The Natural Philosophers
History of Philosophy 1
Question: What is the Main Substance of the Universe?
The early physicists of history lived in Miletus during the 5th and 6th centuries BC. This area, situated in present-day Turkey between Aydın and İzmir, was the residence of prominent philosophers like Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes. These philosophers pursued truth through careful observation of the natural world, utilizing methods such as reasoning, experimentation, and observation. Their endeavors earned them the distinction of being recognized as among the earliest scientists or physicists in history.
Some of the ideas put forth by these three thinkers still resonate with topics we discuss today, such as evolution, dark matter, and antimatter. It was actually Aristotle who bestowed upon them the title of “physicists.” However, before delving into their individual philosophies, it’s important to address a common theme among these three thinkers. This common theme revolves around the concept of “arkhe.”
Indeed, “arkhe” holds immense significance in ancient Greek philosophy, symbolizing the beginning, the first principle, the fundamental basis, and the origin of all things. This concept carries multiple meanings and implications, and its derivatives are found in various modern terms. For example, the term “anarchy” originates from “arkhe.” In Greek, the prefix “an-” denotes negation, so “an-arkhe,” or “anarchy,” translates to the absence of a central authority or ruler.
The connection between the concept of “arkhe” and the first physicists lies in their quest to understand the fundamental principles underlying the universe. These early philosophers, including Thales, sought to identify the basic substance or principle that governs all natural phenomena. By closely observing nature, they speculated that there must be a common underlying factor that accounts for the diversity and transformation observed in the world.
Thales
Thales is depicted as someone who is perpetually engrossed in observing the stars, often absent-minded, and seemingly disconnected from the world around him. In fact, there’s a tale where, lost in his celestial contemplations, Thales fails to notice a well right in front of him and accidentally falls into it.
One of the most captivating stories about Thales is recounted in Aristotle’s “Poetics.”
During that era there was a prevailing belief that philosophy served no practical purpose, and Thales, along with other philosophers, faced criticism due to their poverty. Relying on his expertise in the stars, Thales predicted a bountiful olive harvest for the upcoming season. He then astutely rented all the olive presses in the vicinity at remarkably low prices. When the predicted harvest indeed came to pass, everyone was astonished, and they had no choice but to rent the presses from Thales at exorbitant rates. This shrewd move resulted in Thales amassing great wealth. Addressing those who had criticized him, Thales explained that despite his philosophical knowledge enabling him to amass riches, wealth held no allure for him. It seems he delivered a powerful lesson to his detractors. Indeed, there are also considerable benefits to be gained from the study of astronomy and philosophy.
The origins of scientific inquiry often harken back to Thales, not merely due to his ability to forecast a solar eclipse in 585 BC or to determine a pyramid’s height by analyzing its shadow, but primarily because of his philosophical inquiries. Thales distinguished himself not by the solutions he offered, but by the profound questions he posed about nature. Rather than leaning on mythology or religious doctrines, he endeavored to elucidate natural phenomena based exclusively on observations of nature itself. Thales postulated that there must exist a fundamental substance underlying the manifold phenomena of the world, governed by a universal principle. This prompted his quest for the fundamental substance, known as the “arkhe.”
He believed that the fundamental substance underlying everything was water.
The Arkhe is Water.
Looking at it from today’s perspective, you might consider this answer to be quite naive. However, when you think about it, it’s not entirely illogical. After all, the survival of living organisms depends on water. Moreover, his time in Egypt would have exposed him to the centrality of the Nile River to life in the region. Another observation he made is that water can exist in three different states: gas, liquid, and solid, while retaining its essential properties. Can you imagine how excited Thales must have been with the conclusions he drew from these observations in the 6th century BC?
Anaximander
Anaximander was one of Thales’ students. He shared his mentor’s deep interest in the stars. He sought to create a map, suggesting that the world had a cylindrical shape. His insights are thoroughly examined in the history of philosophy. Bertrand Russell, in his work “The History of Philosophy,” argues that Anaximander is the most remarkable figure among the ancient Greek philosophers.
Anaximander refutes the idea that the entire universe could emerge from a singular tangible substance. He argues that the source of all things cannot be a physical object itself. This notion is indeed brilliant! He prompts us to ponder: if water serves as the foundational element for all things and everything derives from water, then where did the water itself originate?
He also proposed that everything in the universe exists alongside its opposite. When attempting to define the arkhe, or the fundamental principle, one immediately encounters its opposite. These opposing forces perpetually clash, leading to their mutual annihilation. Consequently, Anaximander concluded that the arkhe cannot be a tangible entity; rather, it must be abstract. He termed this abstract principle “apeiron.”
The Arkhe is the Apeiron.
“Apeiron” means boundless or infinite in Greek. According to Anaximander, if there is a struggle of opposites in the universe where opposites confront and transform each other, then the fundamental basis that prepares the ground for this “Cosmic Struggle” must be neutral. Anaximander was not understood by people of his time, and his philosophy was not generally accepted. Hence, it’s often said that Anaximander was a thinker far ahead of his time.
Let’s analyze Anaximander’s ideas in the context of modern scientific knowledge. One aspect is his understanding of the motion of matter. Anaximander offers intriguing insights into this concept. He proposes that the initial forms of life were marine organisms and suggests that humans evolved from these aquatic creatures through a process of motion. While he doesn’t explicitly employ the term “evolution,” his perspective presents an early form of evolutionary theory. Additionally, Anaximander challenges the prevailing belief in the divine creation of the world, asserting instead that the universe was not created but emerged through a process of evolution from a pre-existing state.
In the 1930s, an astrophysicist named Fritz Zwicky proposed the existence of something called dark matter in the universe. Dark matter cannot be directly observed, but we can think of it as a kind of framework that binds all the atoms in the universe together. Zwicky concluded that dark matter contributes additional mass to the universe, resulting in an extra gravitational force that sustains the structure of galaxies. Furthermore, the precise origin and composition of dark matter remain unknown. Now, when we compare this with what Anaximander articulated, it bears a resemblance to the concept of apeiron. It’s almost as if Anaximander anticipated this idea two and a half millennia ago. In this regard, a connection can be drawn between dark matter and apeiron. Do you agree with this perspective?
The other interesting point is Anaximander’s assertion that everything exists alongside its opposite. Because now we talk about antimatter, antiparticles. Matter and antimatter annihilate each other when they come together. I don’t want to extend this topic further now. The idea of associating or not associating the three points I mentioned concerning Anaximander — opposites, motion, and apeiron — with the issues debated in science today seems quite interesting to me. I think Anaximander is truly a remarkable thinker.
Anaximenes
Anaximenes, although not as captivating as Anaximander, presents ideas that distinguish him in his own right. Anaximenes likely recognized the significance of air as the essential element that supports all life. He proposed that the soul is composed of air and that fire is simply air that has been rarified.
The Arkhe is Air.
Anaximenes posited that when air undergoes condensation, it transforms into water, and upon further solidification, it transitions into earth. While this concept may not immediately captivate, what distinguishes Anaximenes is his idea that the qualitative variations observed in nature stem from quantitative distinctions. In essence, he reduces qualities to quantities, marking a unique perspective among his contemporaries.
In conclusion what makes the Milesian School so special is not just what they said but the questions they asked. The questions they posed were quite remarkable. Their endeavors would inspire many later thinkers to delve into the same subjects and explore different perspectives. They would serve as a source of inspiration for those who came after them, laying the foundation for science and philosophy to flourish.
