The Intriguing Ancient Philosophy - Assignment Example

Ancient Philosophy

Question One

The ancient philosophy is quite intriguing. The occurrences of this period have led to changes that have taken the world to the use of science to prove things. Among the fascinating issues of ancient philosophy is 'first cause.' This is defined as a self-created being which we all refer to when certain things occur. For instance, the thought about this first cause by Aristotle, one of the great minds in the ancient history, had influenced another thinker by the name St. Thomas of Aquinas to name God as the first cause. He had the right to say as he thought that God was the creator of everything and every situation. From these issues, it follows that the search for first causes was hectic and full of confusion. Every philosopher during this period was smart enough to bring out his idea. Therefore I can term the search for first causes to be full of chaos. The teacher of Aristotle, Plato said that change is a reality and that it cannot be evaded hence he just had the change as the first cause. The search was full of contradictions.

During this period, there was a lot of theology-like thinking among some philosophers, for instance, Aristotle. However, they still did not agree on the origin of the universe. Every philosopher had his or her thoughts. The structure of the universe, according to Plato, was perfect and unchanging. To him, it was attributed to no first cause but change, Things had changed drastically into forming the universe. In his structure, the stars were eternal and divine. On the other hand, great minds like Aristotle and Thomas of Aquinas were more religious, and the origin of the universe was Biblical. St. Thomas of Aquinas builds on what Aristotle suggests. Their origin of the universe if from one superior being who makes the various things around the universe occur. They both reject that the origin of the universe is self-explanatory.

In the analysis of the ancient philosophy, I am concerned mainly with Plato and Aristotle because they contributed a lot. The former happens to be the latter's teacher, and they both have independent stands on issues. Metaphysical part of philosophy is concerned with explaining the basic nature of the universe and its contents. Plato's metaphysical principle states that the earth was perfect and unchanging and the sun, moon and planets revolved around the earth. This is the cosmological structure of the universe according to him because change is a reality and the contents of the universe were changing gradually to form the perfect and finally unchanging shape. Aristotle, on the other hand, has a metaphysical principle saying that he cosmological structure of the universe has the earth as the centre of the universe and the sun, moon, planets revolve around it. A supernatural being put the things in that order. Other philosophers challenge these great minds, but their reasons are not convincing enough to me.

Towards the end of this ancient philosophy, we see a change from mythos to logos, i.e. basing reason on myths and using logical thinking. This directs the use of natural science which is currently being used. Plato is the pioneer for this since he starts developing myths and combining myths to find a reason for the occurrence of some phenomena. In this myth formation, we see the incorporation of a philosophical argument instead of mythical argument. Hence and introduction to logical thinking a factor in natural science.

Question Two

Just like the case for Plato and Aristotle, Anaximander and Anaximenes had a close relationship between student and teacher. The former was the student for the latter. They had an independent mind, regardless of their positions. What makes me not consider them a lot is because their theories did not give any scientific or religious background. Nonetheless, their philosophies and theories illustrate great thinking. In fact, Anaximenes was the first philosopher to provide the reasoning behind his theory. Due to their independent thinking, there arise differences in their accounts f change in the universe. Anaximander says that the first thing in the universe originated from a moist element by evaporation. Man originated from other organisms like fish, whereas everything originated from an indefinite point. This changes led to the current universe. He did not provide any reasoning behind this. On the other hand, Anaximenes believes that from the air, things changed to form what is currently the earth. The formation was done through a process of rarefaction and condensation of air. By rarefaction, the air becomes fire, and by condensation, the air becomes water the stones after further condensation. The reasoning behind this was that when someone blows air onto the hand, it is hot, but while closing the lips, it is cold; thus, air can change to any matter. However, this lacks any scientific basics.

Anaximander holds an indefinite nature as the first cause of the universe rather than an element. His cosmological structure arises from. A combination of eternal motion and infinite nature brings about the difference in some phenomenon such as hot and cold. Besides, he says that the earth is there for a period of time and one day, it will be dissolved, and the indefinite nature will create more piles of earth. The way man keeps destroying things in the earth the indefinite nature gifts them, they will be punished. According to him, this infinite nature owns everything. Anaximenes holds air as the first cause. According to him, air can be changed to different states of matter, including fire, stones and water, among others. These states enable the existence of the contents of the earth like land or even fire for use. In his account, this first cause can change to any state depending on rarefaction and condensation levels that one gets to. Like outlined earlier, the search for the first cause was quite interesting and fascinating!

The process of rarefaction occurs in theory put across by Anaximenes. Rarefaction was simply thinning of the air to make fire. The qualitative account of the universe differs from the quantitative account. In the former, the universe is arranged in a manner that a person can understand. These qualitative accounts have been seen after the involvement of logos into the debate of the first cause. It has come with the astrologists. The implication of this approach is the removal of the confusion of the origin of the universe. It has narrowed down the origin of the universe to less first causes making research easier. The quantitative account of the universe just puts everything into the universe without any order. This was mostly in the ancient philosophy, where they argued that the earth is at the centre of the universe. The qualitative approach is way better and reasonable than the quantitative approach.

Question Three

Parmenides is a Greek Philosopher who existed in ancient Greek Philosophy. He is the founder of the Elea school of philosophy. In his time, there seems to arise an argument between him and Plato. Parmenides does not believe in change which Plato believes thus the argument. Parmenides was the author of the great doctrine of Being and Becoming. In the doctrine, several issues arise. Among them is the great phrase of 'whatever is is and what is not cannot'. Essentially he tries to bring out the issue of following what one knows and has facts for rather than following an opinion. This is summarized in layman's language as a way of Truth and a way of opinion. This doctrine can be summarized in one phrase ‘all in one’. This phrase, according to the philosopher is that the process of multiplying in the existing things, the changing in the form of the existing things and the change in motion are a representation of a single eternal being. Therefore, there is no change. All the changes we observe in the different existing things are the different forms of the single eternal being. Another issue, as illustrated earlier, is that the doctrine does not believe in change. He says that change is impossible but the existence of the existing things in eternal. His doctrine pulls towards theology in some sense. The doctrine of Parmenides is written as a poem.

The way of Truth is a part of the poem that Parmenides writes to put across his philosophical thoughts. In that part of the poem, he says that there is a way which is and a way which is not. This is somehow philosophical and needs explanation. The way which is is the way than an individual has facts and truths about while the way which is not, is the way that one has opinions about.

According to the Doctrine, there exists One Being who is represented by the changes occurring, including multiplying and change in form. There is a criterion to prove that this one existing as outlined by Parmenides. This criterion is the observable features that we observe in the inhabitants of the universe. The changing in the form of the different existing things, the change in motion of the different existing things and the multiplying of living things.

The way of becoming according to Parmenides is the way which is. He said that the is the way which is and the way which is not with the latter being the way of opinions and the former being the way of Truth. To be able to become in life, then one must follow the way of Truth.

The goddess Justice is a phenomenon in ancient Greek. The guarantees made by the goddess can be taken from a philosophical end and a literature end. In the philosophical end, she guaranteed no hope for Justice since she left and never came back, and she was in charge of Justice. Therefore individuals believing in her should not have hope for Justice. On the literature end, she guarantees that she will come back with the utopian Golden Age. This was a relief to the believers because there would be peace, harmony, stability and prosperity. Furthermore, people would not work since the earth provide food with abundance. People would live for long without getting old.

Towards the end of this ancient philosophy, we see a change from mythos to logos, i.e. basing reason on myths and using logical thinking. This directs the use of natural science which is currently being used. Plato is the pioneer for this since he starts developing myths and combining myths to find a reason for the occurrence of some phenomena. In this myth formation, we see the incorporation of a philosophical argument instead of mythical argument. Hence and introduction to logical thinking a factor in natural science.

Question Two

Just like the case for Plato and Aristotle, Anaximander and Anaximenes had a close relationship between student and teacher. The former was the student for the latter. They had an independent mind, regardless of their positions. What makes me not consider them a lot is because their theories did not give any scientific or religious background. Nonetheless, their philosophies and theories illustrate great thinking. In fact, Anaximenes was the first philosopher to provide the reasoning behind his theory. Due to their independent thinking, there arise differences in their accounts f change in the universe. Anaximander says that the first thing in the universe originated from a moist element by evaporation. Man originated from other organisms like fish, whereas everything originated from an indefinite point. This changes led to the current universe. He did not provide any reasoning behind this. On the other hand, Anaximenes believes that from the air, things changed to form what is currently the earth. The formation was done through a process of rarefaction and condensation of air. By rarefaction, the air becomes fire, and by condensation, the air becomes water the stones after further condensation. The reasoning behind this was that when someone blows air onto the hand, it is hot, but while closing the lips, it is cold; thus, air can change to any matter. However, this lacks any scientific basics.

Anaximander holds an indefinite nature as the first cause of the universe rather than an element. His cosmological structure arises from. A combination of eternal motion and infinite nature brings about the difference in some phenomenon such as hot and cold. Besides, he says that the earth is there for a period of time and one day, it will be dissolved, and the indefinite nature will create more piles of earth. The way man keeps destroying things in the earth the indefinite nature gifts them, they will be punished. According to him, this infinite nature owns everything. Anaximenes holds air as the first cause. According to him, air can be changed to different states of matter, including fire, stones and water, among others. These states enable the existence of the contents of the earth like land or even fire for use. In his account, this first cause can change to any state depending on rarefaction and condensation levels that one gets to. Like outlined earlier, the search for the first cause was quite interesting and fascinating!

The process of rarefaction occurs in theory put across by Anaximenes. Rarefaction was simply thinning of the air to make fire. The qualitative account of the universe differs from the quantitative account. In the former, the universe is arranged in a manner that a person can understand. These qualitative accounts have been seen after the involvement of logos into the debate of the first cause. It has come with the astrologists. The implication of this approach is the removal of the confusion of the origin of the universe. It has narrowed down the origin of the universe to less first causes making research easier. The quantitative account of the universe just puts everything into the universe without any order. This was mostly in the ancient philosophy, where they argued that the earth is at the centre of the universe. The qualitative approach is way better and reasonable than the quantitative approach.

Question Three

Parmenides is a Greek Philosopher who existed in ancient Greek Philosophy. Read More