Editing Ancient Greek philosophy (section)

== Early Greek philosophy (or pre-Socratic philosophy) ==
{{Main|Pre-Socratic philosophy}}
The '''convention''' of terming those [[philosophers]] who were active prior to the death of [[Socrates]] as the ''pre-Socratics'' gained currency with the 1903 publication of [[Hermann Alexander Diels|Hermann Diels']] ''Fragmente der Vorsokratiker'', although the term did not originate with him.<ref>Greg Whitlock, preface to ''The Pre-Platonic Philosophers'', by Friedrich Nietzsche (Urbana:  University of Illinois Press, 2001), xiv–xvi.</ref><!-- A better reference for this fact should be found; this is just one I had handy. --> The term is considered useful because what came to be known as the "Athenian school" (composed of Socrates, Plato, and [[Aristotle]]) signaled the rise of a new approach to philosophy; [[Friedrich Nietzsche]]'s thesis that this shift began with Plato rather than with Socrates (hence his nomenclature of "pre-Platonic philosophy") has not prevented the predominance of the "pre-Socratic" distinction.<ref name="Whitlock">Greg Whitlock, preface to ''The Pre-Platonic Philosophers'', by Friedrich Nietzsche (Urbana:  University of Illinois Press, 2001), xiii–xix.</ref>

Since 2016, however, current scholarship has transitioned from calling philosophy before the Athenian school "pre-Socratic" to simply "Early Greek Philosophy". André Laks and Glenn W. Most have been partly responsible for popularizing this shift in describing the era preceding the Athenian School through their comprehensive, nine volume Loeb editions of ''Early Greek Philosophy''. In their first volume, they distinguish their systematic approach from that of Hermann Diels, beginning with the choice of "Early Greek Philosophy" over "pre-Socratic philosophy" most notably because Socrates is contemporary and sometimes even prior to philosophers traditionally considered "pre-Socratic" (e.g., the Atomists).<ref> ''Early Greek Philosophy, Volume 1: Introductory and Reference Material'', Edited and Translated by André Laks and Glenn W. Most, Loeb Classical Library 524 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2016) 6–8.</ref>

The early Greek philosophers (or "pre-Socratics") were primarily concerned with [[cosmology]], [[ontology]], and mathematics. They were distinguished from "non-philosophers" insofar as they rejected mythological explanations in favor of reasoned discourse.<ref>John Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy:  Thales to Plato'', 3rd ed. (London: A & C Black Ltd., 1920), 3–16.  [https://archive.org/stream/p1greekphilosoph00burnuoft#page/n9/mode/2up Scanned version from Internet Archive]</ref>

=== Milesian school ===
{{Main|Milesian school}}
[[Thales of Miletus]], regarded by [[Aristotle]] as the first philosopher,<ref>[[Aristotle]], [[Metaphysics (Aristotle)|''Metaphysics Alpha'']], 983b18.</ref> held that all things arise from a single material substance, water.<ref>Aristotle, ''Metaphysics Alpha'', 983 b6 8–11.</ref> It is not because he gave a [[cosmogony]] that [[John Burnet (classicist)|John Burnet]] calls him the "first man of science", but because he gave a naturalistic explanation of the [[cosmos]] and supported it with reasons.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 3–4, 18.</ref> According to tradition, Thales was able to predict an [[solar eclipse|eclipse]] and taught the Egyptians how to measure the height of the [[pyramids]].<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 18–20; [[Herodotus]], [[Histories (Herodotus)|''Histories'']], I.74.</ref>

Thales inspired the [[Milesian school]] of philosophy and was followed by [[Anaximander]], who argued that the substratum or [[arche#Arche in ancient Greek Philosophy|''arche'']] could not be water or any of the [[classical element]]s but was instead something "unlimited" or "indefinite" (in Greek, the ''[[Apeiron (cosmology)|apeiron]]''). He began from the observation that the world seems to consist of opposites (e.g., hot and cold), yet a thing can become its opposite (e.g., a hot thing cold). Therefore, they cannot truly be opposites but rather must both be manifestations of some underlying unity that is neither. This underlying unity (substratum, ''arche'') could not be any of the classical elements, since they were one extreme or another. For example, water is wet, the opposite of dry, while fire is dry, the opposite of wet.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 22–24.</ref> This initial state is ageless and imperishable, and everything returns to it according to necessity.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ogUR3V9wbbIC&pg=PA83|title=A History of Greek Philosophy: Volume 1, The Earlier Presocratics and the Pythagoreans|first1=W. K. C.|last1=Guthrie|first2=William Keith Chambers|last2=Guthrie|date=May 14, 1978|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=9780521294201|via=Google Books}}</ref> [[Anaximenes of Miletus|Anaximenes]] in turn held that the ''arche'' was air, although John Burnet argues that by this, he meant that it was a transparent mist, the [[aether (classical element)|''aether'']].<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 21.</ref> Despite their varied answers, the Milesian school was searching for a natural substance that would remain unchanged despite appearing in different forms, and thus represents one of the first scientific attempts to answer the question that would lead to the development of modern atomic theory; "the Milesians," says Burnet, "asked for the [[physis|''φύσις'']]<!--Greek italics in the original--> of all things."<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 27.</ref>

=== Xenophanes ===

{{Main|Xenophanes}}

Xenophanes was born in [[Ionia]], where the Milesian school was at its most powerful and may have picked up some of the Milesians' cosmological theories as a result.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 35.</ref> What is known is that he argued that each of the phenomena had a natural rather than divine explanation in a manner reminiscent of Anaximander's theories and that there was only one god, the world as a whole, and that he ridiculed the [[anthropomorphism]] of the Greek religion by claiming that cattle would claim that the gods looked like cattle, horses like horses, and lions like lions, just as the Ethiopians claimed that the gods were snub-nosed and black and the Thracians claimed they were pale and red-haired.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 35; Diels-Kranz, ''Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker'', Xenophanes frs. 15–16.</ref>

Xenophanes was highly influential to subsequent schools of philosophy. He was seen as the founder of a line of philosophy that culminated in [[Pyrrhonism]],<ref>[[Eusebius]], ''[[Praeparatio Evangelica]]'' Chapter XVII</ref> possibly an influence on [[Eleatics|Eleatic philosophy]], and a precursor to [[Epicurus]]' total break between science and religion.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 33, 36.</ref>

=== Pythagoreanism ===

{{Main|Pythagoreanism}}

[[Pythagoras]] lived at approximately the same time that Xenophanes did and, in contrast to the latter, the school that he founded sought to reconcile religious belief and reason. Little is known about his life with any reliability, however, and no writings of his survive, so it is possible that he was simply a [[mysticism|mystic]] whose successors introduced rationalism into Pythagoreanism, that he was simply a [[rationalism|rationalist]] whose successors are responsible for the mysticism in Pythagoreanism, or that he was actually the author of the doctrine; there is no way to know for certain.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 37–38.</ref>

Pythagoras is said to have been a disciple of [[Anaximander]] and to have imbibed the [[cosmology|cosmological]] concerns of the Ionians, including the idea that the cosmos is constructed of spheres, the importance of the infinite, and that air or aether is the ''arche'' of everything.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 38–39.</ref> Pythagoreanism also incorporated [[asceticism|ascetic]] ideals, emphasizing purgation, [[metempsychosis]], and consequently a respect for all animal life; much was made of the correspondence between mathematics and the cosmos in a musical harmony.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 40–49.</ref> Pythagoras believed that behind the appearance of things, there was the permanent principle of mathematics, and that the forms were based on a transcendental mathematical relation.<ref>C.M. Bowra 1957 ''The Greek experience'' p. 166"</ref>

=== Heraclitus ===
{{Main|Heraclitus}}
Heraclitus must have lived after Xenophanes and Pythagoras, as he condemns them along with [[Homer]] as proving that much learning cannot teach a man to think; since [[Parmenides]] refers to him in the past tense, this would place him in the 5th century BC.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 57.</ref> Contrary to the [[Milesian school]], which posits one stable [[Classical element|element]] as the ''[[arche]]'', Heraclitus taught that ''[[Panta rhei (Heraclitus)|panta rhei]]'' ("everything flows"), the closest element to this eternal flux being fire. All things come to pass in accordance with ''Logos'',<ref>DK B1.</ref> which must be considered as "plan" or "formula",<ref>pp. 419ff., [[W.K.C. Guthrie]], ''A History of Greek Philosophy'', vol. 1, Cambridge University Press, 1962.</ref> and "the ''Logos'' is common".<ref>DK B2.</ref> He also posited a [[unity of opposites]], expressed through [[dialectic]], which structured this flux, such as that seeming opposites in fact are manifestations of a common substrate to good and evil itself.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 57–63.</ref>

Heraclitus called the oppositional processes ἔρις (''[[Eris (mythology)|eris]]''), "strife", and hypothesized that the apparently stable state of δίκη (''[[Dike (mythology)|dikê]]''), or "justice", is the [[Harmonia (mythology)|harmonic]] unity of these opposites.<ref>DK B80</ref>

=== Eleatic philosophy ===
{{Main|Eleatics}}
[[Parmenides of Elea]] cast his philosophy against those who held "it is and is not the same, and all things travel in opposite directions,"—presumably referring to Heraclitus and those who followed him.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 64.</ref> Whereas the doctrines of the Milesian school, in suggesting that the substratum could appear in a variety of different guises, implied that everything that exists is corpuscular, Parmenides argued that the first principle of being was One, indivisible, and unchanging.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 66–67.</ref> Being, he argued, by definition implies eternality, while only that which ''is'' can be thought; a thing which ''is'', moreover, cannot be more or less, and so the rarefaction and condensation of the Milesians is impossible regarding Being; lastly, as movement requires that something exist apart from the thing moving (viz. the space into which it moves), the One or Being cannot move, since this would require that "space" both exist and not exist.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 68.</ref> While this doctrine is at odds with ordinary sensory experience, where things do indeed change and move, the Eleatic school followed Parmenides in denying that sense phenomena revealed the world as it actually was; instead, the only thing with Being was thought, or the question of whether something exists or not is one of whether it can be thought.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 67.</ref>

In support of this, Parmenides' pupil [[Zeno of Elea]] attempted to prove that the concept of [[Motion (physics)|motion]] was absurd and as such motion did not exist. He also attacked the subsequent development of pluralism, arguing that it was incompatible with Being.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 82.</ref> His arguments are known as [[Zeno's paradoxes]].

=== Pluralism and atomism ===
The power of Parmenides' logic was such that some subsequent philosophers abandoned the [[monism]] of the Milesians, Xenophanes, Heraclitus, and Parmenides, where one thing was the ''arche''. In place of this, they adopted [[pluralism (philosophy)|pluralism]], such as [[Empedocles]] and [[Anaxagoras]].<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 69.</ref> There were, they said, multiple elements which were not reducible to one another and these were set in motion by love and strife (as in Empedocles) or by Mind (as in Anaxagoras). Agreeing with Parmenides that there is no coming into being or passing away, genesis or decay, they said that things appear to come into being and pass away because the elements out of which they are composed assemble or disassemble while themselves being unchanging.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 70.</ref>

[[Leucippus]] also proposed an ontological pluralism with a cosmogony based on two main elements: the vacuum and atoms. These, by means of their inherent movement, are crossing the void and creating the real material bodies. His theories were not well known by the time of [[Plato]], however, and they were ultimately incorporated into the work of his student, [[Democritus]].<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 94.</ref>

=== Sophism ===
{{Main|Sophists}}
Sophism arose from the juxtaposition of ''[[physis]]'' (nature) and ''[[:wikt:nomos|nomos]]'' (law). John Burnet posits its origin in the scientific progress of the previous centuries which suggested that Being was radically different from what was experienced by the senses and, if comprehensible at all, was not comprehensible in terms of order; the world in which people lived, on the other hand, was one of law and order, albeit of humankind's own making.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 105–10.</ref> At the same time, nature was constant, while what was by law differed from one place to another and could be changed.

The first person to call themselves a sophist, according to Plato, was [[Protagoras]], whom he presents as teaching that all [[virtue]] is conventional. It was Protagoras who claimed that "man is the measure of all things, of the things that are, that they are, and of the things that are not, that they are not," which Plato interprets as a radical [[perspectivism]], where some things seem to be one way for one person (and so actually are that way) and another way for another person (and so actually are ''that'' way as well); the conclusion being that one cannot look to nature for guidance regarding how to live one's life.<ref>Burnet, ''Greek Philosophy'', 113–17.</ref>

Protagoras and subsequent sophists tended to teach [[rhetoric]] as their primary vocation. [[Prodicus]], [[Gorgias]], [[Hippias]], and [[Thrasymachus]] appear in various [[Plato's dialogues#The dialogues|dialogues]], sometimes explicitly teaching that while nature provides no ethical guidance, the guidance that the laws provide is worthless, or that nature favors those who act against the laws.