10 Philosopher and the Universe – A Higher Perspective

It is already known to us that Greek philosophy emerged in the 7th century BC. The first philosopher, Thales, laid the foundation for the first school of philosophy.

The philosophers of Miletus were interested in what lies at the foundation of the world, i.e., the primary substance, the origin of nature. Yes, they focused on material causes, not religious or mythological ones. This is the first recorded instance in history of such an approach.

Thales believed that the primary substance was water. Thales’ idea of placing a material object at the foundation of creation is a completely new way of thinking. Science, with this, takes its first breath and prepares to advance rapidly.

Anaximander, in response to the first question of philosophy – what lies at the beginning of nature – gives an answer different from Thales. Apeiron – that is, the infinite, indeterminate primary substance. As we can see, unlike other philosophers, he does not believe that the primary substance of nature is one of the known types of matter. This concept arises purely through deduction. Because apeiron is not observable, it is simply the fundamental matter that lies at the foundation of existence.

The concept created by Thales through observation and Anaximander’s new speculative method further accelerates the formation of science.

“As we know, apeiron is the primary substance, and thus it must transform into matter, i.e., into physical objects. But how does this happen? In response to this question, Anaximander says – eternal motion. This way of thinking will resonate later on.

The last of the Miletian trio, Anaximenes, arrives at a similar conclusion. However, he sees the essence of existence in air. Air is infinite, light, and easily transforms into other substances. Air is apeiron, says Anaximenes. Thus, existence originates from a single substance, but the world is made up of many objects, even though they are all the result of the same substance. This idea lays the foundation for the antagonism between unity and multiplicity in philosophy. The first major antagonism of ancient Greek philosophy is born.

The three Miletian sages shape the first and most important question of philosophy – ‘What is the primary substance that underlies the world?’ Each one, though unknown to history, has already opened their eyes and provides an answer within the framework of science. For now, this is enough as a beginning.”

“This question marks the birth of ancient Greek and Western philosophy. Many philosophers begin their work by answering it. Heraclitus of Ephesus says the answer is fire. Fire transforms into water, air, earth, and then back into fire. As a result, eternal change is the fundamental characteristic of nature, and fire is superior to all.

It is known that Parmenides disagrees with Heraclitus. The Eleatic philosopher proposes the complete opposite – stability. He defends the idea that stability lies at the foundation of nature.

In philosophy, in addition to the conflict between unity and multiplicity, a new antagonism between stability and change arises. The unified is stable, unchanging. The many are in flux. This is absolute. Heraclitus’ concept reveals this problem in philosophy. He chooses change and says that one cannot step into the same river twice. Parmenides takes the opposite position.

However, Parmenides declares, ‘What exists, exists; what does not exist, does not exist.’ Therefore, existence has always existed, because otherwise, it would have to arise from non-existence. But this is impossible. First, non-existence does not exist, and second, nothing can come from non-existence.”

Existence is infinite. Otherwise, it would end in non-existence. Non-existence, as we know, does not exist and is impossible. Existence is not made up of parts, because otherwise, it would be divided into parts with non-existence, and the latter does not exist. Therefore, existence is singular and stable. Parmenides arrives at this conclusion through deduction and logic. Heraclitus, on the other hand, bases his theory on observation. Both philosophers advance philosophy in different directions by several steps.

Zeno defends Parmenides’ theory of unity and immutability. He tries to demonstrate the impossibility of change and multiplicity. For this, the Eleatic philosopher uses motion. Through the well-known dichotomy paradox, Zeno states that a distance will be divided into infinitely many halves. Thus, motion is impossible. A person moving from one point to another will never reach the destination. The same logic applies to the Achilles and the Tortoise paradox. The result – unity is absolute, just as stability is.

In doing so, Zeno transforms the problem of time, motion, and multiplicity into an actual issue for philosophy, and later for science.

Empedocles comes up with the idea of combining Heraclitus’ and Parmenides’ theories. He says that the foundation of existence consists of four elements: water, earth, air, and fire. These elements need to be in constant motion for the world to form. However, according to Parmenides’ theory, existence is singular and stable, so the force causing motion must be separate from matter, independent of it. Change occurs precisely under the influence of this external force. Empedocles calls these forces, reminiscent of natural laws, love and strife. The structure of the world depends on which of them will dominate at any given time. In this way, Empedocles attempts to reconcile Parmenides’ model of a unified and stable world with Heraclitus’ model of a changing and ever-moving world. He makes an attempt at synthesis.

Anaxagoras asks the question, ‘How can flesh come from something that is not flesh, and hair from something that is not hair?’ A philosopher who accepts Empedocles’ theory believes that there must be many elements. According to Anaxagoras, nature does not consist of just four elements, but has one element for each quality. From this, it can be concluded that these elements are infinite. Because every existing object is made up of different elements, or ‘seeds.’

If a person eats an apple, they are fulfilling the body’s needs for blood, flesh, muscle, and so on. Therefore, blood, flesh, and muscle must be in the apple. The apple is a fruit and grows in nature, so these elements must exist in the soil, air, sunlight, and water. Anaxagoras’ theory hints at Zeno’s problem of infinite division.

Thales and the Miletus school give the final and most magnificent answer to the question of what constitutes the foundation of existence – atomism. Matter is composed of atoms.

Atoms are similar to Anaxagoras’ seeds and Empedocles’ four elements. This is because objects are formed from them, and for this, atoms move in space. Therefore, existence is not stable, singular, and motionless, as Parmenides thought. Nature is diverse and always subject to change. Unlike Anaxagoras’ seeds, atoms differ only in quantity. Objects cannot be divided infinitely because atoms are indivisible.

Years later, science, which took its foundation from the Miletus school, will confirm atomism, and philosophy’s first question will, to some extent, find its answer.