#presocratic

Democritus of Abdera – Scientist of the Day

Democritus of Abdera, a pre-Socratic philosopher of ancient Greece, lived from about 460 B.C.E to about 370 B.C.E.  

Cover to John Palmer’s Parmenides & Presocratic Philosophy (unknown artist/designer, 2009).

Empedocles – Scientist of the Day

Empedocles, a Greek pre-Socratic natural philosopher, lived and wrote sometime around 440 B.C.E; he was probably born around 490 and died about 434 B.C.E. 

There once lived a man who was a religious leader, a mystic, a mathematician, and a founder of a political movement who became an almost legendary figure within his life time. This man of course is Pythagoras, and he did all of these things through the founding of the Pythagorean School in what is now southern Italy. Specifically, the school was founded in a city called Croton and this was the epicenter of Pythagoras’s philosophical career. Despite this, he was born in Samos which was a city in Ionia.

Samos was a commercial rival to Miletus and much of the same societal pressures that informed what we know about the Milesian school also apply to Pythagoras. Definitively little is known about Pythagoras or what his disciples actually did or believed. It is well established that Pythagoras was born in Samos and he left for Croton after a disagreement with a local tyrant. However according to legend, Pythagoras met Thales of Miletus who told him to travel to Egypt.

 In Egypt Pythagoras discovered his love of mathematics when he marveled at the size and architectural wonder of the pyramids. Also, according to legend, he was in Alexandria when the city was captured by Persians and he was taken prisoner. While he was imprisoned by the Persians, he was brought to Babylon. The Persian captors allegedly were so amazed at his brilliance that they made him a teacher and eventually let him go. When Pythagoras returned to Samos, he found that the city had changed, and he went to Italy for a new life. Personally, I agree with Bertrand Russel that this is likely false. Without a doubt Pythagoras came into contact with Egyptian, Persian, and Babylonian ideas as well as being steeped in the Homeric and Hesiodic mythology. He was also likely aware of the ideas and theories of the Milesian school. Unlike Thales, Pythagoras believed the earth was round which might lead one to think he was more influenced by Egyptian science than his predecessors. The discovery is sometimes attributed to him but it is more likely he learned it from the Egyptians.

Another cultural trend that definitively influenced Pythagoras was the Orphic mystery religion which is a spin off of the Dionysian cults. Orphism was an ascetic movement and likely a reaction to the wildness of the cult of Dionysius. The movement was centered around a creation myth involving Dionysius. The story goes that Zeus had an affair with Persephone which made Hera jealous. Zeus also proposed that the baby should be the ruler of the universe, this was too much. She gave the baby to the Titans who devoured him. Some versions of the story exclude Hera and say that the Titans acted in their own accord. Athena saved the heart of Dionysius and gave it to Zeus. Zeus then swallowed the heart and struck the Titans with a lightning bolt. Dionysius was reborn and the ashes of the Titans formed humans. This gave humans a dual nature, part Titan and part Dionysian. The Orphic religion centered around this dualism and focused primarily on purification rights. The Orphic believed in reincarnation and their ultimate goal was to break free from the cycle of rebirth to be purely divine (Dionysian). Burnet and Russel agree that this belief was independent of the Hindu concept of reincarnation.

Some important things to consider are that the Orphic view of Dionysius is different than what people in the cult of Dionysius thought about him. The beliefs of this group also centered around a poet who likely did not exist named Orpheus. Orpheus died and descended to the underworld where he learned all of this but he was later resurrected. Orpheus taught that the purification rites of the cult would purify a person of their Titan aspect and they would saved. The Orphic concept of reincarnation and breaking free from the cycle of death and rebirth is centered around salvation from the evil Titan nature that was inherited. This is different from the Eastern conception of reincarnation which is not focused on salvation but specifically with the Buddhists it is centered around enlightenment.

The Pythagorean cult was also centered around purity and believed in reincarnation. There is a great deal of debate as to what the rules of being a member of this society were, despite not knowing exactly what they were the Orphic concept of purification is likely the origin of this. Burnet in his work Greek Philosophy: Thales to Plato indicates that Pythagoras also put Apollo at the center of his pantheon rather than Dionysius. It was this religious movement along with the scientific accomplishments of the Egyptians, Babylonians, and Persians that provide the framework for understanding the ideas of the Pythagorean school. Bertrand Russel calls Pythagoras one of the most important men in history and the shear number of references to him by the Socratic era philosophers alone is enough to corroborate this claim. When analyzing a figure from history with no surviving works such the Milesians or Pythagoras we must focus on how often their contemporaries make references to them and what they are saying.

 Pythagoras is particularly noteworthy in this respect because he started a movement that was incredibly secretive and tight knit. So much so that it would be improper to discuss his ideas independent of his school. Given that the inner workings of the Pythagorean community which are not specifically known, many historians and commentators argue that anything they produced should be viewed in light of the community rather than the individual. The Pythagoreans were progressive for their time as they included women and some legends indicate that Pythagoras learned what he knew from the Oracle at Delphi. A single phrase that has been ascribed to Pyhtagoras incapsulates what people often attribute as the Pythagorean belief system.

“All things are numbers”

The Pythagoreans are unique this respect because at the time mathematics was not centered around arithmetic. The ancient conception of mathematics was centered around geometry and shapes, so the decision for this group of people to focus on numerical values was a departure from the norm in its own right. Even though Pythagoras and his followers likely did not discover the Pythagorean theorem, it is sometimes argued that the formula was their discovery. They solved for all possible right triangles that could ever exist. The Egyptians likely knew how to find the size of a hypotenuse on a triangle but did not have a numerical formula for doing so. Readers must consider that the number system we currently use did not exist in the minds of the Greek people, who likely did not even have a concept of zero. Arithmetic, especially at the level of the Pythagoreans, is extremely difficult when one does not even have a zero. The Pythagoreans also attributed numerical values to things such as music, which at the time tuning instruments and notes were done by ear and not by specific values. Because of this, the eight stringed lyre is sometimes attributed to the Pythagoreans.

There are many ideas and accomplishments attributed to Pythagoras but given that he was believed to be a divine man capable of preforming miracles even in his own lifetime, it is difficult to get facts about this person. I definitely feel as though this article is incomplete and that there is much more things to consider when talking about Pythagoras. Along with Thales and the Milesians, I hope to make continual references to Pythagoras in hopes of paining a more complete picture of this legendary thinker.

Suggested Readings and Sources:

All of these sources are available online free

Xenophanes was born in Colophon, a city in Ionia, during the sixth century BCE. The dating of his life is not exact however in his surviving fragments he referred to the Greco-Persian war as an event that occurred in his life while Heraclitus referred to him the past tense. This gives us a window of when he probably lived. Like other Ionic Greek speaking people, he would have been aware of the Milesian school and foreign sciences such as Egyptian geometry and Babylonian astronomy. However, these are not the topics he is known for addressing. When Xenophanes was relocated, he went to what is now Sicily and later to what is now southern Italy, Elea to be exact. This is rather similar to what Pythagoras did and Xenophanes did in fact live around the same time that he did. Despite these similarities, there is no reason to think that the two thinkers met. Pythagoras was famous within his own life time and it would be fair to argue that at least Xenophanes knew of him. It is also important to recall that the Orphic mystery religion was influential in this region at the time. Little is known about Xenophanes and there is some speculation as to why that is, Aristotle did not like Xenophanes and said he was more of a theological theorist rather than a student of nature. Despite the fact that Xenophanes’s fragments indicate his interest in topics such as nature. Aristotle basically said he wasn’t a philosopher and was incredibly dismissive of his ideas. Xenophanes was incredibly unpopular in his own time as well, when you consider what his main tenants were this does not come as a surprise.

Imagine rural Texas, a place where there are people who are quite religious and really enjoy sports such as football. The culture of some towns in rural Texas revolve around the church and the local sports teams. Now imagine the kind of person who not only mocks these beliefs but claims his beliefs are better. This is the kind of person that Xenophanes was, and I hope the analogy sheds light on just how breath takingly unpopular he was. Xenophanes was an ardent critic of Greek religion and in some respects, he was a critic of the Greek ideal and culture at large. Comparing Greek athletics to Texan’s love of football does not do justice to how much the Greeks valued athleticism. Achilles, the hero of the Iliad, was often considered the ideal person and he was a warrior as well as a talented athlete. Odysseus was also a remarkably gifted archer. The high value on athleticism went beyond the poems of Hesiod and Homer, by the time of Xenophanes the ancient Olympics had been occurring for over two hundred years. I cannot emphasize enough how important religion and sports were in Greek life. Xenophanes criticized all of this.

Although Aristotle would say that Xenophanes was not a philosopher, he would not contest that he was a theologian and a poet. Philologists have been able to accurately determine if a fragment is a quote directly from Xenophanes or merely a paraphrased segment because of his poetic writing style. Xenophanes tended to write in hexameters and iambic trimeters. Directly from the fragments we know that the chief criticism that Xenophanes had of the Greek mythos was that people’s gods look a lot like they do. The gods of the Ethiopians looked Ethiopian, the gods of the Thracians looked Thracian, and the Greek gods sure looked Greek. He went so far as to claim that if horses had gods that they would look like horses. The significance and meaning behind these statements were not lost to the Greek people of the day. They understood that Xenophanes was questioning the validity of their beliefs. It could even be argued that he meant the poems of Hesiod and Homer were not ancient truths but the ramblings of ordinary men.

Xenophanes himself is reported to have been a monotheist, and from this, contemporary scholars have concluded that his criticism of the epic poets was not rooted in a criticism in supernatural belief but particularly anthropomorphizing God. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy points out that Xenophanes took particular issue with the gods being portrayed as profane and having flawed character like ordinary men. The idea that the supreme deity of the universe would cheat on his spouse and then lash out in anger at getting caught was especially profane. Xenophanes believed that God was good and above the flaws of humankind.

Although many writers state that Xenophanes was a monotheist, this is a contested point in history. Despite the fact that it would have been unusual for a Greek to have been a monotheist, monotheism was not an unusual idea at this point in history. The Persians who were typically practitioners of the Zoroastrian religion were monotheists, and an Ionian like Xenophanes would have a higher likelihood of encountering their ideas. Also, the second temple era of the Jewish religion was developed at this point, the diaspora in Babylon ended with Persian Emperor Cyrus the Great’s reign, and the second temple period was prominently monotheistic. Some alternatives to the monotheistic view of Xenophanes would be that he supported a particular brand of Greek religion or that he was an atheist. I think that it is unlikely he was an atheist because later philosophers were atheists and writers of the time took significant note of it. The absence of mentioning that Xenophanes was an atheist would indicate that he is not an atheist.

Discussions of ancient philosophy often invoke mental images of men with beards wearing white robes and challenging the status quo. People may even think of Athens when they imagine what ancient philosophical discourse must have been like. From our previous discussions you would know that a lot of the philosophical discourse was occurring in Ionia and what is now southern Italy. So far, the only mention of Athenian philosophy was the likely apocryphal tale of an older Parmenides meeting a young man named Socrates. It also goes without saying that philosophy to this point has been profoundly influenced by religion which deviates from the typical conception of philosophers.

Anaxagoras is different from other pre-Socratic philosophers in that the more iconic image of an antagonistic Athenian is a near perfect representation. He was born in Ionia under Persian occupation and he flourished during the period of time between the Greco-Persian war and the Peloponnesian war. He moved to Athens and where the majority of his teaching occurred. He taught Pericles, an important leader in Athenian history, and Archelaus who may have taught Socrates. Both of these students will be the topic of later discussion.

He was heavily influenced by what could be called the more rationalistic teachings that were popular in Ionia. Out of the Milesian school, Anaximenes is considered the most influential thinker on Anaxagoras. A close second would be Parmenides because much like Empedocles, the philosophy of Anaxagoras is a reaction to the Parmenidean view of monism. Scholars are not sure if Empedocles or Anaxagoras were aware of each other’s work. Traditionally Empedocles is considered to have written first but none of the scholarship indicates that Anaxagoras got his ideas from Empedocles. Despite both being put into the category of pluralists, they have incredibly different views. Anaxagoras’s contemporaries found that the most controversial aspect of his views were his ideas about astronomy. He was banished from Athens after being charged with impiety for teaching that the sun and moon were objects rather than divine beings. He taught that the sun was a fiery rock and much larger than the area around Athens. There is some evidence that he was actually banished for his political ties to Pericles, but other scholars indicate that he was apolitical and was actively uninvolved in day to day life. Still, he could have been banished for his association with Pericles whether or not he was a political figure.

In the generations shortly following Anaxagoras people were more focused on a different aspect of his philosophy, specifically Plato and Aristotle talked about his ideas about Mind (Nous). In the Platonic dialogues Socrates mentions that the idea of Mind is impressive and interesting but that he was disappointed that Anaxagoras did not do much with the concept. Socrates specifically says that Anaxagoras did not go so far as developing a teleology based on mind and Aristotle stated that Anaxagoras only used Mind as a mechanical device. In Anaxagorean pluralism, Mind holds a very special position and Guthrie mentions that the conception of an incorporeal mind was a serious breakthrough in Greek thought. Anaxagoras thought that initially the universe was a homogenous mixture and that Nous (Mind) set the world in motion with an initial push. Guthrie compares this to the first cause argument that is common in Christian circles today. The homogenous mixture differentiated after Mind gave an initial push giving order to the world we live in.

Anaxagorean mixture is based on Parmenidean ideas such as that things cannot come into reality or cease to exist, and that there is no empty space. Anaxagoras seemed to be very interested in seeds which in Greek (Romanized) is called Sperma. His conception of a seed is different than the English word because it includes eggs and sperm cells, although he would not have used such exact terms Greeks did know that semen was necessary for babies. The idea is that inside a seed would be everything necessary for a tree or life to grow. He stated that everything is in everything, and the homogenous mixture was like a seed. Consequently, when Mind caused that mixture to differentiate nothing is being created or changing because it is just a rearrangement of something that already existed. Anaxagoras may not have used such an explanation to describe his ideas and Barnes in his work Pre-Socratic Philosophers offers more notes on the translation of Anaxagoras’s ideas. Anaxagoras is mentioned in contemporary scholarship as being particularly difficult to understand and some writers such as Bertrand Russell outright do not mention a great deal of his ideas, specifically Russell does not mention seeds when most other works do.

Despite some confusion over certain concepts and their significance, it is clear that Anaxagoras would not have understood his work through the lens of particles. He thought that things could be infinitely divided and that there were no discrete things. You cannot hold a pure piece of gold or a cup of pure blood because everything is in all things. In the context of reading other thinkers, this is the most important idea to take away. Anaxagoras thought that everything was a homogenous mixture and that Mind only allows arrangement or order of the mixture, which would explain why we perceive a diverse reality despite the fact that there can be no change. It is particularly important to remember this when reading the Atomist philosophers.

Elaborating on Anaxagoras’s immediate influence, he had two students that are mentioned by historians. Pericles who was an Athenian politician who will be discussed in a later article. Archelaus was also a pre-Socratic philosopher and is credited with continuing Anaxagoras’s intellectual legacy after his banishment. There is almost no information about his life and work outside of a few brief mentions by historians such as Diogenes Laertius and Pseudo-Plutarch. He is sometimes credited with being Socrates’s teacher, but Xenophon, Plato, and Aristotle do not give him credit for this. I have not found any primary or secondary text that elaborates on Archelaus, but if I find one then I will make a post amending this.

Thank you for reading and feel free to leave a comment.

Suggested readings

Early Greek Philosophy – John Burnet

Greek Philosophy: Thales to Plato – John Burnet

The History of Western Philosophy – Bertrand Russel

History of Philosophy – William Turner

A History of Philosophy, volume 1 – Frederick Copleston

Pre-Socratic Philosophers – Jonathan Barnes

A Brief Illustrated History of Philosophy – Anthony Kenny