What the philosopher Anaximenes considered the basis of everything that exists. Milesian School: Thales, Anaximander and Anaximenes

Anaximenes

The third philosopher of the Milesian school was Anaximenes. He was probably younger than Anaximander - at least Theophrastus calls Anaximenes his "student". He wrote a book, of which only a small fragment has survived. According to Diogenes Laertius, "he wrote in a simple, uncorrupted Ionian dialect."

The doctrine of Anaximenes at first glance seems to be a step backward compared to the doctrine of Anaximander, for Anaximenes, having abandoned the theory of apeiron, follows in the footsteps of Thales in search of the element that serves as the basis of everything. However, for him it is not water, but air. This idea must have been prompted by the phenomenon of breathing, for man lives while he breathes, so it is very easy to conclude that air is a necessary element of life. Anaximenes draws a parallel between man and nature as a whole: just as our soul, being air, controls us, so breath and air surround the whole world. Air, therefore, is the Urstoff (primary element) of the world, from which all “things that exist, have existed and will exist, all gods and divine objects, have appeared, and other things come from them” 6.

However, a problem arises here - how to explain how all things appeared out of thin air, and it was in solving this problem that the genius of Anaximenes manifested itself. To explain how concrete objects arise from a simple element, he introduced the concepts of condensation and rarefaction. Air itself is invisible, but becomes visible as a result of these processes - when rarefied or expanded, it turns into fire, and when condensed, it turns into wind, clouds, water, earth and, ultimately, into stones. The concepts of condensation and rarefaction provide another explanation for why Anaximenes chose air as the primary element. He thought that, as the air becomes rarefied, it heats up and tends to become fire; and when condensing, it cools and tends to turn into something solid. Air, then, is in the middle between the fire that surrounds the world and the cold, damp mass in the center; Anaximenes chooses air as a kind of intermediate authority. However, the most important thing in his doctrine is the attempt to trace how quantity turns into quality - this is exactly what his theory of condensation and rarefaction sounds like in modern terminology. (Anaximenes noted that when we breathe with our mouths open, the air heats up, and when we breathe through our nose with our mouth closed, it cools, and this example from life is proof of his position.)

Like Thales, Anaximenes believed the Earth was flat. She floats on the water like a leaf. According to Professor Burnet, "the Ionians were never able to accept scientific view to the Earth, even Democritus continued to believe that it was flat.” Anaximenes offered an interesting interpretation of the rainbow. It occurs when the sun's rays encounter a powerful cloud on their way through which they cannot pass.

Zeller notes that this is “a step in scientific explanation goes far from the explanation of Homer, who believed that Iris (“rainbow”) is a living messenger of the gods.”

With the fall of Miletus in 494 BC. e. The Milesian school must have ceased to exist. The Milesian doctrines as a whole are now known as the philosophical system of Anaximenes; probably in the eyes of the ancients he was the most important representative of the school. It is unlikely that he was recognized as such because he was its last representative; rather, his theory of condensation and rarefaction, which was an attempt to explain the properties of specific objects by the transition of quantity into quality, played a role here.

In general, we must repeat once again that the main merit of the Ionians lies in the fact that they posed the question of the original element of all things, and not in the answers they gave to it. We must also emphasize that they all considered matter to be eternal - the idea that this world was created by someone's will did not occur to them. And for them this the world is the only world. However, it would hardly be correct to consider the Ionian philosophers as dogmatic materialists. The distinction between matter and spirit had not yet been established in those days, and until this was done, one cannot speak of materialists in the same sense in which we speak of them now. They were "materialists" because they tried to explain the origin of all things from some material element. But they were not materialists who deliberately deny the distinction between matter and spirit, for the simple reason that this distinction itself had not yet been clearly drawn, so there was nothing to deny.

Let us note finally that the Ionians were “dogmatists” in the sense that they did not engage in “criticism of problems.” They believed that it was possible to know things as they are: they were full of naive faith in miracles and the joy of discovery.

Ἀναξιμένης Date of Birth: Date of death: A place of death: School/tradition: Direction:

Western Philosophy

Period: Main interests: Significant ideas:

Origin

Influenced:

Anaximenes of Miletus(ancient Greek Ἀναξιμένης , / - /502 BC e. , Miletus) - ancient Greek philosopher, representative of the Milesian school of natural philosophy, student of Anaximander.

Genesis of the world in Anaximenes

Anaximenes - the last representative Milesian school. Anaximenes strengthened and completed the trend of spontaneous materialism - the search for natural causes of phenomena and things. Like Thales and Anaximander earlier, he believes that the fundamental principle of the world is a certain type of matter. He considers such matter to be unlimited, infinite, having an indefinite form. air, from which everything else arises. “Anaximenes... proclaims air to be the beginning of existence, for from it everything arises and to it everything returns.”

As a meteorologist, Anaximenes believed that hail is formed when water falling from clouds freezes; If air is mixed with this freezing water, snow forms. Wind is condensed air. Anaximenes associated the state of the weather with the activity of the Sun.

Like Thales and Anaximander, Anaximenes studied astronomical phenomena, which, like other natural phenomena, he sought to explain in a natural way. Anaximenes believed that the Sun was a [flat celestial] body similar to the Earth and the Moon, which became hot from rapid movement. The earth and heavenly bodies float in the air; The earth is motionless, other luminaries and planets (which Anaximenes distinguished from stars and which, as he believed, arise from earthly vapors) move by cosmic winds.

Essays

The works of Anaximenes have survived in fragments. Unlike his teacher Anaximander, who wrote, as the ancients themselves noted, in “pretentious prose,” Anaximenes writes simply and artlessly. When presenting his teaching, Anaximenes often resorts to figurative comparisons. He likens the condensation of air that “gives rise” to a flat earth to “felting wool”; The sun, the moon - to fiery leaves floating in the middle of the air, etc.

Literature

Fragments of early Greek philosophers, vol. 1. - M.: Nauka, 1989. - P. 129-135.
Thomson J. Studies in the History of Ancient Greek Society, vol. 2. The First Philosophers. Per. from English - M.: 1959. - P. 153-154.
Losev A. F. History of ancient aesthetics. Early classic. - M.: Ladomir, 1994. - P. 312-317.
Trubetskoy S. N. History course ancient philosophy. - M.: Russian court, 1997.
Asmus V.F. Ancient philosophy. - M.: Higher School, 1998. - P. 11-12.

Links

Categories:

Personalities in alphabetical order
Philosophers in alphabetical order
Ancient Greek philosophers
Milesian school
Philosophers of Ancient Greece
Philosophers of the 6th century BC e.

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

General information. Anaximenes is a student and follower of Anaximander. Unlike his teacher, he wrote roughly and artlessly. This speaks of the formation of scientific and philosophical language, of its liberation from the remnants of mythology and socio-anthropomorphism. Anaximenes was also a scientist, but his range of interests was much narrower than that of Anaximander. He is the author of the essay “On Nature”.

Apeiron. Unable to keep up with the heights of Anaximander’s abstract thinking, Anaximenes found the origin of all things in the most unqualified of the four elements - in the air. Anaximenes calls the air limitless, that is, apeiron. Thus, apeiron turned from a substance into its property. Apeiron of Anaximenes is a property of air.

Cosmogony. Anaximenes reduced all forms of nature to air. Everything arises from air through condensation and rarefaction. As the air becomes rarefied, it first becomes fire, then ether, and when it thickens, it becomes wind, clouds, water, earth and stone. Anaximenes approached here dialectical idea transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones. He incorrectly associated rarefaction with heating, and condensation with cooling. Anaximenes thought that the Sun was the earth, which became hot from its rapid movement. The Earth and heavenly bodies float in the air, with the Earth motionless, and other bodies moving by air vortices. The earth is flat.

Psychology and atheism. Thales associated the soul with the ability to self-propulsion. Anaximenes believed that, like the body, the soul is formed by air. The gods, according to Anaximenes, did not create air, but were themselves created from air, that is, they are a modification of material substance.

Ticket number 28. Melissa. The doctrine of one being.

Biography. Melissus is the last representative of the Eleatic school. The teaching of the Eleatics, formulated by Parmenides, was found in the first half of the 5th century. BC. its outstanding defender in the person of Parmenides' student Zeno. Another follower of Parmenides was Melissus from the island of Samos (no longer from Elea), who, while remaining generally faithful to the teaching of Parmenides, changed it in two fundamental points. Acme Melissus falls on 444-441. BC. Melissa was not only a philosopher, but also a great statesman. Being a contemporary of Pericles, Melissus was his opponent. He opposed the hegemonic aspirations of Athens, which turned the anti-Persian Athenian Maritime Union into the Athenian Archaeus.

Essays. Melissus is the author of the essay “On Nature,” excerpts from which we find in Simplicius. Aristotle also talks about Melissa. Aristotle has a low opinion of Melissa. He contrasts Melissa and Xenophanes, as people who think roughly, with Parmenides, a more subtle and insightful mind.

Teaching. However, Melissa deserves attention:

1) He gave a clear and precise, without any poetic metaphors, as was the case with Parmenides, a prosaic presentation of the teachings of the Eleatics. He is responsible for the formulation of the “law of conservation of being” - the main point of the teachings of the Eleatics. This law is known in its Latin formulation: Ex nihilo nihil fit - “out of nothing nothing comes.” But few people know that for the first time Melissa formulated the law of conservation of being in the words “nothing can ever arise.” This law was accepted by all ancient philosophers, regardless of whether they recognized the existence of non-existence or not.

2) Melissus, accepting such Parmenidean characteristics of being as unity and homogeneity, interpreted the eternity of being not as timelessness, but as eternity in time. The past and future for Melissa are not non-existence, but parts of being, in contrast to the views of Parmenides. For Melissa, there is not only a present, but also a past and a future. Being is eternal in the sense that it was, is and will be eternal.

3) Melissus fundamentally changed the teaching of Xenophanes and Parmenides about the finitude of being in space. Melissa's existence is limitless; he taught that existence is “eternal, limitless.” Melissa came to the idea of the spatial infinity of the universe based on the unity of existence. If existence were limited by a limit, then it would not be one, it would be twofold, determining and determined, that which is limited and that which limits. And since existence is one, then it is unlimited, and therefore limitless.

4) By closing the possibility of personalizing being, Melissa emphasizes that being does not suffer or grieve. If it experienced suffering, it would not have the fullness of existence.

5) Melissa is a materialist. Aristotle: “Parmenides spoke of the intelligible one,” and “Melissas speaks of the material one.”

6) Melissa was an atheist. Diogenes Laertius reports that “he also said about the gods that one should not teach about them, for knowledge of them is impossible.”

These are Melissa's views. As already mentioned, he changed the teaching of Parmenides in two fundamental aspects: he replaced the ideal and finite being with the material and infinite.

Epistemology. As for the epistemological aspect, Melissus, as far as we know, remained in the position of Parmenides, believing that the senses, drawing us a plural existence, deceive us and that only reason gives the true picture of the world, showing that being is “eternal, limitless, one and perfect.” homogeneous."

The inconsistency of the teachings of the Eleatics. The teachings of Melissa revealed the inconsistency of the teachings of the Eleatics. Having become ideal, being for Parmenides remained spatial, corporeal to some extent. But the corporeal cannot be absolutely unified, as the Eleatics, including Melissus, wanted. For Melissa, as an Ionian, who gravitated not only to the Italic, but also to the Ionian tradition, the teaching of the Eleatics acquired a materialistic and atheistic character. Being Melissa is a combination of Anaximander's apeiron and Parmenides' being. From Anaximander came the idea of the infinity and materiality of being, and from Parmenides - the understanding of this being as eternal, always equal, united and indivisible, as something that opposes the world of phenomena and is accessible only to logical thinking.

Ticket number 29. Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans. general characteristics schools. The idea of philosophy.

Pythagoras.Dates of life: (ca. 570 – ca. 497). The founder of the Pythagorean League was Pythagoras. Almost everything we know about him is from later information. Most sources say that he was with Fr. Samos. In his youth, he listened to Anaximander of Miletus and Pherecydes of Syros (who, according to Cicero, was the first to say that the souls of people are immortal). It is also reported that he was forced to leave his homeland due to the tyranny of the Samian tyrant Polycrates, and went on a journey to the east (lasting a total of about 30 years): to Egypt, to Babylonia, and then possibly to India. Upon his return, after a short stay in his homeland, he finds himself in “Magna Graecia”, namely in the city of Croton, where he founded his school - the Pythagorean Union. This is the legend associated with the name of Pythagoras.

Pythagoras himself did not write anything, but, like the “seven wise men,” he gave oral instructions, often mysterious and incomprehensible, which were called “akusmas” (from Greek - “oral saying”), and which can be understood in the everyday sense, which catches the eye, and on a deeper semantic level. It is not always clear what meaning Pythagoras himself put into them. Here are some of them with possible interpretations:

What has fallen - do not pick it up - before death, do not cling to life;

Do not step through the scales - observe moderation in everything;

Do not break bread in two - do not destroy friendship;

Don’t walk on the beaten path - don’t indulge the desires of the crowd;

Pythagorean Union. Information about the Pythagorean alliance is also provided to us only by later sources. Some scientists even doubt its existence. Meanwhile, from later information, a picture emerges of the Pythagorean “general partnership” (Iamblichus) as a scientific, philosophical and ethical-political community of like-minded people. Evidence says that, allegedly, first the Pythagoreans in Croton and other cities of “Greater Hellas” came to power, but they were opposed by a certain Cylon and his supporters. When the Pythagoreans gathered in Crotona for a congress in one house, the Kilonians set fire to the house and burned them. Pythagoras fled to the city of Metapontus, where he died c. 497 BC Unbiased analysis political views Pythagoreans speaks of their extreme hostility to anarchy. They saw the source of state laws in God.

Training in the Pythagorean Union. According to legend, training in the Pythagorean Union lasted 15 years:

1) for five years the students could only remain silent;

2) for the next five years they could only hear the speeches of Pythagoras, but not see him;

3) for the last five years, students have been able to talk with Pythagoras face to face.

The knowledge of the Pythagoreans is vague, collective, and was often attributed to the discoverer Pythagoras. The Pythagoreans tried not to call Pythagoras by name, preferring to talk about him: “Himself” or “That same husband.” The most terrible sins The Pythagoreans considered bloodshed and perjury. Pythagorean treatment excluded surgical intervention as a factor in changing the balance of opposites in a person.

Pythagorean way of life. Information about the way of life of the Pythagoreans is more defined. He relied on a certain hierarchy of values. The Pythagoreans put the beautiful and decent in the first place in life (where they included science), the profitable and useful in the second, and the pleasant in third. The Charter of the Pythagorean Union determined the conditions for admission to the union and the lifestyle of its members. Persons of both sexes (only free) who had passed many years of testing of their mental and moral qualities were accepted into the union. The property was common. All those entering the Pythagorean community handed over their property to special stewards. There were two stages in the union: acoustics (novices) acquired knowledge dogmatically, and mathematicians (scientists) dealt with more complex issues, which were taught to them with reason. The Pythagorean League was a closed organization, and its teachings were secret.

The Pythagoreans got up before sunrise, did special exercises, worked all day, and did not go to bed in the evening without thinking about what they managed to do during the day and what was left for later.

Pythagorean ethics. The basis of Pythagorean ethics was the doctrine of “proper.” “Proper” is victory over one’s base needs, the subordination of the younger to the elder, the cult of friendship and camaraderie, and the veneration of Pythagoras. The Pythagoreans paid much attention to medicine, psychotherapy and problems of childbirth. They developed techniques to improve mental abilities, the ability to listen and observe. They developed their memory, both mechanical and semantic. The latter is possible only if the beginnings are found in the knowledge system. Despite their political activity, the Pythagoreans valued the contemplative lifestyle, the life of a sage, above all else. Their very way of life had ideological foundations - it stemmed from their ideas about the cosmos as an ordered and symmetrical whole. But beauty is not revealed to everyone. It is available only to those who lead a correct lifestyle.

Early Pythagoreanism. The teachings of Pythagoras. We learn about the teachings of Pythagoras only from later information. From early information, only disapproving reviews from Heraclitus (“much knowledge does not teach the mind”), praise from Herodotus (“the greatest Hellenic sage”) and a few more mentions came down: Xenophanes, Empedocles, etc. Nothing else is known from early information. The average information also contains nothing about the teachings of Pythagoras as such. Aristotle's special work “On the Pythagoreans” has been lost. Everything we know about Pythagoras comes from later information. Here's some information:

· he was once seen in two cities at the same time;

· he had a golden thigh;

· a white eagle flew to him from heaven and allowed himself to be stroked;

· he himself killed the deadly poisonous snake that bit him in Tyrrhenia with his own bite;

· once, when he said hello to the river, it answered him in a loud human voice;

· allegedly he knew about his past incarnations: his first incarnation was the son of the god Hermes Ephialtes, and thus Pythagoras acted as an aristocrat, noble. This aristocracy was strengthened by the doctrine of the transmigration of souls: Pythagoras is not just a descendant of god, he himself is the son of god, that is, Ephialtes, born several generations later as Pythagoras;

· elevating himself above others, he thought that there were three types of intelligent living beings: God, man and “like Pythagoras.”

From later information we also learn about various Pythagorean taboos, including food taboos.

Other early Pythagoreans. Among the early Pythagoreans, Parmeniscus, Percops, Brontinus, Petron, Alcmaeon, Hippasus, as well as Theano, the wife of Brontinus (and according to other sources, Pythagoras) are known.

Hippasus. Hippasus from Metapontus is another, along with Pythagoras, an outstanding representative of early Pythagoreanism. According to Aristotle, he taught that the beginning of everything is fire, and in this he differed significantly from other Pythagoreans. The number of Hippasus seems to correspond to the Heraclitian logos; he taught that number is the first example of the creation of the world. Hippasus was one of the first to speak out against the elitism of science and for its “democratization.” Hippasus revealed to the “unworthy” (apparently not ordinary people, but simply “acousmaticians”) the nature of both commensurability, proportion, and incommensurability (which was kept secret as contrary to the basic ideas that number underlies everything). For this she was expelled from the union, taking with her part of the acousmaticians (otherwise they would not have said that Pythagoras is the head of mathematicians, and Hippasus is the head of the acousmaticians). The Pythagoreans cursed Hippasus and built a grave for him, alive. Soon he drowned.

Pythagorean medicine. The Pythagoreans treated the body with gymnastics and external remedies, and the soul with music. They avoided negative emotions, for which they used psychotherapy. When treating, the Pythagoreans preferred external remedies to internal ones, and even more so to surgical intervention.

Alcmaeon. Alcmaeon is the most famous physician-philosopher of the Crotonian school. His acme occurred during the old age of Pythagoras. Alcmaeon was interested in the general cause of diseases, and found it in the violation of “isonomia”, i.e. balance in the mixture of body qualities, or the dominance of one of them. From the fact that lines from all over the body lead to the brain, he concluded that the brain is the main, controlling part of the body. Alcmaeon distinguished between sensation and thinking.

Summary of early Pythagoreanism. During the period of the formation of Pythagoreanism, the remnants of mythology and magic were very large in it. All the more surprising was the rapid progress of Italian philosophy and science, which was started by Pythagoras.

Middle Pythagoreanism. Middle Pythagoreanism occurs at the beginning new era V ancient philosophy, an era when the formation of philosophy basically ends, and we will see how among the Eleatics philosophy formulates its main question - the question of the relationship between being and thinking. By this time, the Pythagorean alliance was falling apart. But the Pythagorean teaching is still alive. Moreover, it reaches its philosophical peak in Philolaus.

Philolaus.Dates of life: approx. 470 – after 399 It was said about him that when the house in which the Pythagorean congress was held was set on fire, Philolaus jumped out of it and escaped. But maybe he wasn't there at that moment. In any case, all the Pythagoreans who were there, except for Lysis, who also escaped, were burned. After the defeat of the Union, Philolaus finds refuge in Tarentum, where the powerful strategist Archytas, a student of Philolaus, rules. It was Philolaus who wrote down the teachings of Pythagoras and published them in the book “On Nature”. Based on the doxography alone, one can form a high opinion of Philolaus, although more as a scientist than as a philosopher.

Philolaus and mathematics. In the field of mathematics, Philolaus is characterized by a naive indistinction between the mathematical and the physical, characteristic of Pythagoreanism. For Philolaus, the unit is still a spatial-corporeal quantity, part of real space. Hence the geometrization of arithmetic; all numbers were depicted by Philolaus as figures. A simple, indecomposable non-factor number was represented to them as a collection of spatial points elongated in a line. This is a "linear number". Numbers divisible into two equal factors were represented as “square”, and numbers divisible into two unequal factors were represented as “rectangular”. Numbers that could be decomposed into three factors already seemed to be spatial, stereometric bodies. It is interesting that, for all its “sophistication,” Philolaus’ mathematics was burdened with mythological associations.

Quadruple. Philolaus connected the arithmetic with the geometric in other ways, and through it with the physical. If one is a spatial-solid point, then two is a line, three, plane, four (tetractyd, Quadruple) is the simplest stereometric figure, a tetrahedron.

Decade. A special place in a row natural numbers borrowed ten from Philolaus. When depicting a decade, it was clear that a decade is the sum of the first four numbers natural series, 1, 2, 3 and 4. And since these are all arithmetic expressions of a point, line, plane and body, the decade contains all four forms of existence of the spatial-corporeal world. The Pythagoreans were also greatly impressed by the fact that ten contained an equal number of simple and complex, as well as even and odd, numbers: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 – 2, 4, 6, 8, 10.

Cosmogony and cosmology. The cosmology and cosmogony of Philolaus are even more burdened with mythological images. He calls the center of the universe the Universal Hestia (Olympian goddess, personification of the hearth and family). It is also the home of Zeus, the mother and "altar" of the gods. Philolaus calls the three parts of the universe Olympus, Cosmos and Uranus, respectively. And in this mythological context, Philolaus brings up the idea of the mobility of the Earth, and that the Earth is not the center of the universe. However, Philolaus comes to the conjecture about the non-geocentricity of the universe not through scientific means, but from considerations of a value order. Philolaus places fire, not Earth, at the center of the world, because fire seems to him more perfect than Earth. Therefore, it is fire, and not earth, that must be in the center and be the beginning of all things. This fire is not the sun, but a certain central fire, Hestia, the house of Zeus. The entire universe is finite, it is covered with a fiery sphere. Philolaus calls her Olympus. The central fire is at the center of this Olympic sphere. Around him rests, as it were, the central core of the world - what Philolaus calls Uranus. This includes the Moon, the Earth and a certain Anti-Earth. Around this central core, Uranus, all the way to Olympus, is located what Philolaus calls the Cosmos. In it, just like the Moon in Uranus, the Sun and five planets (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn) and stars move around the Central Fire. These are the three parts of the universal sphere. The sun is not a hot body at all, but a cold crystalline mass, and sunlight is the light of the Central Fire reflected by the sun, not visible from the Earth. The Moon is similar to the Earth and has a living nature. The darkest place in Philolaus’s cosmology is Antichthon (Anti-Earth). Philolaus literally worshiped the decade, and he came up with 9 celestial bodies: stars, 5 planets, the Sun, the Moon, the Earth. Olympus and the Central Fire, as the center and periphery of the universe, were not considered. And Antichthon blocked the Earth from the Central Fire, therefore invisible from the Earth. Thus, in the cosmogony and cosmology of Philolaus, fire dominates. Philolaus, the first of the ancient scientists, took a step towards heliocentrism, and took the second step in the 3rd century. BC. Aristarchus of Samos.

The philosophy of Philolaus. As a Pythagorean, Philolaus tried to explain everything in the world with the help of numbers. Having found the essence, the formula of a stereometric figure in four, Philolaus did not stop there: five - quality, color, six - animation, seven - mind, health, light, eight - love and friendship, wisdom and ingenuity. Philolaus constructs the universe itself from the limit (peras), the infinite (apeiron) and harmony. Philolaus’ essay “On Nature” began like this: “Nature, during the structure of the world, was formed from the combination of the infinite and the limit; the whole world order and all things in it [represent a combination of these two principles].” These two principles in Philolaus do not have internal unity; they are “not dialectical, but resting determinations” (Hegel). Therefore, they need something that would connect them. Philolaus saw such a connecting link in harmony. He gives the following definition of harmony: “Harmony is the union of the heterogeneous and the agreement of the discordant.” The limit is a number. Boundless is bodily space. The universe is a space organized by numbers. Numbers are the limits that order the apeiron as some indefinite matter, an element. The highest cosmic number is still the same decade.

Epistemology of Philolaus. Philolaus contrasts the supralunar world - Cosmos - with the sublunar one - Uranus. The first is a world of order and cleanliness. Wisdom is possible regarding him. The second world is a world of randomly born and emerging things. In relation to them, only virtue is possible. In Space there is a limit. In Uranus there is the limitless. But there is a limit there. Philolaus' epistemology is ontological: truth is inherent in things to the extent that the infinite is organized by a limit, matter by numbers. At the same time, in Philolaus and in epistemology, the main place is occupied by the decade. Everything can be learned only with her help. Philolaus calls the decade faith and memory, and even the goddess of memory - Mnemosyne. So, mythological goddess memory of Mnemosyne is interpreted by Philolaus as a ten, a decade. It underlies calculus and is the basis of semantic memory.

Like Alcmaeon, Philolaus associated thinking with the activity of the brain. However, the soul is immortal. The soul “puts on a body through the medium of number and immortal, incorporeal harmony.” Philolaus was a supporter of the doctrine of metempsychosis.

Other Middle Pythagoreans. To Middle Pythagoreanism, which existed in the 5th century. BC. one should also include the student of Philolaus Eurytus (who took the doctrine of number to the extreme), the botanist Menestor, the mathematician Theodore, the cosmologist Ecphantus (who taught about the rotation of the Earth around its axis, and was also the first known atomist), as well as the cosmologists Hicetas (who taught about the rotation of the Earth around its axis) and Xuthus.

Summary of Middle Pythagoreanism. The views of representatives of average Pythagoreanism indicate the absurdity of the interpretation of the Pythagorean Union as a political-religious organization hostile to science. They say that the Pythagorean Union was an outstanding scientific and philosophical school, the traditions of which remained alive for a long time after her death.

Late Pythagoreanism. Late Pythagoreanism - Pythagoreanism of the first half of the 4th century. BC. The Pythagorean Union had long since collapsed, but the Pythagorean theoretical and moral tradition was still alive. The largest representative of late Pythagoreanism was Archytas of Tarentum. Being the embodiment of the ancient ideal of kalogathia (kalos - beautiful, gatos - good), Archytas combined in his person the qualities of an outstanding mathematician and mechanic of his time, a philosopher and scientist, a musician and military leader, a politician and a just person.

Archytas as a scientist. In Archytas, Pythagoreanism, which arose as a synthesis of science and Orphic mythology, found its logical conclusion. The scientific component of the Pythagorean worldview defeated the worldview; science defeated not only mythology, but also philosophy. Archytas, one might say, is already a scientist, not a philosopher.

Cosmology of Archytas. In cosmology, Archytas attempted to prove the infinity of the universe. He argued that since being on the edge of the universe you can stretch out your hand, then move an arm’s length further and repeat this endlessly, then the universe is limitless.

The meaning of Pythagoreanism. Ancient Pythagoreanism is the most important page of ancient philosophy and a progressive phenomenon of ancient culture of the 6th – 4th centuries. BC, especially to the extent that he was characterized by the rudiments of scientific thinking. Based on the material of Pythagoreanism, the formation of philosophy from mythology under the influence of scientific knowledge(especially mathematics) and, in general, increasingly rational thinking. The Pythagoreans turned Orphic ritual purification into a scientific pursuit, a cult of reason. And as the Pythagoreans realized that the world around them was not chaos, but cosmos, they abandoned metempsychosis, interpreted the soul as harmony, and imagined the real world more deeply.

Ticket number 30. History of the Pythagorean School (there are only dates and basic information here, the content should be taken from question 29)

Information about Pythagoreanism. Unfortunately, we do not know anything completely reliable about Pythagoreanism, especially early Pythagoreanism. Information about the Pythagoreans (as well as about all Pre-Socratics) can be divided into three parts:

1) early – VI-V centuries. BC.;

2) middle – VI-I centuries. BC.;

3) late – I-VI centuries. AD

Early information comes from contemporaries of the Pythagorean League, but it is extremely poor. The middle and late information is much more complete, but was it not more complete due to the invention of the Greeks?

Pythagoras. The founder of the Pythagorean League was Pythagoras. Almost everything we know about him is from later information. Most sources say that he was with Fr. Samos. It is also reported that he was forced to leave his homeland due to the tyranny of the Samian tyrant Polycrates, and went on a journey to the east (lasting a total of about 30 years): to Egypt, to Babylonia, and then possibly to India. Upon his return, after a short stay in his homeland, he finds himself in “Magna Graecia”, namely in the city of Croton, where he founded his school - the Pythagorean Union. This is the legend associated with the name of Pythagoras.

Pythagorean Union. Information about the Pythagorean alliance is also provided to us only by later sources. Some scientists even doubt its existence. Meanwhile, from later information, a picture emerges of the Pythagorean “general partnership” (Iamblichus) as a scientific, philosophical and ethical-political community of like-minded people. Evidence says that, allegedly, first the Pythagoreans in Croton and other cities of “Greater Hellas” came to power, but they were opposed by a certain Cylon and his supporters. When the Pythagoreans gathered in Crotona for a congress in one house, the Kilonians set fire to the house and burned them. An impartial analysis of the political views of the Pythagoreans speaks of their extreme hostility to anarchy. They saw the source of state laws in God.

Periodization of Pythagoreanism. Pythagoreanism had three peaks:

1) political – in the first half of the 5th century. BC.,

2) philosophical - in the second half of the 5th century. BC. And

3) scientific – in the first half of the 4th century. BC.

The earliest time is the last third of the 6th century. BC. - this is the origin of Pythagoreanism, the period of Pythagoras’ activity, and it contains all three sides of Pythagoreanism, political, philosophical, and scientific.

The history of the Pythagorean League and Pythagoreanism can be divided into six parts:

I. Organization of the Pythagorean League by Pythagoras - the last third, and maybe even a decade of the 6th century. BC e, the emergence of Pythagorean philosophy and science within the framework of the Pythagorean “fellowship”, the establishment of the political dominance of the Pythagoreans in “Great Hellas”;

II. Political dominance of the Pythagorean League - first half of the 5th century. BC.;

III. The defeat of the Pythagorean League - mid-5th century. BC.;

IV. The dispersion of the Pythagorean diaspora, Lysis and Philolaus in Thebes, the return of Philolaus to Magna Graecia - second half of the 5th century. BC.;

V. Archytas of Tarentum and his group, the transformation of Pythagoreanism into science, the loss of not only mythological remnants, but also philosophical foundations - the first half of the 4th century. BC.;

VI. the last of their Pythagoreans in Phlius - mid-4th century. BC.

Simplifying the diagram, we will talk about early, middle and late Pythagoreanism.

Ticket number 31. Democritus The doctrine of atoms and cosmology.

History of atomism. IN Ancient India the doctrine known as Vaisheshika included the atomic theory of matter. True, it is not known which teaching, the atomism of Democritus or Vaisheshika, is primary.

The beginning. The principles of atomists are atoms (being) and emptiness (non-being). Atomists subjected the Eleatic concept of non-existence to a physical interpretation, speaking of emptiness. The presence of emptiness helped explain such phenomena as condensation and rarefaction, abrasion, diffusion, and permeability.

Anti-Eleatic aspects. Two anti-Eleatian points can be distinguished in the atomism of Democritus:

1) recognition of the existence of non-existence, which they interpret as empty space;

2) the assumption of the reality of multitude, multiplicity.

Postulates:

Emptiness: motionless and limitless, formless, united, has no density, and does not have any influence on the bodies located in it, on being.

Being: defined, has a form, multiple, absolutely dense, indivisible (atomos). It is a collection of an infinitely large number of small atoms.

Emptiness and being are antipodes.

Atom: indivisible, completely dense, not containing emptiness, imperceptible to the senses due to its small size, an independent particle of matter. He is a part of being, has all its properties (indivisible, eternal, unchangeable, identical to himself, there is no movement inside him, has no parts). All this can be called the inner essence of the atom. Externally it is determined by the form ( rismos , distinguished anchor-, hook-, spherical, angular, concave) - like 8 from 7, order - like 87 from 78 ( diatiga) and position – as 8 from ∞ ( trail, rotation), the size is like n from P. Each atom is enveloped in emptiness, which separates the atoms from each other. They believed the atoms of the soul to be spherical, similar to a fire-shaped T, fast and small.

The beginnings of molecular theory. The order and position of atoms is not so much the reason for the diversity of the atoms themselves as the reason for the diversity of the compounds of atoms.

Dualism. Atomists are dualists, since they recognize two principles in the universe, irreducible to each other - being and non-being.

Law of Conservation of Being. Like the Eleatics, the atomists have a law of conservation of being. But if among the Eleatics the statement “being cannot pass into non-existence, and vice versa” came from the denial of the existence of non-being, then for the atomists this law meant the impossibility of atoms passing into emptiness and vice versa. The relations between them are purely external: atoms are indifferent to emptiness, emptiness is indifferent to atoms.

Movement. Law of Conservation of Motion. In addition to shape, order, position and size, the atom also has mobility. Movement is the most important property of both atoms and everything real world. Atomists introduced emptiness, believing that movement is impossible without emptiness. Atoms fly in the void, colliding and flying apart. Aristotle reproaches the atomists for ignoring the question of the origin of motion, of what is primary in it. But for atomists, motion is eternal, an inseparable property of atoms, inherent in them by nature. Thus, the atomists expanded the law of conservation of being of the Eleatics to the law of conservation of being and motion. They abandoned the question of the cause of movement, because it is eternal, and Democritus “does not consider it necessary to look for the beginning of the eternal” (Aristotle).

Atoms and perception. Atoms, according to Democritus and Leucippus, are completely qualityless, i.e. devoid of sensory properties. All these qualities arise due to the interaction of atoms and sense organs. Atomists were the first to teach about the subjectivity of secondary, sensory qualities.

Modern view of atoms. IN modern science rather, the elementary particles into which an atom can be decomposed can be correlated with the atoms of Democritus. Democritus' atomism is absolute, and this is only one aspect of existence. In reality, atomism is relative (for example, elementary particles turn into each other).

The world of things and phenomena. For atomists it is real. Atoms “fold and intertwine… give birth to things.” Atomists explained the emergence and destruction of things by the connection and separation of atoms, and change - by a change in the order - structure of connections, and position - rotation. Atoms are eternal and transitory - things are changeable. So the atomists built a picture of the world in which creation and destruction, movement, multiplicity are possible, and at the same time everything, in essence, is unchanged and stable.

Cosmogony. The world as a whole is a boundless void, filled with many worlds, the number of which is infinite, for these worlds are formed by an infinite number of atoms of the most diverse forms. Atomists were accused of the fact that the world arises somehow spontaneously, spontaneously. But atomists were not interested in the cause of its occurrence, they were interested in how it arises. The void is filled with atoms unevenly, and where there are more atoms, a violent constant collision begins, turning into a vortex, a circular movement, in which heavier atoms accumulate in the center, displacing lighter atoms from there. This is how earth and sky come into being. Atomists are geocentrists. They believe the number of worlds to be infinite. They are transitory, some arise, some exist, some disappear in the moment.

Summary. Atomists considered the listed primary causes to be the material foundations of existing things. The atomists rejected the world mind - Nus Anaxagoras. They explained consciousness itself by the existence of special fire-like atoms.

Small world building. If the above-described theory of atoms, emptiness and motion, cosmogony and cosmology of the atomists is set out in the “Big World-Building”, then the subject of the “Small World-Building” is Live nature in general, and in particular – human nature. Atomists use the word “diacosmos” - construction, organization, device, this is also what Pythagoras called “cosmos” - world order, universe, World.

Origin of life. Living things arose from non-living things according to the laws of nature without any creator or rational purpose. After the earth was formed, films swelled on it, looking like purulent abscesses. During the day they were nourished by the sun, and at night by moisture. They grew and burst, and living things came out of them, including people. When the earth dried up under the rays of the sun and could no longer give birth, animals began to reproduce sexually, giving birth to children from each other. Living beings differed in the ratio of elements in them: which had more earth-like elements - land (lots of heat) and plants (little heat), aquatic - fish and amphibians, aerial - birds. The mobility and “depth” of the soul (animated, all living things), according to Democritus, depend on the amount of heat invested in the creature at birth.

Bogomolov:

Emptiness is no longer the “non-existent” of the Eleatics, it is already existing nothingness.

Democritus called atoms den –“what”, and emptiness - meden –"nothing". Although emptiness exists, nothing can arise from it, it is just space (place - topos), he is passive and inactive. Starting with Aristotle, doxographers began to call atoms also “being” (to on), and emptiness – “non-being” (to me on).

Atomism recognizes the eternity of the world in time, infinity in space, the infinity of the number of atoms and the worlds made up of them, and the infinity of emptiness.

Ticket number 32. Sophists. Main representatives. General characteristics of sophistry. The role of sophistry in the history of Greek culture and philosophy.

The emergence of sophistry. The word "sophistes". In the second half of the 5th century. BC. Sophists appear in Greece. In the conditions of ancient slaveholding democracy, rhetoric, logic and philosophy push aside gymnastics and music in the education system. The ancient Greek word “sophistes” meant: expert, master, artist, sage. But the Sophists were sages of a special kind. They were not interested in the truth. They taught the art of defeating the enemy in disputes and litigation. Therefore, the word “sophist” acquired a reprehensible meaning. Sophistry began to be understood as the ability to represent black as white, and white as black. The Sophists were philosophers only to the extent that this practice received ideological justification from them.

The meaning of sophistry. At the same time, the sophists played a positive role in spiritual development Hellas. They are theorists of rhetoric and eloquence. The focus of their attention is the word. Many of the sophists had an amazing gift of speech. The sophists created the science of words. Their merits are also great in the field of logic. By violating the yet undiscovered laws of thinking, the sophists contributed to their discovery. In philosophy, the Sophists drew attention to the problem of man, society, and knowledge. In epistemology, the sophists consciously posed the question of how thoughts about it relate to the world around us? Is our thinking capable of understanding the world around us?

Agnosticism and relativism of the Sophists. The sophists answered the last question in the negative. They taught that the objective world is unknowable, i.e. were the first agnostics. Agnostics teach that the world is unknowable, that there is no truth. However, the agnosticism of the sophists is limited by their relativism. Relativism is the doctrine that everything in the world is relative. In epistemology, relativism means that truth is relative, that it depends on conditions, on place and time, on circumstances, on a person. The Sophists taught that everyone has their own truth. As it seems to some, so it is. Therefore, the Sophists did not deny truth, but objective truth. They recognized only subjective truth, or rather, truths. These truths are related not so much to the object as to the subject. The epistemological relativism of the sophists was complemented by moral relativism. There is no objective criterion of good and evil. What is beneficial to someone is good and good. In the field of ethics, the agnosticism of the sophists developed into amoralism. The Sophists did not do much in physics. They were the first to distinguish between what exists by nature and what exists by institution, natural law and human law. In the person of the sophists, worldview thought ancient Greece put man at the center of worldview research. The untenable relativism of the sophists has one positive feature: it is anti-dogmatic. In this sense, the sophists played a special role in Hellas. They led a wandering lifestyle. And where they appeared, the dogmatism of tradition was shaken. Dogmatism rests on authority. The sophists demanded proof. They themselves could prove the thesis today, and the antithesis tomorrow. This shocked the average person and awakened his thoughts from dogmatic slumber. Everyone involuntarily asked the question: where is the truth?

Division of the Sophists. Sophists are usually divided into senior and junior. Among the elders, Protagoras, Gorgias, Hippias, Prodicus, Antiphon, and Xeniades stood out. All of them are contemporaries of Philolaus, Zeno, Melissa, Empedocles, Anaxagoras and Leucippus. Of the younger sophists, active already at the end of the 5th - beginning of the 4th century. BC, the most interesting are Alcidamas, Thrasymachus, Critias and Callicles. Little remains of the numerous works of the Sophists. About the sophists Protagoras and Gorgias - in a separate ticket.

Other senior sophists. Hippias contrasted natural laws with human ones and taught that the purpose of life is to achieve autarky - self-satisfaction. Prodicus had the nickname “the atheist” because, trying to scientifically explain the origin of belief in gods, he thought that religion arose due to the fact that people worshiped natural phenomena that were useful to them. For the sophist Antiphon, as for Hippias, the dictates of nature and the requirements of the law are antagonistic. He calls for following the dictates of the law in front of witnesses, and for himself and in private to behave according to the laws of nature. Antiphon is the founder of the contractual theory of the origin of the state. He defined ethics as the art of being carefree. For Antiphon, slavery is a social institution that is contrary to nature; he taught about the natural equality of all people, and also, consequently, about the equality of Hellenes and barbarians.

Criticism of sophistry by Plato and Aristotle. In his works, Plato portrays various sophists as liars and deceivers, who trample the truth for profit and teach others to do the same. Socrates constantly argued with the sophists. He defends objective truth and the objectivity of good and evil and proves that being virtuous is better than being vicious, and that vice, with its immediate benefit, ultimately punishes itself. In the dialogue “The Sophist,” Plato sarcastically mocks the Sophists. He points out here that the sophist plays with shadows, connects the unconnected, elevates the random, transient, insignificant into law - everything that is on the verge of being and non-being, gives existence to the non-existent. There is no difference between an orator and a sophist. Plato interprets rhetoric sharply negatively. Rhetoric, says Plato through the mouth of Socrates, does not need to know the essence of the matter; it is only interested in convincing that those who do not know know more than those who know. Plato also condemned the sophists for taking money for teaching. It was Plato who was the first to give the word “sophist”, i.e. originally "sage" negative meaning. Aristotle wrote a special essay “On Sophistic Refutations”, in which there is the following definition of sophistry: “Sophistry is imaginary wisdom, and not real, and a sophist is one who seeks gain from imaginary, and not real wisdom.” Aristotle reveals here the techniques of the sophists. For example, a sophist speaks too quickly so that the enemy cannot understand the meaning of his speech, he deliberately draws out his speech so that it is difficult for the enemy to grasp the entire course of his reasoning, he seeks to infuriate the enemy, because in anger it is already difficult to follow the logic of the reasoning. The sophist destroys the seriousness of his opponent with laughter, and then confuses him by suddenly switching to a serious tone. These are the external devices of sophistry. But sophistry is also characterized by special logical techniques. These are, first of all, deliberate paralogisms, that is, imaginary syllogisms - inferences. Sophistry is deliberate, not involuntary, paralogism. Aristotle identifies two sources of paralogisms: ambiguity, ambiguity of verbal expressions and incorrect logical connection of thoughts. Aristotle counts 6 linguistic and 7 extralinguistic paralogisms. For example, amphiboly is the ambiguity of a verbal structure, homonymy is the ambiguity of words. Aristophanes also ridicules the sophists, although he turns Socrates into a sophist.

Ticket number 33. Socrates. His personality and his role in the history of philosophy. Sources of our knowledge about Socrates. Socratic method.

Socrates. The first Athenian philosopher, Socrates, was a younger contemporary of Democritus. Socrates is interesting not only for his teaching, but also for his life, since his life was the embodiment of his teaching. Socrates had a huge influence on ancient and world philosophy.

Sources. Everything we know about Socrates, we know from hearsay, mainly from his students and interlocutors - from the historian Xenophon (“Memoirs of Socrates”) and the student of Plato. Plato attributed almost all of his teaching to Socrates, so it is sometimes difficult to say where Socrates ends and Plato begins (especially in the early dialogues).

Life of Socrates. Socrates is the first Athenian (by birth and citizenship) philosopher. Socrates' father Sophroniscus is a stonecutter, and his mother Philareta is a midwife. During the war between Athens and Sparta, Socrates valiantly fulfilled his military duty and participated in major battles three times. Socrates did not strive for active social activities. He led the life of a philosopher: he lived unpretentiously, but had leisure. He was a bad family man, cared little about his wife and three sons, who were born to him late, and did not inherit his intellectual abilities, but borrowed limitations from his mother - Socrates' wife Xanthippe, who went down in history as an example of an evil, quarrelsome and stupid wife. Socrates devoted all his time to conversations and debates; he had many students. Unlike the Sophists, the beggar Socrates did not take money for his studies.

Death of Socrates. After the overthrow of the tyranny of the Thirty and the restoration of democracy in Athens, Socrates was accused of atheism. The accusation came from the tragic poet Meletus, the rich tanner Anytus and the orator Lycon. Meletus wrote a denunciation against Socrates, accusing him of corrupting youth by inventing new gods and overthrowing old ones, after which Socrates was forced to appear before helia, a jury. Meletus acted as the accuser, declaring that he solemnly accused Socrates of “not honoring the gods whom the city honors, but introducing new deities, and is guilty of corrupting youth; and the punishment for this is death.” The majority found Socrates guilty, and Socrates had to offer himself punishment. HE offered to punish himself with a free lunch for life, or, as a last resort, a fine of one mine, after which the jury condemned Socrates to death with even more votes. Socrates said in his speech that he is not afraid of death, which is either a transition into oblivion, or a meeting in Hades with outstanding people of past history: Homer and others. All three speeches are contained in Plato's Apology of Socrates. Socrates was supposed to be executed immediately, but on the eve of the trial, a ship left Athens for Delos on an annual religious mission. Until the return of the ship, executions were prohibited by custom. While awaiting execution, Socrates had to spend thirty days in prison. On the eve of it, early in the morning, Socrates, having bribed the jailer, makes his way to Socrates, his friend Crito, who reports that the guards have been bribed and Socrates can escape. However, Socrates refuses, believing that established laws must be obeyed, otherwise he would have already emigrated from Athens. He says that he is not afraid of death, because he is prepared for it with his entire philosophy and way of life. According to Socrates, the death of the body is the recovery of the soul, so his last wish was to make a sacrifice to the god of recovery. This story is given in Plato's dialogue Phaedo. It is not difficult to notice that the “Phaedonovsky” Socrates imagines death differently than the Socrates from the “Apology”. This is not surprising; the Socrates from the Apology is closer to the historical Socrates. In the Phaedo, Plato attributed his idealistic views to Socrates, putting into his mouth his four proofs of the immortality of the soul. This is the external side of the life and death of Socrates.

Inner life Socrates. Socrates loved thoughtful contemplation. Often he would withdraw so much into himself that he would become motionless and disconnected from outside world. It never occurred to Socrates himself that he was wiser than others. He was very puzzled by the oracle that there is no wiser man than Socrates. Socrates decided that Apollo decided through the mouth of the Pythia to say that Socrates is wiser than others not because he is really wise, but because he knows that his wisdom is worth nothing before the wisdom of God. Others are not wise because they think they know something. Socrates formulates his superiority over people this way: “I know that I know nothing.”

The Calling of Socrates. At the same time, Socrates was convinced that he was chosen by God and assigned by him to the Athenian people, like a gadfly to a horse, on the rack to prevent his fellow citizens from falling into spiritual hibernation and caring about their affairs more than about themselves. By “deeds” Socrates here understands the desire for enrichment, a military career, home affairs, speeches in the national assembly, conspiracies, uprisings, participation in government, etc., and by “care for oneself” - moral and intellectual self-improvement. For the sake of his calling, Socrates abandoned business. He, Socrates, was “put in line by God himself, obliging him to live by practicing philosophy.” Therefore, Socrates proudly says in court: “as long as I breathe and remain strong, I will not stop philosophizing.”

« Demon" by Socrates. This is a certain inner voice through which God persuades Socrates to philosophize, always prohibiting something, deviating him from certain actions in practical activity.

Subject of Philosophy according to Socrates. The focus of Socrates, like some sophists, is man. But man is considered by Socrates as a moral being. Therefore, the philosophy of Socrates is moral anthropologism. Both mythology and physics were alien to Socrates' interests. Socrates once expressed the essence of his philosophical concerns to Phaedra with some annoyance: “I still cannot, according to the Delphic inscription, know myself.” The call to “Know yourself!” became the next motto for Socrates after the statement: “I know that I know nothing.” Both of them determined the essence of his philosophy. Self-knowledge had a very definite meaning for Socrates. To know oneself meant to know oneself as a social and moral being, and not only and not so much as a unique personality, but as a person in general. The main content and goal of Socrates' philosophy is general ethical issues. Later, Aristotle would say about Socrates: “Socrates dealt with issues of morality, but did not study nature as a whole.”

Socrates' method. Philosophically, Socrates' method, which he used in the study of ethical issues, is extremely important. In general, it can be called the method of subjective dialectics. Being a lover of introspection, Socrates at the same time loved to communicate with people. In addition, he was a master of dialogue and oral interview. It is no coincidence that Socrates’ accusers were afraid that he would be able to convince the court. He avoided external techniques; he was interested, first of all, in content, not form. At the trial, Socrates said that he would speak simply, without choosing words, for he would tell the truth as he was accustomed to speak from childhood and as he later spoke in the square near the money changers.

Irony. Socrates was a conversationalist with his own mind. He is ironic and crafty. Without suffering from false shame, pretending to be a simpleton and an ignoramus, he modestly asked his interlocutor to explain to him what, due to his occupation, this interlocutor should have known, it would seem, well. Not yet suspecting who he was dealing with, the interlocutor began to lecture Socrates. He asked several pre-thought-out questions, and the interlocutor was lost. The soil has been plowed: the interlocutor has freed himself from self-confidence and is ready to seek the truth together with Socrates.

Antisophism of Socrates. Socratic irony is neither the irony of a skeptic nor the irony of a sophist. A skeptic would say here that there is no truth, a sophist would add that since there is no truth, consider as truth what is beneficial to you. Socrates, being an enemy of the sophists, believed that every person can have his own opinion, but the truth must be the same for everyone. The positive part of the Socratic method is aimed at achieving such truth.

Maieutics. The soil was prepared, but Socrates himself did not want to sow it, because he emphasized that he knew nothing. “By asking you,” Socrates says to his interlocutor, “I am only exploring the subject together, because I myself do not know it.” Believing that he himself did not possess the truth, Socrates helped it to be born in the soul of his interlocutor. He likened his method to the art of midwifery in relation to truth, which is why he called his method - maieutics. What does it mean to know? To know about something means to know what it is. Therefore, the goal of maieutics, the goal of a comprehensive discussion of any subject, is its definition, the achievement of a concept about it. Socrates was the first to raise knowledge to the level of concept. If philosophers before him used concepts, they did so spontaneously. Only Socrates drew attention to the fact that if there is no concept, then there is no knowledge.

Induction. The acquisition of conceptual knowledge was achieved through induction (guidance), that is, ascent from the particular to the general, which should have occurred during the interview process. While searching for definitions, Socrates receives certain answers from his interlocutors, but they give specific examples of the manifestation of concepts; it turns out that their definition does not contain the entire concept, but only some aspect of it. Socrates is not looking for examples of, say, courage, such as “not running away from the battlefield,” but a universal definition of courage in general. Such definitions should be the subject of dialectical reasoning. Since no one understood this except Socrates, he turned out to be the wisest of all. But since Socrates himself had not yet reached such concepts and did not know about it, he claimed that he knew nothing. To know oneself means to find the concepts of moral qualities common to all people. Aristotle would later say in Metaphysics that “two things can rightly be attributed to Socrates—proof by induction and general definitions.”

Anti-immoralism of Socrates. Conviction in the existence of objective truth also means for Socrates that there are objective moral norms, that the difference between good and evil is not relative, but absolute. Like some sophists, Socrates did not equate happiness with profit. HE identified happiness with virtue. But you need to do good only knowing what it is. Knowing what is good and what is evil makes people virtuous, because knowing what is good and what is bad, a person cannot act badly. Evil is the result of ignorance of good, and morality, according to Socrates, is the result of knowledge. Socrates' moral theory is purely rationalistic. Aristotle will later object to Socrates: having knowledge of good and being able to use this knowledge are not the same thing. Ethical virtues are achieved through education; it is a matter of habit. You have to get used to being brave in order to be one.

Idealism and Socrates. The question of Socrates' idealism is not simple. The desire for conceptual knowledge, for thinking in concepts, is not in itself idealism. However, Socrates' method contained the possibility of idealism. In addition, the possibility of idealism was present in Socrates due to the fact that his activity meant a change in the subject of philosophy. Before Socrates (and partly before the Sophists), the main subject of philosophy was nature, the world external to man. Socrates argued that he is unknowable, and that one can only know the soul of a person and his deeds, which is the task of philosophy.

Ticket number 36. Sophists. Protagoras and Gorgias.

Anaximander and Anaximenes

Life. They were natives of Miletus. Anaximander lived approximately between 610 and 546 AD. BC and was a younger contemporary of Thales. Anaximenes apparently lived between 585 and 525. BC

Proceedings. Only one fragment, attributed to Anaximander, has survived to this day. In addition, there are comments by other authors, for example, Aristotle, who lived two centuries later. Only three small fragments survive from Anaximenes, one of which is probably inauthentic.

Anaximander and Anaximenes seem to have started from the same premises and asked the same question as Thales. However, Anaximander did not find a convincing basis for the assertion that water is an unchangeable fundamental principle. If water is transformed into earth, earth into water, water into air, and air into water, etc., then this means that anything is transformed into anything. Therefore, it is logically arbitrary to claim that water or earth (or anything else) is the “first principle”. Anaximander could have raised this kind of objection against Thales' answer.

For his part, Anaximander preferred to assert that the fundamental principle is apeiron, the indefinite, unlimited (in space and time). In this way he apparently avoided objections similar to those mentioned above. However, from our point of view, he has “lost” something important. Namely, unlike water, apeiron is not observable. As a result, Anaximander must explain the sensibly perceived (objects and the changes occurring in them) with the help of the sensually imperceptible apeiron. From the standpoint of experimental science, such an explanation is a drawback, although such an assessment, of course, is an anachronism, since Anaximander is unlikely to have possessed modern understanding empirical requirements of science. Perhaps most important for Anaximander was to find a theoretical argument against Thales' answer. And yet Anaximander, analyzing the universal theoretical statements of Thales and demonstrating the polemical possibilities of their discussion, called him “the first philosopher.”

Anaximenes, the third natural philosopher from Miletus, drew attention to another weak point in the teachings of Thales. How is water converted from its undifferentiated state to water in its differentiated states? As far as we know, Thales did not answer this question. As an answer, Anaximenes argued that air, which he considered as the “first principle,” condenses when cooled into water and, with further cooling, condenses into ice (and earth!). When heated, the air liquefies and becomes fire. Thus, Anaximenes created a certain physical theory of transitions. Using modern terms, it can be argued that, according to this theory, different states of aggregation (steam or air, water itself, ice or earth) are determined by temperature and density, changes in which lead to abrupt transitions between them. This thesis is an example of the generalizations so characteristic of the early Greek philosophers.

Let us emphasize that Anaximenes points to all four substances, which were later called the “four principles (elements).” These are earth, air, fire and water.

Thales, Anaximander and Anaximenes are also called Milesian natural philosophers. They belonged to the first generation of Greek philosophers. Next we will see that subsequent philosophers bring the thoughts they expressed to their logical conclusion.

15. Milesian School: Anaximander Anaximander (c. 610–after 546 BC) was a compatriot of Thales, an outstanding mathematician, geographer, prose writer and philosopher. He has the original idea of the infinity of worlds. He accepted the indefinite and limitless as the fundamental principle of existence.

16. Milesian School: Anaximenes Anaximenes (c. 585-525 BC) is considered a student of Anaximander, whose influence clearly shows on him. From his work, written in Ionian prose, only a small excerpt has survived. He believed that the origin of everything is

2. Anaximander Anaximander was also a Milesian and a friend of Thales. “The latter,” says Cicero (Acad. Quaest., IV, 37), “could not convince him that everything consists of water.” Anaximander's father's name was Praxiades. The time of his birth is not known exactly. Tenneman (Vol. I, p. 413) accepts that he

3. Anaximenes It remains to be said about Anaximenes, born between the 55th and 58th Olympiads (560 - 548 BC); he was also a Milesian, a contemporary and friend of Anaximander. He gave little of significance, and we generally know very little about him. Diogenes Laertius (II, 3) absurdly and contradictorily reports:

III. ANAXIMENES The small doxographic material that has come down to us on the philosophy of Anaximenes, however, also gives a vivid picture of mythological naturalism.9. The beginning. A summary of Anaximenes’ system is given by the following fragment: “It is reported that Anaximenes said that

Anaximander The general type of philosopher appears before us as if in a fog in the image of Thales, but the image of his great follower appears to us much more clearly. Anaximander of Miletus, the first philosophical writer, writes as a typical philosopher should write, while absurd

CHAPTER III. EARLY IONIAN PHYSICS THALES, ANAXIMANDER, ANAXIMENES Ionian cultureGreek philosophy arose among the Ionian colonies, which is explained by their cultural flourishing, the development of arts and industry, as well as lively relations with others

Anaximen/Anaksimen

Anaximenes is a student and follower of Anaximander, the last representative of the Milesian school.

He strengthened and completed the trend of spontaneous materialism - the search for natural causes of phenomena and things. He considered the material principle to be air (apeiron), from which, thanks to rarefaction, fire arises, and thanks to condensation, wind, clouds, water, earth and stones. Unlike his teacher, who wrote, as the ancients themselves noted, in “pretentious prose,” he wrote simply and artlessly. This speaks of the formation of scientific and philosophical language, of its liberation from the remnants of mythology and socio-anthropomorphism. Like the Milesian philosophers, Anaximenes was a scientist. But the range of his scientific interests is narrower than that of Anaximander. Questions of biology and mathematics apparently did not interest him. Anaximenes - astronomer and meteorologist. He is the author of the essay “On Nature”.

This philosopher taught that the world arises from “infinite” air, and all the variety of things is air in its various states. Cooling, the air thickens and, solidifying, forms clouds, earth, stones; rarefied air gives rise to celestial bodies with a fiery nature. The latter arise from earthly vapors. When presenting his teaching, Anaximenes often resorted to figurative comparisons. He likens the condensation of air that “gives rise” to a flat earth to “felting wool”; The sun, the moon - to fiery leaves floating in the middle of the air. Anaximenes’ boundless air embraces the entire world and is the source of life and breathing of living beings. Anaximenes thought that the Sun was the Earth, which became hot from its rapid movement. The earth and heavenly bodies float in the air. At the same time, the earth is motionless, and other luminaries move by air vortices.

Anaximenes saw in the boundless air the beginning of both body and soul. The soul is airy. As for the gods, Anaximenes also brought them out of thin air. Augustine reports that “Anaximenes did not deny the gods or pass over them in silence.” But he, Augustine reports, was convinced that “air was not created by the gods, but that they themselves were made of air.”

Some of Anaximenes' guesses are quite successful. Hail is formed when water falling from clouds freezes, and if air is mixed with this freezing water, snow forms. Wind is condensed air, which is incorrect. Anaximenes corrected Anaximander's mistake and placed the stars further than the Moon and the Sun. He associated the state of the weather with the activity of the Sun.

Philosophy of Anaximenes

Anaximenes ((c. 588 - c. 525 BC) - ancient Greek philosopher and scientist. Like Thales and Anaximander earlier, he believes that the fundamental principle of the world is a certain type of matter. He considers such matter to be unlimited, endless, indefinitely shaped air, from which everything else arises. “Anaximenes... proclaims air to be the beginning of existence, for from it everything arises and to it everything returns.”

Anaximenes materializes the apeiron, a purely abstract definition of his teacher. To describe the properties of the world's origin, he draws on a complex of properties of air. Anaximenes still uses Anaximander's substantial term, but attributively. Air in Anaximenes is also unlimited, i.e. apeiros (ἄπειρος); but Anaximenes understands the first principle in addition to other properties that air has. Accordingly, the statics and dynamics of the origin are determined by such properties.

The air of Anaximenes simultaneously corresponds to the ideas of both Thales (an abstract origin, conceived as a concrete natural element) and Anaximander (an abstract origin, conceived as such, without quality). According to Anaximenes, air is the most low-quality of all material elements; a transparent and invisible substance that is difficult/impossible to see, which has no color or normal bodily qualities. At the same time, air is a qualitative principle, although in many ways it is an image of universal spontaneity, filled with generalized abstract, universal content.

According to Anaximenes, the world arises from “infinite” air, and all the diversity of things is air in its various states. Thanks to rarefaction (i.e. heating) fire arises from the air, thanks to condensation (i.e. cooling) - wind, clouds, water, earth and stones. Rarefied air gives rise to celestial bodies with a fiery nature. An important aspect of Anaximenes’ provisions: condensation and rarefaction are understood here as basic, mutually opposite but equally functional processes involved in the formation of various states of matter.

Anaximenes’ choice of air as the cosmogonic first principle and the actual life basis of the cosmos is based on the principle of parallelism between the microcosm and the macrocosm: “just as air in the form of our soul holds us together, so breath and air embrace the entire Earth.” Anaximenes’ boundless air embraces the entire world and is the source of life and breathing of living beings.

Completing the construction of a unified picture of the world, Anaximenes finds in the boundless air the beginning of both body and soul; the gods also come from the air; the soul is airy, life is breath. Augustine reports that “Anaximenes did not deny the gods and did not pass over them in silence... Anaximenes... said that the beginning is unlimited air, and that from it arises everything that is, that was, that will be; (all) divine and divine things; and that everything that follows will arise from the offspring of the air.” But Anaximenes, Augustine reports, was convinced that “it was not the gods who created air, but that they themselves were made of air.” The gods of Anaximenes are a modification of a material substance (and accordingly, in the view of orthodox theology, are non-divine, that is, they are not actually gods).

Anaximenes first introduces the concept of the mutual relationship of primordial matter and motion. Air as primordial matter, according to his views, “constantly fluctuates, for if it did not move, it would not change as much as it changes.” (At the same time, Anaximenes postulates “condensation” and “rarefaction” of a single primordial matter, leading to the formation of various states (the matter of the world), as opposite but equally functional processes, i.e. both lead to qualitative changes.) Anaximenes suggests a step towards the development of the first teachings about qualitative changes, i.e. comes close to the dialectic of transforming quantitative changes into qualitative ones.

Like Thales and Anaximander, Anaximenes studied astronomical phenomena, which, like other natural phenomena, he sought to explain in a natural way. Anaximenes believed that the Sun was a (flat celestial) body similar to the Earth and the Moon, which became hot from rapid movement. The earth and heavenly bodies float in the air; The earth is motionless, other luminaries and planets (which Anaximenes distinguished from stars and which, as he believed, arise from earthly vapors) move by cosmic winds.

The works of Anaximenes have survived in fragments.