It is everything, and yet it is everything that is not, for in time everything that is not, will be. The art and thought of Heraclitus. Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University Press, p. L1 2 Modern Stoicism. Heraclitus and the Birth of the Logos. So, here we have a move from his aphoristic observations of the sensory world, to a singular and uniting thread between all things.
This way, he offers his readers a way of unlocking the power of true understanding for themselves, with lesser regard for knowledge that is simply exchanged between subjects. From this we can ascribe an objectivity to the Logos, as it is something that is both outside and above us mere mortals yet is inescapably inherent in everything. His philosophy embraced opposites, and as previously mentioned he believed all of reality to be comprised of opposing features.
As a generalisation, tension can be considered to be what holds reality together, while at the same time pulling it apart and creating change. This is figurative of the war that he believed to be ever-present, and an essential and necessary feature of reality.
In fact, Heraclitus, according to his own philosophy, recognised a harmony of opposites in the notion of war itself; born out of destruction is creation, and by creating we necessarily destroy. For every father there must also be a mother, and in this case would be peace or love, as a war itself must necessarily involve opposing forces. Existence is comprised of opposites, and united, these opposites are viewed as one and the same thing; the opposing characteristics are simply the two extremes of a unified existence.
There is no being for Heraclitus — only becoming. As I will discuss in section 4, this is echoed in modern scientific theories. Ancient concepts of philosophy.
London [u. The presocratic philosophers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. Parmenides: Being, Change, and Motion Parmenides of Elea, accredited Father of Metaphysics and founder of the Eleatic School of Philosophy, held rather radical views on the nature of reality. The Eleatics shared the fundamental view than there was a unified, static, ever-existing, and uniform reality, that was perceived by human minds as something that supported the possibilities of birth, death, movement, and change; this for the Eleatics, was a misinterpretation of reality fed to us by our senses which were not to be trusted.
His exceptional powers of reasoning brought speculation about the origin and constitution of the universe to a halt, and caused it to make a fresh start on different lines. It is divided into three sections, which I interpret as a development from an existential position, to a consideration of the falsity of sense-experience, and finally concludes with a rational insight. She tells him that an inquiry into what is not cannot be conceived of, and that nothingness or not-being are illegal concepts.
Parmenides would argue that unicorns do exist, because once they are conceived of in mind, that is where they exist, even as an immaterial entity. This rational approach to the nature of reality and being leaves Parmenides unable to conceive of non-being; nothingness cannot generate something, therefore if something exists, it must have always existed, or been generated from something, or some other things that already existed.
In the same way that energy cannot be created or destroyed but simply transferred between existing entities or converted into other forms or other types of energy, such is existence for Parmenides.
Both of these concepts describe a closed system in which the individual parts contribute to the totality by interacting with other individual parts. A History of Greek Philosophy. On this [way] are very many signs: that what is cannot come-to-be nor cease-to-be; [that it is] whole, unique, unmoving and complete — nor was it ever nor will it be, since it is all together now — one, coherent.
This premise is what underpins his entire philosophy; it leads him from the way of opinion or the world of sense-experience , to the way of truth or rationality. He is then forced to ignore what he sees happening in reality and to accepting that based on a primary scientific understanding of the world , movement is an impossibility — it is simply an illusion. The space between and around objects which is an essential part of being able to apply our metaphysical concepts to the ascription and recognition of identities in our reality - such as a person, chair, rock, or any individual entity for that matter , was a void; it was nothingness.
For movement to be possible, an entity would be required to move through this void in order to relocate itself yet moving through something which cannot be logically conceived of denies the possibility of movement in the first place. Parmenides also rejects the notion of change, again following from his premise of non-being; for something to become different from what it was at any given point in time or its state of Being , the concept of non-being must necessarily exist.
Analogously, if it could change, it would cease to be what it once was, thus what once existed Being would no longer exist; it would become non-being, but this is again an impossibility for non-being does not exist.
Flaws, Unity, and Reconciliation While both are contestable, the philosophies of both Heraclitus and Parmenides can be considered absolutist14 theories; this is the first of the similarities between the two. Heraclitus being the absolutist propounding constant and inevitable change, and Parmenides being the absolutist propounding stasis and singularity.
First, there is a change; second the change is constant; and third, because nothing is ever the same the constant change is unidirectional. In the light of science. Amherst: Prometheus Books, p. Its powers must be neither divided nor limited. It is this Logos that he views as the central spindle around which our reality in flux operates and adheres to as a fundamental principle.
Even through unpredictable yet unidirectional and constant change, everything needs to rest on a solid foundation, and similarly to Parmenides, this only exists in the realms of his rational approach to ontology. There may then be several characteristics of a person which no longer reside, such as their consciousness, their autonomy, or their rational capability, but if a person is no longer able to rationalise their Being in accordance with his fundamental premise, it would surely be fair to denote a state of non-being to that person.
He does not, according to his strict adherence to the concept of Being, allow for partial or qualified change while retaining an element of permanence to persist. This argument echoes that of the Ship of Theseus16, yet Parmenides would maintain that the ship or entity, or body could not undergo any changes due to its previous state of Being required to become non-being.
By the same token, we could not say that after the accident that there now existed a new entity of Being, as birth is an incoherent concept according to the same premise. It is essentially a consideration of identity persisting through time while qualified changes are made to the entity possessing the identity in question. It continues to divide philosophers, while at least some agree that qualified changes can be made to a numerically unique entity without the need for it to lose its uniquity, or its central essence preserving its denotation in space and time.
Being and becoming from the ontic point of view 5. Literature 1. Heraclitus — constant change Even bearing in mind that, as Ludwig Marcuse , p. Sign in to write a comment. Read the ebook. Are Forms Necessary for Discourse? Konzepte, Werkzeu Parmenides und Zenon. Das Seiende bei Parmenides, Platon un Das ontologische Problem der Negation Parmenides von Elea. Das Problem von Zeit und Zeitlichkeit Ontologischer Pluralismus.
Die Positi Parallelen zwischen Platons "Par Yet Heraclitus does not repudiate knowledge or the wisdom that comes from a proper understanding of the world. To be sure, he believes most people are not capable of wisdom; understanding is a rare and precious commodity, which even most reputed sages do not attain to B28[a].
Yet in contrast to those who view knowledge as an accumulation of information or wisdom as a collection of sayings, he requires much more than sensation and memory:. In this statement Heraclitus reviews the leading authorities of his day, living the last three and dead, dealing with religious and secular knowledge, and finds them all wanting.
They spend too much effort in collecting information and not enough in grasping its meaning. In his myths, Hesiod treats Day and Night as separate persons, taking turns traveling abroad, while one remains at home.
But this fails to capture the interconnectedness of day and night, and falsifies reality. Heraclitus criticizes Homer, Pythagoras and Archilochus for their inadequacies. A barbarian was a non-Greek; just as a foreigner hears Greek words without understanding their meaning, most people perceive without understanding the world around them.
Sense perception is necessary for knowledge, but not sufficient; without the ability to decipher information from the senses, one cannot understand the world. What chance is there then to learn the secrets of the world? What is needed is not simply more sense experience or more information, but an improved way of comprehending the message logos that the world offers.
In this context his curious method of expression begins to make sense. Many of them support two or more readings, and contain hidden insights. To comprehend them the reader must grasp their complexity and then discover their unity. To read Heraclitus appropriately is to have a rich cognitive experience, as the philosopher hints in his introduction B1. Heraclitus often presents a simple concrete situation or image which has implications for our understanding of the world: a river, a bow, a road.
He does not generally pronounce generalizations and deduce consequences. Rather, his method can be seen as inductive: he offers an example which suggests general principles. Unlike most philosophers, he challenges the right brain rather than the left. He does not teach in the conventional sense; he offers his readers materials for understanding and lets them educate themselves. He cites with approval a model of religious instruction:. The riddling statements of the Delphic oracle do not provide straightforward answers, but force people to interpret them.
His truths come to the attentive reader as discoveries resulting from the solution of a puzzle. Such an understanding can result only from an ability to interpret the language of nature. The proper understanding allows one to act in a harmonious way. Heraclitus urges moderation and self-control in a somewhat conventional way B85, B To die in battle is a superior kind of death B Those who drink to excess make their souls wet, and accordingly harm them B , for a healthy soul is dry B Those who experience better deaths attain better rewards B Those who lie will be punished B28[b].
Some of these remarks tend to suggest an afterlife with rewards and punishment, although his belief in a continued existence is controversial see Nussbaum In any case, Heraclitus views the soul as the moral and cognitive center of human experience. In political theory he maintains that one good man is worth ten thousand ordinary people B He criticizes his fellow citizens for banishing a distinguished leader:.
Evidently he trusts the few and distrusts the many. He sees good laws as being reflections of universal principles:. Although Heraclitus is not known to have had students, his writings seem to have been influential from an early time.
He may have provoked Parmenides to develop a contrasting philosophy Patin ; Graham , although their views have much more in common than is generally recognized Nehamas Empedocles seems to have invoked Heraclitean themes, and some Hippocratic treatises imitated Heraclitean language and presented applications of Heraclitean themes.
From an early time Heraclitus was seen as the representative of universal flux in contrast to Parmenides, the representative of universal stasis. As mentioned, both Plato and Aristotle viewed Heraclitus as violating the law of non-contradiction, and propounding an incoherent theory of knowledge based on a radical flux.
Yet Aristotle also treated him as a coherent material monist who posited fire as an ultimate principle. Aenesidemus interpreted Heraclitus as a kind of proto-skeptic see Polito Ever since Plato, Heraclitus has been seen as a philosopher of flux.
The challenge in interpreting the philosopher of Ephesus has always been to find a coherent theory in his paradoxical utterances. Since Hegel, he has been seen as a paradigmatic process philosopher—perhaps with some justification. The recently published Derveni Papyrus, discovered in a tomb in northern Greece, contains a commentary on an Orphic poem. See Betegh The Oxyrhynchus Papyri vol. See Burkert Life and Work 2. Method 3. Philosophical Principles 3.
Cosmology 5. Knowledge 6. Value 7. Influence 8. Method Heraclitus made every effort to break out of the mold of contemporary thought. In any case he seems to regard himself not as the author of a philosophy so much as the spokesman for an independent truth: Having harkened not to me but to the Word Logos it is wise to agree that all things are one. B50 Heraclitus stresses that the message is not his own invention, but a timeless truth available to any who attend to the way the world itself is.
For although all things happen according to this Word, they are like the unexperienced experiencing words and deeds such as I explain when I distinguish each thing according to its nature and show how it is.
Other men are unaware of what they do when they are awake just as they are forgetful of what they do when they are asleep. B1 He begins by warning his readers that most of them will not understand his message. To take a simple example: moroi mezones mezonas moiras lanchanousi. Deaths that are greater greater portions gain. B25 Heraclitus uses alliteration four m-words in a row and chiasmus an ABBA pattern to link death and reward.
The character of man is his guardian spirit. Philosophical Principles Although his words are meant to provide concrete vicarious encounters with the world, Heraclitus adheres to some abstract principles which govern the world. On those stepping into rivers staying the same other and other waters flow. Cleanthes from Arius Didymus from Eusebius B49a. Heraclitus Homericus B91[a]. Heraclitus sometimes explains how things have opposite qualities: Sea is the purest and most polluted water: for fish drinkable and healthy, for men undrinkable and harmful.
When he says, Collections: wholes and not wholes; brought together, pulled apart; sung in unison, sung in conflict; from all things one and from one all things B10 he does not contradict himself.
Most tellingly, Heraclitus explains just how contraries are connected: As the same thing in us are living and dead, waking and sleeping, young and old. For these things having changed around are those, and those in turn having changed around are these.
Heraclitus, however, advocates a radical kind of change: For souls it is death to become water, for water death to become earth, but from earth water is born, and from water soul.
B36 Here soul seems to occupy the place of fire. Cosmology Although Heraclitus is more than a cosmologist, he does offer a cosmology. His most fundamental statement on cosmology is found in B This world-order [ kosmos ], the same of all, no god nor man did create, but it ever was and is and will be: everliving fire, kindling in measures and being quenched in measures.
Heraclitus describes the transformations of elementary bodies: The turnings of fire: first sea, and of sea half is earth, half fireburst.
Heraclitus seems to acknowledge this in his praise of war and strife: We must recognize that war is common, strife is justice, and all things happen according to strife and necessity. B80 War is father of all and king of all; and some he manifested as gods, some as men; some he made slaves, some free. B53 Conflicting powers of opposites, including those of elemental bodies, make possible the world and all its variety; without that conflict we would have only lifeless uniformity.
There is, however, a guiding force in the world: Thunderbolt steers all things. B64 The fiery shaft of lightning is a symbol of the direction of the world. Knowledge Plato held that for Heraclitus knowledge is made impossible by the flux of sensible objects. Yet in contrast to those who view knowledge as an accumulation of information or wisdom as a collection of sayings, he requires much more than sensation and memory: Learning many things does not teach understanding.
Else it would have taught Hesiod and Pythagoras, as well as Xenophanes and Hecataeus. B40 In this statement Heraclitus reviews the leading authorities of his day, living the last three and dead, dealing with religious and secular knowledge, and finds them all wanting.
0コメント