26,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Serie: This is Philosophy
- Sprache: Englisch
THIS IS ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY
“A masterful introduction to ancient philosophy. Fitzpatrick knows the contemporary scholarship on these authors, so he can shift from summarizing their thought to scrutinizing individual arguments. Meanwhile the writing remains so accessible that a reader might not notice how much he covers. The prose is precise but relaxed, with details that enrich the texture: the Pythagoreans’ harmonies, the Stoic Horned Argument, Antisthenes’ daily walk to Socrates. Students and instructors alike will benefit.”
—Nickolas Pappas, Professor at City College of New York (CUNY)
This Is Ancient Philosophy is a fascinating introduction to the major philosophers and foundational concepts of classical antiquity.
Assuming no prior knowledge, the book uses an intuitive, readable narrative style as it examines the ideas, influences, and interconnections of philosophers such as Socrates, the Sophists, Plato, and Aristotle, as well as philosophical schools of thought including Cynicism, Epicureanism, Stoicism, and Skepticism.
Divided into three parts, the book opens with an overview of early Greek philosophy, describing the turn from mythological thinking to philosophical analysis. The second part focuses on the distinctions between the subjects of philosophy in both the Golden Age and today, followed by a survey of the Hellenistic period and a discussion of the relation between fate and freedom of action. Throughout, readers are aided by a wealth of instructive and engaging charts, grids, figures, and a detailed map illustrating the chronological development of philosophy, from Asia Minor to southern Italy and Athens.
Part of the popular This Is Philosophy series, This Is Ancient Philosophy is an excellent text for students of philosophy, both introductory and advanced, and general readers with interest in the philosophy of the classical era.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 517
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2024
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
COVER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SERIES PAGE
TITLE PAGE
COPYRIGHT PAGE
DEDICATION PAGE
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
MAP
INTRODUCTION
The Precursors of Philosophy: Homer and Hesiod
This Is Ancient Greek Philosophy
Part I: EARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY
1 MILETUS AND ELEA
1.1 Miletus
1.2 Elea
2 IONIA AND THRACE
2.1 Ionia
2.2 Thrace
3 THE PHILOSOPHIC TURN
Part II: THE GOLDEN AGE
4 PLATO
4.1 Biography and Texts
4.2 The Socratic Dialogues
4.3 The Sophists
4.4 Plato’s Philosophy
5 ARISTOTLE
5.1 Biography and Texts
5.2 Aristotle's Philosophy
6 THE SUBJECTS OF PHILOSOPHY
Part III: HELLENISTIC PHILOSOPHY
7 CYNICISM AND EPICUREANISM
7.1 Alexander's Death
7.2 Cynicism
7.3 Epicurus and Epicureanism
8 STOICISM AND SKEPTICISM
8.1 Stoicism
8.2 Skepticism: Pyrrhonians and Academics
9 FATE AND THE GOOD LIFE
9.1 Historical Context
9.2 Moral Weakness as Akrasia
9.3 Fate and Voluntary Action
9.4 The Good Life
Index
End User License Agreement
Guide
INTRODUCTION
Table of Contents
Cover Page
Series Page
Title Page
Copyright
Dedication Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
MAP
Begin Reading
Index
WILEY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
Pages
ii
iIi
iv
v
xi
xii
xiii
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
69
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
151
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
THIS IS PHILOSOPHY
Series editor: Steven D. Hales
Reading philosophy can be like trying to ride a bucking bronco—you hold on for dear life while “transcendental deduction” twists you to one side, “causa sui” throws you to the other, and a 300‐word, 300‐year‐old sentence comes down on you like an ironshod hoof the size of a dinner plate. This Is Philosophy is the riding academy that solves these problems. Each book in the series is written by an expert who knows how to gently guide students into the subject regardless of the reader’s ability or previous level of knowledge. Their reader‐friendly prose is designed to help students find their way into the fascinating, challenging ideas that compose philosophy without simply sticking the hapless novice on the back of the bronco, as so many texts do. All the books in the series provide ample pedagogical aids, including links to free online primary sources. When students are ready to take the next step in their philosophical education, This Is Philosophy is right there with them to help them along the way.
This Is Philosophy, Second editionSteven D. Hales
This Is Philosophy of MindPete Mandik
This Is EthicsJussi Suikkanen
This Is Political PhilosophyAlex Tuckness and Clark Wolf
This Is Business EthicsTobey Scharding
This Is MetaphysicsKris McDaniel
This Is BioethicsRuth F. Chadwick and Udo Schuklenk
This Is EpistemologyJ. Adam Carter and Clayton Littlejohn
This Is Philosophy of ReligionNeil Manson
This Is Ancient PhilosophyKirk Fitzpatrick
This Is Philosophy of Mind, 2nd editionPete Mandik
This Is Philosophy of ScienceFranz‐Peter Griesmaier and Jeffrey A. Lockwood
Forthcoming:
This Is Feminist PhilosophyRoxana Baiasu
THIS IS ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY
AN INTRODUCTION
KIRK FITZPATRICK
Copyright © 2024 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.All rights reserved.
Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.Published simultaneously in Canada.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per‐copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750‐8400, fax (978) 750‐4470, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, (201) 748‐6011, fax (201) 748‐6008, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permission.
Trademarks: Wiley and the Wiley logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the United States and other countries and may not be used without written permission. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762‐2974, outside the United States at (317) 572‐3993 or fax (317) 572‐4002.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic formats. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication DataNames: Fitzpatrick, Kirk, author.Title: This is ancient philosophy : an introduction / Kirk Fitzpatrick.Description: Hoboken, New Jersey : Wiley‐Blackwell, [2024] | Series: This is philosophy | Includes index.Identifiers: LCCN 2023047959 (print) | LCCN 2023047960 (ebook) | ISBN 9781119879404 (paperback) | ISBN 9781119879411 (adobe pdf) | ISBN 9781119879428 (epub)Subjects: LCSH: Philosophy, Ancient.Classification: LCC B171 .F68 2024 (print) | LCC B171 (ebook) | DDC 180–dc23/eng/20240112LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023047959LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023047960
Cover design: Wiley
For Elizabeth and Forrest
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I want to acknowledge the excellent team at Wiley‐Blackwell. I am especially grateful to Steven D. Hales and Will Croft for their patience, support, and valuable advice. I am also thankful to the anonymous reviewers for their candid critiques. I am forever in debt to Charles M. Young, Richard D. McKirahan, and Daniel W. Graham for their pedagogy and mentorship through the decades. I could not have written this book without them. The book benefited greatly from multiple critiques by Kurt Smith and Lee Trepanier. Thank you also to Aubrey M. Bodine for making the map. I am grateful to Southern Utah University for granting me a sabbatical leave to aid this project. Finally, I want to thank all of my students through the last 31 years.
MAP
INTRODUCTION
The Precursors of Philosophy: Homer and Hesiod
Before Greek philosophy, there was Homer (c. 750 BCE), the cornerstone of all early Greek writings. He offers two epic poems, the Iliad and the Odyssey.1 The Iliad is a story about rage, courage, and honor. The Odyssey is a story for training in leadership and excellence (arete). Athena mentors Telemachus until Odysseus returns. The epic poems employ the gods as anthropomorphic and immortal beings. The gods meddle in natural and human events. They have demigod children with humans, and they suffer the same emotions as humans. Homer employs a worldview that he inherits and weaves into his epic poems. He mentions the heavens, the gods, and the underworld. He treats natural phenomena, such as rivers, as gods. He puts gods on the battlefield. When Ares gets wounded in battle, he wails like a baby and runs back up to Olympus.2 What he does not offer is an account of the heavens, the earth, the underworld, or gods in their own right. Still, for the early Greek philosophers and Plato, these are essential readings. The philosophers do not adopt the teachings. They critique the stories and propose alternative views. Any student of ancient Greek philosophy should read these works carefully.
It might seem that Homer’s works were the Bible of the ancient Greek world. This accurately places Homer at the center of Greek thought, but it ignores certain important points. There are two main differences between Homer’s texts and the Bible. The Bible is sacrosanct; it excludes any alternative view. Its stories cannot be altered or varied without heresy. The ancients took Homer’s stories as more fluid. A poet could claim, for instance, that Helen was not to blame for the war on Troy since the Helen in Troy was a specter. Helen all the while was somewhere else. Modern religions do not allow reinterpretation of their scripture. Historically, every Christian who wrote a book to distinguish all the heretics eventually became a heretic. Heretics did not fare well. Good luck for the Greeks, since they did not interpret Homer as sacrosanct.
Hesiod (c. 700 BCE) offers an importantly different approach to the archaic Greek perspective. Though he inherits the worldview, Hesiod is concerned to offer a more detailed and systematic treatment of the heavens, the earth, the gods, and human beings. Theogony and Works and Days offer an account of the topics. “Theogony” means the coming to be of the gods, or the birth of the gods.3 The story that Hesiod tells connects the birth of the gods with the birth of the Kosmos, the ordered world. Works and Days tells of the cycles in the agricultural calendar, the regular cycles of the seasons, and the cycles in the many different ages of mankind.4 In this work, we get the story of Prometheus and Pandora. We also get the five ages of man.
According to Hesiod, the god Khaos (chaos) came into being first or has always been. This god is the space between heaven and earth. Next come the goddess Gaia (earth) and the god Ouranos (heaven). Then came the gods Tartaros (underworld) and Eros (love). Khaos begets Erebos (night). Erebos begets the gods Aether (topmost air) and Hemera (day). Gaia begets starry Ouranos (heaven) and makes him equal to her size. Heaven is so nice that it is begotten twice, according to Hesiod. She also begets mountains and nymphs. Gaia and Ouranos beget the twelve Titans. First comes Oceanos (sea); it encircles the earth and flows around it. Then they beget Kronos (time), Tethys (rivers), and Themis (justice). Oceanus and Tethys beget Metis (wisdom). In the beginning, Ouranos ruled all the gods and nature. Ouranos ruled as the father of the other gods. One of Ouranos’ Titans, Kronos, overthrew him and forced his way to rule. Time, then, comes to rule the gods and nature. Through time, Kronos and the Titaness Rhea (mother) beget six children. Hestia, Demeter, Hera, Poseidon, and Hades were her first five children. Kronos ruled through power. He was warned that his offspring would overthrow him, just as he had done to his father. So, Kronos swallowed his first five children whole. There, the five swallowed immortal gods were contained in him. Eating the children seems odd, but there are not many options for containing and controlling an immortal being. Zeus was the sixth offspring. Rhea saved Zeus by giving Kronos a rock to swallow, instead of her child. She hid Zeus in Gaia. Over time and by might, Zeus challenged and overthrew Kronos by giving him a potion that made him vomit. Thereby, he freed all his siblings that had been swallowed by Kronos. Zeus did not take kingship straightaway after freeing his siblings and overthrowing Kronos. After overthrowing Kronos, the gods voted to elect a ruler. Zeus won the election. He then swallowed Metis (wisdom), who was his first wife, and Themis (justice). Zeus rules through wisdom and justice. He provides rational and moral order to the Kosmos.
Hesiod adds curious features to his account. He says that heaven is the same size as earth. Possibly, though we do not know, he holds that the underworld is the same size as earth and heaven. He says that the distance between heaven and earth is calculated by the amount of time it would take for an iron anvil to fall for ten days and nine nights. The same calculation is used for the distance between the earth and the underworld. So, the earth is equidistant between heaven and the underworld. Hesiod offers a rational proportion among the top, the bottom, and the between of what is. In Hesiod’s cosmology, an account of the Kosmos, the Kosmos is intelligible. Human beings can use reason to understand it and language (logos) to account for it. The Kosmos is guided by wisdom and ordered through justice.
Suppose we ask Homer or Hesiod how they learned such marvelous things. How might I discover such things? From the texts that we have, we can see that neither Homer nor Hesiod would have a justification that went beyond an appeal to tradition and an appeal to authority. They could say, “Believe me because we Greeks have always believed this or have believed it for a very long time.” They might say, “Believe me because I am an authoritative source.” As philosophers today, we can say that believing something because it has been believed for a long time or believing something because of who said it are instances of the informal fallacies of appeal to tradition and appeal to authority. Homer and Hesiod had popular accounts of the Kosmos, and there was no comparable rival. The philosophers would change this by offering a different sort or kind of explanation.
This Is Ancient Greek Philosophy
The sources that we have for conveying information about the early Greek philosophers are far removed from the original texts. Manuscripts from the era were disseminated by scribes, making copies of a text. The text that formed the basis for the scribe was more likely than not a copy of a copy of a copy. Scribes are imperfect conduits of information. In addition to the challenges faced in ascertaining the accuracy of the base text, there are errors that often occur in the transcription of the base text. There are errors of omission: Homeoteleuton occurs when a transcription skips words because a subsequent word has the same or a similar ending. Homeoarchy occurs when the transcriber skips lines because of the similarity of the beginnings of the lines. Haplography occurs when the transcriber copies a term that appears twice in the base text. There are errors in addition. Dittography occurs when the transcriber writes a term twice that appears only once in the base text. Contamination occurs when a transcriber inserts text that is not in the base text. There are errors in transposition. Metathesis occurs when a transcriber reverses letters, words, or phrases from the base text. Finally, but not exhaustively, there are errors of alteration. These errors occur when a transcriber attempts, deliberately or not, to make sense of the base text in the transcription.
We would be fortunate if we had confidence that our sources were copies of copies that could trace their preceding texts straight through to the original text. We are not so fortunate. Instead, we encounter the ideas of the early Greek philosophers through subsequent texts that offer information that is drawn from original texts or copies of original texts. Since we do not have the original texts, we cannot determine what sort the base text was for the author recounting the thoughts of his predecessors. Our sources offer information of two sorts. Testimonia offers paraphrases of a focal author’s text, of a transcription of the focal author’s text, or of the focal author’s ideas or reputed ideas. Fragments offer a quotation from the focal author’s text or a transcription at some remove from the author’s text. The fragments might be a quotation of a word, phrase, or selection of varying length from a base text. We are fortunate today to have valuable collections of reference texts. This book makes use of certain standard sources.5
Ancient philosophy is distant in time and distant linguistically from us today. The manuscripts that we have often conflict with each other or only partially preserve the text. The expanse of time resulted in many works being partially or entirely lost to us. The ancient Greek language presents challenges of its own, since many of its terms cannot be directly translated into English. In this text, I have retained some of the central Greek terms. I offer the Greek terms in a non‐technical phonetic form so that English readers can easily hear an approximation of the original terms6. The phonetic rendition of the Greek terms fulfills another goal. It stresses that we are discussing the Greek ideas and not their English translations. For instance, the book uses and examines the Greek concept of Kosmos and not the English term “cosmos.”
It is common for texts on ancient philosophy to adopt one of two approaches, either focusing on certain philosophers or on certain themes. The following text adopts a hybrid approach by examining both philosophers and themes. There are three parts in this book and three chapters in each part. The three parts are organized in the same way. They start with two chapters on particular authors and conclude with a chapter on a theme. Part I of the book is Early Greek Philosophy. These philosophers turn from the mythological and theological explanation of the Kosmos to rational and material explanations. Thales holds that water is the basic stuff; Anaximenes holds that it is air; Anaximander holds that it is the unlimited (apeiron); and Empedocles holds that it is earth, air, fire, and water. Democritus holds that it is atoms. Some hold that the explanation of the Kosmos is more abstract. Empedocles holds that it is Mind (nous) and seeds. Xenophanes is skeptical about almost all that we think we know. Part I concludes with a chapter called “The Philosophical Turn.” This chapter examines the development of rational and material explanations through a comparative analysis of the early Greeks. We cannot overstate the importance of the early Greek philosophers. We continue to investigate and explain the world through rational and material explanations. Though science as we know it today did not sprout fully from the early Greeks, they turned us toward models and methods that continue to develop and guide us today.
Part II is The Golden Age. This part examines Plato and Aristotle’s texts. Plato offers an account of Socrates and the Sophists. He also offers his own philosophical system in the theory of forms. The Plato chapter concludes by examining the implications of the theory of forms for ethics and politics. These implications show that one form of government is just and all others are unjust, in varying degrees. Aristotle innovates the subject of formal logic. He also offers his own philosophical system, in his theory of Hylomorphism. Through the implications of his theory, Aristotle gives an account of ethics and politics. His theory of ethics argues that virtue is a mean between two extremes, one of excess and one of deficiency. The chapter on Aristotle concludes with his account of politics and justice in the state. Part II concludes with the theme of The Subjects of Philosophy, offering the distinctions among the subjects of philosophy as employed in the golden age and today.
Part III is Hellenistic Philosophy. This period of philosophy begins with the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BCE. Aristotle died a year later. Under Alexander, the Hellenic world had expanded and unified in a way unmatched in western history. At the time of his death, Alexander’s empire spread from Greece, Egypt and North Africa to the western part of India. During the fragmentation of the Alexandrian empire and the civil wars, Hellenistic philosophy developed and flourished. There were four philosophies in the period: Cynicism, Epicureanism, Stoicism, and Skepticism. The Cynics reject conventional values and live a life according to nature. They live without possessions in a hand‐to‐mouth existence on the streets. They strive for happiness through minimalist living and control over their desires. Epicurus adopts atomism, but he focuses on mental and physical quietude. He aims to embody imperturbability (ataraxia). Stoicism develops innovations in logic, by going beyond Aristotle’s syllogistic logic and by offering an account of propositional logic. Despite this historically significant innovation, the Stoics are squarely concerned to develop a disciplined mind and body. They aim to control desires, passions, and assent to judgments. They consider it their duty to live according to nature. This disciplined life according to nature results in imperturbability and a happy life (eudaimonia). The Sceptics are the inheritors of Plato’s Academy. They develop an account of argument that critiques the claims of other philosophers by opposing a thesis argument with an antithesis argument. They hold that any thesis can be opposed by an equally credible antithesis. So, they withhold assent (epoche) and suspend judgment. In this way, they avoid dogmatism (dogmatikos) to achieve both imperturbability and apathy (apatheia).
The theme of Part III is the focal concern of Hellenistic philosophy, the good life. Each movement aims at happiness. They find it through various means: imperturbability, apathy, and the suspension of judgment. They all agree that to live the good life, one must engage in purposeful voluntary action. They inherit accounts of voluntary action from Plato and Aristotle. These two golden age figures develop their accounts of voluntary action in the light of Socrates’ claim that one cannot voluntarily act against one’s better judgment. He denied that there are acts of moral weakness. This leads Plato and Aristotle to develop accounts of voluntary action and explain action against one’s better judgment. The Hellenistic philosophers inherit the accounts of voluntary action, and they establish commitments in the early Greek philosophers. The materialism of the early Greek philosophers, especially the atomists, implies a fated outcome in the Kosmos. There is psychological determinism in Socrates’ denial of moral weakness, in addition to the materialists’ Kosmic determinism. Attempts to account for voluntary action against better judgment become attempts to account for voluntary action in contrapose to the necessity of the fated Kosmos. Each of the Hellenistic philosophers attempts to reconcile these conflicting concerns. This difficulty remains today as the question of the freedom of will.
Notes
1
Homer's
Iliad
and
Odyssey
are available online at the Perseus Digital Library. The Iliad is here:
https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0134:book=1:card=1
. The Odyssey is here:
https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0136
.
2
Iliad
V.860.
3
Hesiod's
Theogony
is available here:
https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0130
.
4
Hesiod's
Works and Days
is available here:
https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0132
.
5
The Early Greeks: Richard D. McKirahan,
Philosophy Before Socrates
(Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 1994). Daniel W. Graham,
The Texts of Early Greek Philosophy, The Complete Fragments and Selected Testimonies of the Major Presocratics,
Part I
and
II
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010). The titles in the Loeb Classical Library collection are here:
https://www.loebclassics.com/view/LCL524/2016/volume.xml
. The Golden Age: John M. Cooper,
Plato: Complete Works
, (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 1997). Jonathan Barnes,
The Complete Works of Aristotle
in two volumes (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991). Hellenistic Philosophy: Long and Sedley,
The Hellenistic Philosophers
(New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987). A.A. Long,
Hellenistic Philosophy, Stoic, Epicureans, and Sceptics
2
nd
ed., (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986). Diogenes Laertius,
Lives of Eminent Philosophers
, R.D. Hicks trans. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1931) refers to philosophers in all three periods. Digital Libraries: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Classics (MIT):
http://classics.mit.edu/index.html
. Project Guttenberg:
https://www.gutenberg.org
. Perseus Digital Library at Tufts University has Greek and English texts here:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper
.
6
To read the Greek words, pronounce the letter “c” as an English “k” and pronounce the letter “y” as a “u.”
Part IEARLY GREEK PHILOSOPHY
1MILETUS AND ELEA
1.1 Miletus
1.1.1 Thales
Thales of Miletus lived in the late seventh century BCE and early sixth century BCE. Apollodorus of Athens claimed that Thales was born in about 625 BCE. According to Herodotus, he predicted a solar eclipse that occurred on 28 May, 585 BCE. Diogenes Laertius tells us that he died at the fifty‐eighth Olympiad (548–545 BCE) at the age of 78. His family history is reported as going back to the Phoenicians. Thales is cited as the only early Greek philosopher among the seven sages.
Thales is the subject of numerous anecdotes, which function historically to commend or malign philosophers. Thales is credited with devising a brilliant way to cross a river. Rather than cross the river, have the river cross you. The story goes that an army needed to cross a river, but the river was too strong to cross. So, he found a pronounced curve in the river, advanced into the bulge, and once the army advanced into the bulge, he rerouted a portion of the river behind them. With the river split, they could cross to the other side. Though many particulars of this story are dubitable, the engineering is not improbable. There are some stories about him that have become stereotypes of philosophers. When he was asked why he had little money, but was supposed to be wise, he invested in olives and made great profits. This story was meant to show that philosophy teaches practical skills, but philosophers are not preoccupied with employing them. Along similar lines, Aristotle tells us that Thales was criticized for seeming to be wise but being poor. As the story goes, Thales studied the heavens and predicted a bumper crop in olives the next year. He put deposits on the olive presses. In modern economics, he bought all the futures contracts for olive presses. He subsequently made a large profit. This anecdote was to show that though philosophers seem practically useless for studying the heavens, they are not. The philosophers do not go after money, but wisdom instead.
In another anecdote, when Thales was walking along, looking to the heavens and examining the stars, he fell into a well. This story portrays philosophers as practically useless stargazers.1 Plato returns to the negative conception of the philosophers in the Republic, when he tells us that the majority of people (hoi polloi) call the philosophers “useless stargazers.”2 In everyday life, the philosopher is not worried about the peculiarities of what is proximate; instead, the philosopher wonders about what is universal. Thales does not know his neighbor, but he is keenly interested in humankind. Thales of Miletus was credited as the first to develop natural philosophy. He did not take payment from his associates or students.
Thales brought geometry and mathematics to Greece. Proclus mentions that Thales learned mathematics from knowledge handed down from the Phoenicians, whereas the Greeks learned geometry from the Egyptians. Thales traveled to Egypt and learned other science, both general and empirical. He theorized about math and geometry in the abstract, but he also applied his theories to empirical observations. In the abstract, he was the first Greek to identify the diameter of a circle. He divided the year into 365 days. He showed that an isosceles triangle has two equal angles. In Egypt, he measured the height of the pyramids by their shadows. By establishing the relation between an upright stick and its shadow, he calculated the height of the pyramids.
We have conflicting reports of Thales’ writings. One work that he possibly authored was called the Nautical Star Guide. Alternatively, he is said to have written only two major treatises: On the Solstice and On the Equinox. Some sources tell us that he wrote nothing, and to date we cannot verify that Thales wrote any works. The works that are spuriously attributed to Thales are indicative of an interest that he had in the sky. Thales claims that the stars are composed of the earth and fire. This claim makes the unknown (the stars) like the known (earth and fire). The move is essential to reasoning that extrapolates known things and extends them to unknown things. We saw this move in measuring the pyramids; the known is the ratio of height to shadow as determined by a stick of known height in relation to a shadow of known length. This information is then applied to the unknown, the height of the pyramid. He is credited with predicting a solar eclipse, but it is more likely that Thales explained a solar eclipse. He argued that the moon passes in front of the sun to causes an eclipse. Here we have a natural explanation of a solar eclipse.
There is a singular innovation that Thales made to establish his place as an early Greek philosopher. He tried to find a principle of all things and a theory of all things in matter. This move is indicative of many early Greek philosophers, but it is important to note that it is not true of all of them. Since he was reputedly the first to develop a theory of all things in a material substratum, he is hailed as the first Greek philosopher. In the following passage, Aristotle offers a general account of the early Greek philosophers who found a material substratum that persists through change. All things come from this substratum and return to it.3 Aristotle notes that this is a revolutionary innovation. The early Greek philosophers claimed that the substratum underlies and is the principle of everything. There is a wide variety of stuff, such as plants, animals, wood, mud, etc. These thinkers, Aristotle tells us, attempt to account for the variety of stuff by identifying a more basic stuff. One might, for example, identify mud as a combination of the earth and water. One might, for example, claim that there are four types of basic stuff: air, earth, fire, and water. In this way, a philosopher could explain the enormous variety of stuff by means of an account of more basic stuff. These philosophers attempted to find the most basic stuff. If this process ends in multiple basic material stuffs, the theory is a form of material pluralism. If the process ends in one basic stuff, which underlies all the variety of stuff, the theory is a form of material monism. We see both material pluralist and material monist theories among the early Greek philosophers. The theories claim that the basic stuff, whether singular or plural, functions as a persistent substratum. The substratum is “changing in its attributes,” but the underlying substratum persists through change. In this way, the basic stuff neither comes to be nor perishes; instead it is always preserved. Modern science, it is worth noting, continues this search for the basic stuff(s). To date, we continue this ancient search, though we have not yet found it or them.
Aristotle develops an account of four causes: material, efficient, formal, and final. By talking about the substance water as a material principle, Aristotle places it in his theory as a material cause. We will get to Aristotle’s account of the four causes in Section 5.2.3. At this point, it is important to avoid anachronism, as tempting as it might be, to frame Thales' account in Aristotle's subsequent theory. Aristotle hones in on Thales' particular theory, by noting that some early Greek philosophers are pluralists and some are monists in their accounts of the basic stuff. He identifies Thales as a monist.4 Thales, Aristotle tells us, says that the only basic stuff is water and that earth floats on water. We can say with confidence that Thales holds these claims, but we are left to conjecture concerning Thales' reasons for holding them.
Multiple sources tell us that Thales offers a materialist account of natural phenomena. He offered an explanation for the flooding of the Nile. Thales claimed that the flooding of the Nile was caused by the Etesian winds and explained earthquakes by claiming that the earth floats on water. As a ship bobs in the waves, the earth quakes in the bobbing. This also explains, he thinks, that water is dispersed throughout the rivers of the earth. These reports credit Thales with an innovation worthy of repute. A physical explanation of the flooding revolutionizes the explanatory model. It ignores the mythological model of explanation, which cited Poseidon as the cause of flooding. Thales offers a physical explanation, which cites natural phenomena as the cause. Other sources report that Thales explanatory model expands from water to the whole of the world and the heavens. First, there is water. The condensation and compaction of water forms the earth. From water and the condensation of the earth come wind, earthquakes, and the movement of the stars. Thales was the first to explain the heavens and the earth through an eternal element that underlies all changes. There are many things in need of explanation here. If we accept the first claim, water is the only thing. What changes the water and makes it condense? How can you condense water enough to get earth? Both of these concerns point to motion. The concerns condense into the question: What causes the changes in water? We need some explanation of motion in the account.
Thales imports motion elsewhere. He argues that the soul is a source of motion, in the way that magnets move objects. Aristotle argues that Thales infers the power of motion in the soul from the ability of a magnet to move iron. If we follow the model so far, water is condensed into earth. Now we are told that two forms of the earth (condensed water) can move each other (loadstone and iron). Put this together. The soul is the animating force. It is an attraction–repulsion relation between two objects. Both objects are forms of variously condensed water. If this is true, then the soul is everywhere, since water is everywhere, and the soul is just a form of water. As we saw, water is immortal, so it is God. Thales' position is expansive. He starts with one thing – water – and from it, he explains the earth, the wind, earthquakes, the flooding of the Nile, the motion of the stars, and the entire cycle of nature. It is difficult to confidently say much about Thales' beliefs and reasons for his beliefs. Testimonia does give us confidence in holding that he was reputed as holding certain beliefs and that he had some justification for holding the beliefs. If Thales offered a naturalistic account of natural phenomena, then he deserves to be credited as the first Greek philosopher. If Thales did not offer a natural account of physical phenomena, then he is not worthy of repute as the first Greek philosopher. Philosophers disagree about whether he was the first philosopher or not.
Aristotle offers a controversial interpretation of Thales' claims about water. According to Aristotle, Thales held that water is a source or governing principle. In Greek the term is arche. This is a central concept in Aristotle's philosophy. The term “arche” can have multiple meanings: (1) a base element from which other elements come, (2) a base element that makes up the world, and (3) the governing principle used to explain the world. We do not have any evidence that Thales actually employed the concept of arche in this way. While these concepts play a big part in Thales successors and in Aristotle's philosophy, Aristotle's application of the term “arche” and its various meanings to Thales is now believed to be anachronistic. Interpreters today are skeptical of Aristotle's interpretation, and they offer an alternative view of the meaning and function of water for Thales. We can recall that Homer and Hesiod placed Oceanos surrounding the earth and that Oceanos was the begetter of gods. Oceanos was said to be in motion and it generated the rivers and freshwater wells. We also saw that Oceanos functioned in a mythological and not philosophical explanatory model. When we see Thales' account in the historical context of Homer and Hesiod, we see that his account is reminiscent of the earlier mythological accounts. This is now taken to be the more likely meaning and function of “water” in Thales' claims. The early Greek philosophers hailed Thales as their founder. Aristophanes has a character jokingly say, “The man is a Thales!”5 The joke only works if Thales is believed to be philosophically wise.
1.1.2 Anaximander
Our best sources tell us that Anaximander was the son of Praxiades of Miletus. Anaximander was 64 years old during the second year of the fifty‐eighth Olympiad (547/6 BCE). This would make Anaximander about 15 years younger than Thales. Anaximander was an associate and student of Thales. Though the early Greek authors did not tend to title their works, a common practice was to give them a title after the fact. On Nature was the most popular title of works by these early Greek authors, and Anaximander was the first to write such a work.
Anaximander was also the first Greek cartographer to write a schematic map on a wall. The map had Europe and Asia in equal size with the ocean flowing around it. Anaximander was also reputed to be the first person to bring the gnomon to Greece. He placed one in Sparta. This gnomon marked solstices and equinoxes and the hours of the day. Anaximander offers a cosmogony, a history of the origins of the Kosmos. This testimonia comes to us at some remove. Simplicius reports that Theophrastus reports that Anaximander's view on the origin of the Kosmos names the source of all things as apeiron. It is not an element, such as air, earth, fire, and water. The term “apeiron” comprises two parts. The “a” is an alpha‐privative, and it means “not.” The term “peiron” is derived from a root term used to form the verb “perao,” meaning “to travers or to pass through,” or “peras,” meaning an end, limit, or boundary. When we combine the parts, we see that apeiron means “boundless or unlimited,” or “cannot be traversed or passed through.” The apeiron is eternal, always moving, and it surrounds the Kosmos.
At first glance, we might interpret the translation of apeiron as having only spatial reference. It is conceived as being so vast that it is infinite. There is a difference between what is boundless and what is infinite. If there is nothing beyond the boundless, then we cannot go beyond it. Even there we should be cautious to interpret the term as “infinite,” except in certain of Aristotle's uses and other later authors. Spatially we can say that there is nothing outside of or beyond apeiron. While the term can have a spatial reference, it can also have a conceptual reference. The apeiron is generative of all the elements in the Kosmos, and some of these elements have opposite features: hot and cold, and dry and wet. There is a cycle that begins with the apeiron and the process of separating. The separation generates all things, the Kosmos. Over time the elements combine to reform apeiron. Some interpreters mention a natural regulation to the length of the cycles. The cycles are repeated endlessly. This shows that the apeiron is boundless also in its capacity to generate elements because when the elements are compared to each other they have opposite features and apeiron generates all elements of the Kosmos.
Anaximander had a detailed account of the Kosmos in its current generation. Plutarch and Hippolytus give us the following information about Anaximander's account of the Kosmos. The heavenly bodies are fire separated from the sun, and they are in air.6 There are tubes or holes for breath like spokes in a wheel, through which we see the stars, the moon, and the sun. The sun is 27 times larger than the earth. The moon is 18 times larger than the earth. The sun is the farthest from the earth, and the stars are the closest. The earth is suspended in air, equidistant from everything. It is round, concave, and cylindrical. The depth of the earth is one‐third of its width. Anaximander describes a hocky‐puck earth equidistant from the heavenly bodies with specific proportions in relation to the sun and moon, or the apertures of the elements in the spoked wheel. The spokes in the wheel give him access to explanations of heavenly phenomena. He explains solar and lunar eclipses through the breathing holes and the waxing and waning of the moon. He invokes the winds to explain numerous natural phenomena such as thunder, lightning, and hurricanes. His explanation is that when the clouds surround the wind, the clouds are less dense than the wind. There is then a violent interchange, which causes a tearing and produces various phenomena. The wind is the prominent and consistent factor in Anaximander's explanation of natural phenomena.
Anaximander describes the stages in this current earth cycle in very general terms. The apeiron separates into the elements; then after a cycle governed by cosmic justice, these elements combine to be apeiron again. Also, he tells us that the earth is in the process of drying out. It is going from wetter to dryer, as the moisture dries from the heat of the sun. The vapor from the drying water produces winds. The process of the world drying up helps him explain the origins of human beings. Human offspring are not able to care for themselves when young. It is a wonder that the first humans survived. To explain the survival of humans, he claims that they come from nonhuman animals. He suggests that humans originally came from fish or smaller animals. The humans matured to puberty in these aquatic animals, whatever they were, and then burst forth from the aquatic animals.
Anaximander offers a revolutionary account of the Kosmos. He uses his model of the Kosmos to explain heavenly phenomena, such as eclipses and the phases of the moon. He charts the seasons and equinoxes by means of the gnomon. He offers a thoroughgoing physical account, where the gods of the mythic age have no place. The gods have become superfluous. Rather than explaining lightning and thunder by means of Zeus, we get an explanation in terms of wind, rarity and density, and friction. Rather than explaining the behavior of water through Poseidon, he invokes wind and pressure. His account employs phenomena that we can demonstrate at a smaller scale and then amplify the implications of the phenomena to apply to large‐scale Kosmic phenomena. His explanation of the place of the earth in the Kosmos is especially interesting. Aristotle tells us that Anaximander places the earth in the middle of the Kosmos. The earth is held in stasis, held in by contrary forces. In this way, the earth and the heavens are placed by necessity. Interpreters notice that this explanation employs what Leibniz will subsequently call the Principle of Sufficient Reason.7 Aristotle describes Anaximander as having what is now called sufficient reason to place the earth anywhere except at the center, since he has no reason to place it higher, lower, left, or right. Unless there is some sufficient reason to place the earth elsewhere, there can be no explanatory justification for placing it elsewhere.
Anaximander's account is revolutionary not just in his consistent use of physical elements interacting with physical elements to generate phenomena, but in his conceptual and explanatory form of justification. Unlike Thales, we know that Anaximander committed his thoughts to writing. His work, On Nature, was groundbreaking and seminal. Many subsequent authors wrote books titled On Nature or had their works known by this commonly used title. He wrote in prose and not poetry, which marks a clear stylistic break from the poets Homer and Hesiod. The papyrus informs subsequent interpreters in a way that gives us insight into his thoughts in a way that we lack concerning Thales. The particulars of Anaximander's account show ingenuity and creativity in their explanations of natural phenomena. Even more remarkable are his theoretical commitments underlying his explanations. He clearly sees the problem of accounting for the elements, earth, air, fire, and water in terms of each other or in terms of any one of these elements. His invocation of apeiron as an underlying substance is theoretically brilliant. True, he does need, but does not provide, an explanation of how apeiron can generate elements with opposite features. He does, however, see that to account for the opposite features of the common elements, he needs a genesis from a different sort of stuff. He does not tell us what apeiron is, but he does make it function in his explanations in a novel way. Finally, his invocation of what would later be called the Principle of Sufficient Reason shows that he is concerned as much with the structure of his explanations as he is with their content. In light of this, there are reasons to hold that Anaximander is the first Greek philosopher.
1.1.3 Anaximenes
Anaximenes' biography is obscure and there is not much that we can say with certainty. It might be true that Anaximenes of Miletus was the son of Eurystratus and that he died in the sixty‐third Olympiad (528/5 BCE). Plato never mentions him by name and Aristotle is the first to name him. We can say with more confidence that he was from Miletus, that he was a student of Anaximander, and that he was the last in our record of the Milesian philosophical school of thought.
Anaximenes holds that air (aer) is the arche of the Kosmos. He posits air as the first element and the source of the other elements. The term “aer” is used by his predecessors. Among them, we should focus on Anaximander's use of the term, which leads contemporary translators to render the term aer as “dark mist.” This is distinguished from the higher regions in the skies that are called ether or more precisely aither. Anaximenes is referring to aer or air, insofar as it has no perceptible qualities. In some form, it is the stuff that we take for granted. Until it becomes tainted, we take it as given. Suppose that one fish asked another fish, “How's the water?”8 Until the water is tainted and somehow off, the fish takes the water for granted. Aer functions in a similar way; it is imperceptible and as yet unknown. Anaximenes calls aer boundless and this echoes a concept from Anaximander. For Anaximander, apeiron has the capacity to separate and become all things. Anaximenes argues that the indeterminate apeiron is determinate. He determines the indeterminate in aer. The element aer is that sort of stuff, that stuff that you do not notice until it is not there, or until it becomes different or unfit. He refers to the substratum of nature singular and apeiron. He specifies apeiron to be aer, which can rarify or condense. In rarified form aer becomes fire. When condensed it becomes water, earth, and rock. Anaximenes holds that motion is an eternal force in the Kosmos. Everything that exists comes from aer and motion.
It is difficult to conceive that air is the basic element and that it is generative of the others. Yet, this is what Anaximenes attempts to show. Anaximenes offers the following to explain how the diversity of the world comes to be from aer. Air changes as its density and rarity change. We think of density and rarity as quantitative concepts that apply to how much of a given substance occupies a certain volume. Let us say that we have a container with a volume of 1 and we have x amount of an element in that container. If we can have more of an element in the same volume, then we have a denser element. Interpreters are quick to point out that these are sophisticated ways of thinking about rarity and density, and that we cannot have confidence in thinking that this is the concept Anaximenes employs. The rarest form of air is fire; as the fire becomes denser, it becomes wind, denser and it becomes cloud, denser and it becomes water, denser and it becomes the earth, and even denser it becomes stones. This gives us a list of seven elements that we can place from most rare to most dense: fire, air, wind, cloud, water, earth, and stones. All other things come from the seven elements. We should not think that we can explain air in terms of fire or stone. Air is not a denser form of fire and air is not a less dense form of stone. We can explain fire and stone in terms of air and not vice versa. If we could explain any of the elements by means of any other element, then no element is arche more than any other.
Anaximenes has more to say about air. He takes hot and cold as accidental and not essential features of matter. The following sentences show why he thinks the features are accidental. He explains hot and cold in terms of rarity and density. As justification for the connection, he offers an experiment that each of us can do at home. He claims that when you exhale with open lips the air is hot, and when you exhale with pursed lips the air is cold. This empirical evidence is meant to justify his claim that air can be both hot and cold. Anaximenes has air function in a way that is different from the other elements. Air alone, plus motion, rarity, and density, explains hot and cold. Air alone functions to explain the accidental features of the other elements. No other element functions in this way. We can now better understand how air functions as arche.
1.1.4 Xenophanes
Xenophanes of Colophon was a philosopher and minstrel. He tells us that he was born in Colophon in Ionia about 570 BCE. Xenophanes was part of the philosophical movement in Miletus. In about 546 BCE, he left Ionia and traveled widely. He spent most of his time in Sicily and southern Italy, where there were Greek colonies. He lived to be over 90 years old and died around 478 BCE.
Xenophanes does not offer a cosmogony, an account of the genesis of the Kosmos, and the diversity of genesis within the Kosmos. He does, however, discuss the Kosmos, the heavens, and the principal elements. So, he continues the discussion of principal stuff that is familiar among the Milesian philosophers. In addition, he is traditionally credited, going back to Plato and Aristotle, as the founder of the Eleatic school of thought in southern Italy. He was reputed to have been an associate and teacher of Parmenides, the most famous of the Eleatic philosophers. Recently, interpreters have become skeptical of the claim that Xenophanes was the teacher of Parmenides. Nevertheless, we can see that Parmenides reiterates some of Xenophanes' ideas and so we can say that his ideas had some influence on Parmenides. Xenophanes was a pivotal figure, forming a bridge between the end of the philosophical movement in Miletus and the beginning of the philosophical movement in Elea.
Xenophanes does not accept the traditional mythological Greek gods as real; instead he explains them away by substituting natural phenomena. He does not think that a rainbow is the goddess Iris, but he explains it as cloud and light. Xenophanes tells us in a fragment that certain elements are primary, but we get conflicting evidence on this point. One fragment says that he posited the earth as the only arche. Other, more numerous sources tell us that he takes the earth and water to be arche. The evidence does not allow us to determine whether there is one or two principal elements for Xenophanes. Possibly the earth dissolves into water, but more likely the earth and water are in a cyclical relationship with each other. He does tell us a bit more about the earth. The earth stretches from our feet downward without end. So, there is more to the earth than what we see. The air extends above us to the heavens. We can say with confidence that he does not take air as a principal element. He tells us that water, the ocean, makes wind. It also makes clouds and rain. He tells us that the sun warms the earth and we can suppose it warms the water too. He describes a process where water generates clouds through what we would now call evaporation. The clouds carry water through the sky. The rainwater falls back to the earth supplying the water for rivers. We now call this process the water cycle.
Xenophanes holds not only that water cycles from sea to cloud to rivers to sea, but testimonia tells us that he thinks the world goes through a process from wet to dry and back to wet again. He offers empirical evidence for the cyclical process. He argues that sea shells are found in the mountains. Impressions of seaweed, coral, and sea animals are found scattered about. These remnants are far from and above the sea. He infers that water and earth, wet and dry, undergo cyclical periods of dominance. Humankind will come to an end when the earth dissipates into the water. Xenophanes makes a remarkable claim about fossils and he takes that physical evidence into account when supplying his explanation of the phenomena. This is an important feature of science, namely that the explanation for physical phenomena must be grounded in physical evidence. His account shows that he continues with the themes of the Milesian philosophers. Though he does not give us a cosmogony, he does give us novel twists in his account of the Kosmos.
He is a focal figure of early Greek philosophy because of his comments on epistemology, ethics, and theology. We start with his epistemological skepticism. He argues that we do not know the plain truth about the gods or coming to be and perishing. All that we think we know actually is opinion. This is a puzzling passage since it seems to refute itself. If the plain truth cannot be known, then Xenophanes cannot tell us the plain truth. This response to the passage is too easy and it misses the point. Xenophanes is contrasting the plain truth or knowledge with opinion. We offer opinions; although these opinions can be true, they do not constitute knowledge. So, it can be the case that what Xenophanes is saying is true, but we just cannot claim that it is known. Though he offers a healthy skepticism through his division of knowledge and opinion, he does not offer a nihilistic skepticism. He argues that there are better and worse opinions. By investigating, using reason and observation, we can come to better opinions. Many people claim that the gods have revealed all things to them. He rejects this. It is not the gods that give justification to opinions, but instead humans must seek out true opinions for themselves. Through a process of seeking the truth, we can suppose, as Xenophanes sees it, that humans can gain better and better opinions. So, there is some hope of gaining true beliefs. He urges us to believe his claims as if they were true. Still, though we can have true opinions and we can be justified in believing the opinion as if it were known, we cannot have knowledge.
Xenophanes is committed to natural explanations of the Kosmos and he is skeptical of claims of knowledge. So, it is not surprising that he is relentless in his attack on the traditional Greek beliefs about the gods. One line of critique focuses on epistemological concerns about our knowledge of the gods. Humans think that gods are born, wear clothes, speak, and have bodies like humans. Gods end up being very much like humans. He offers more specific indications of humans anthropomorphizing gods. In Africa, the gods are black and snub‐nosed. In Thrace, they have blue eyes and red hair. That is remarkable indeed. Xenophanes is incredulous about the widespread opinion that gods look just like the humans that worship them. The method that humans employ when envisioning the gods has other unwanted implications. If humans do this, what would other animals do? Xenophanes opines that if cows had hands, they would draw the gods in their own image. Cows worship cow‐morphic gods. Horses worship what we can call hippomorphic gods. He concludes that the other animals would follow in the same manner. This species‐centered morpho of the gods generates incredible results. So, no sooner should we believe that the gods look like us than we should believe that the gods look like horses, lions, or any other such things. Xenophanes is not done with his critique of traditional beliefs about the gods. There are not only epistemological reasons to reject the traditional beliefs about the gods; there are ethical concerns too. Homer and Hesiod attribute many morally vicious and disgraceful acts by the gods. Adultery and deception are just the start of the list. Xenophanes has ethical commitments that apply not only to human beings but also to the gods. There is one standard for both and this standard cannot credibly be inferred from the traditional Greek theological beliefs. We do not know much about Xenophanes’ ethical theory, but it is safe to say that it forbids theft, adultery, and some forms of deception. When faced with a choice between his reasoned opinions on ethics and the behavior of the gods as depicted in Homer and Hesiod, Xenophanes sides with his reasoned opinions.
