. Hence, Anaxagoras believed that permanence exists.

            In addition, Anaxagoras also believed about change, in relation to Heraclitus' change. According to him, motion or change exists because of the “Mind”. As what was stated: “And when Mind began to cause motion, separating off proceeded to occur from all that was moved, and all that Mind moved was separated apart, and as things were being moved and separated apart, the rotation caused much more separating to occur” (Fr. 13). The “Mind” is a force that causes things to move and to change. We can relate it to Empedocles' idea about “Love” and “Strife”. The “Mind” is like a God that causes all the movements in this world. As the “Mind” enters things may form or may move infinitely. Thus, according to Anaxagoras, motion or change really exists.

            To wrap up the whole point, Empedocles’ and Anaxagoras’ principle of reality a synthesis of Heraclitus’ change and Parmenides’ permanence in a way that Empedocles believed that there is change because of separation and mixture of substances through “Love” and “Strife”, and at the same time he believed that reality is fundamentally changeless for the reason that “what is” is, and “what is” does not come from “what is not”. Empedocles even mentioned that the four basic elements are permanent in this world. Moreover, Anaxagoras believed that motion or change has a source; it is the “Mind”. Also, in relation to Parmenides’ permanence, Anaxagoras believed that reality is permanently “One” for the reason that “every part would contain all things” (Burnet 780. Things in reality are related to each other.

            We see that Empedocles and Anaxagoras both mentioned about motion. However, they didn't really explain how things move. This will be further explained by the Atomists.

            Later on, the Atomists namely Leucippus and Democritus, stand with their ideas about the atoms. Atoms are the smallest matter in this world. According to them, all things are comprised by these so called atoms. These atoms have different shapes but can't be seen by our naked eyes. Like the Pluralist and Parmenides, the atomists also believed in permanence. For them, atoms are permanent in this world. They are not created and cannot also be destroyed. They stay in this world as it is.

            Additionally, the Atomists also believed in motion or change, in relation to Heraclitus' change. They believed that atoms with the same shape are arranged together to form a new position. This is why things in this world have different forms. Also, they believed that as the atoms arrange together, they move through the spaces between them. The spaces between them make them capable to move around because, to move, there must be a space. Henceforth, motion or change, according to them, exists.

            We have tackled about the ideas of Pre-Socratic Philosophers. As I see, the Pre-Socratic philosophers had different object of study. They have many differences. They have different understanding of being. Some philosophers, particularly the Milesians, were seeking for the physical origin of all things. Hence, they looked being in its physical matter or form. On the other hand, some philosophers like Heraclitus, Parmenides, Pythagoras and many more, looked being behind its physical form. To further explain, they looked being as conceptual.

            However, Philosophy is not conditioned by the object it tries to study. Also, it is not about their different answers to their different problems and questions. If we just focus on the answers of the Pre-Socratic Philosophers, it’s hard to get the whole point of what Philosophy is because their answers are different from one another. So, despite of the differences of the ideas of the Pre-Socratic Philosophers, let us now begin to look at the similarities of the Pre-Socratic Philosophers for us to understand what really makes up Philosophy. As we all see, they all began in wonder. As what Aristotle said, “It is through wonder that men now begin and originally began to philosophize; wondering in the first place at obvious perplexities, and then by gradual progression raising questions about greater matters too”. To wonder is common to all the Pre-Socratic Philosophers. The Milesian Philosophers were wondering what is the origin of all things. Moreover, the Philosophers after their time were also wondering what comprises being. However, they did not become Philosophers only because of wonder because all people are capable to wonder and to arrive at a certain answer. So, there must be special a commonality to all the Pre-Socratic Philosophers that not all people can have.

            Analyzing the ideas of the Pre-Socratic Philosophers, indeed they arrived at different answers. Yet, their manner of arriving to it seems the same. Upon arriving at a certain answer, they answered the questions “why and how being exists?” But they did not just simply answer the “why” and the “how” of being. All Pre-Socratic Philosophers were finding the principles behind being. They attempted to find out the first principles of being. Some believe that being comprises water or air. Some believe that being changes. Also, some believe that being is permanence. After arriving at such belief of the principles of being, all Pre-Socratic Philosophers were finding its first causes with the help of their rationality. In other words, they reasoned out how they arrived at such belief of principles. For instance, Empedocles believed that change exists because of “Love” and “Strife”. “Love” mixes different matters and “Strife” separates them. Hence, change exists. The first causes of the first principle “change” are “Love” and “Strife”. Upon arriving at first principles and first causes, all Pre-Socratic Philosophers used their rational, critical and logical thinking skills that not all human beings can do. They think rational in a way that they gave reasons to defend their point; critical in a way that they pass through a deep analysis to defend their answers. In other words, they did not easily arrive at their answer for they did a lot of study and scientific observation. They think logical in a way that they arrived in a conclusion with understanding of the premises.

            In conclusion, all men are capable of wondering and capable of arriving to a particular answer in a particular problem. However, unlike the Pre-Socratic Philosophers, not all men are capable of giving rational reasons why they arrive at a certain answer. On the other hand, the manner of the Pre-Socratic Philosophers is different. The Pre-Socratic Philosophers used their rational, critical and logical thinking skills to arrive at a particular answer and to give reasons behind the particular answer. Thus, Philosophy is a rational, critical and logical manner of understanding the underlying principles and causes behind being.