Heraclitus’ Argument:
Heraclitus was a Pre-Socratic philosopher who believed that logos was the nature and account for the universe (22B1-B2, 31). He describes that “[t]his kosmos… none of gods nor humans made… is and shall be: an ever-living fire” (B30, 34), making a connection of how fire is the “stuff” (Corner) that is the source of creation in the universe. He also mentions that “[f]ire is want and satiety” (B65, 35), indicating that fire is a force consisting of two opposites. Heraclitus believes that the unity of opposites consists of two forces pulling on each other to achieve harmony like a guitar and the tightness of its strings.
Heraclitus refers to the fluctuation of internal struggles within something, displayed often cryptically
…show more content…
Moderate fluxism contains two properties of higher and lower levels. The higher level is the stability within the flux, and the lower level is the two opposing factors (Corner). One example Heraclitus speaks of is that “[[i]t is not possible to step twice into the same river]… [i]t scatters again and again comes together, and approaches and recedes” (B91, 34). The river represents the higher property, and the flow represents the lower property. Regardless of which way the flow goes, the river will always persist. The higher property takes priority over the lower property. My feet in the river’s water may not be the same river, yet it is the same river. Heraclitus goes into developing the contradiction because it is the same river, only changing its water or flow. In that sense, it denies change in some form, which means Heraclitus cannot be a radical fluxist. This also appears in his other examples above. The sea is something that always persists despite the Purity or Pollution it contains. The sea, no matter how pure or polluted, will still be the sea. A pure sea is still the sea, and a polluted sea is still the sea. The road travelled up is still the same distance and ground that is walked down. The road is still the road going up as it is going down, persisting as a road. Believing that everything is changing means that the road would not be the same road, the sea is not the same sea, and the river is not the same
take the boy out and kill him when he was still a child. The kind old shepard
Thrasymachus has just stated, "Justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger", and is now, at the request of Socrates, clarifying his statement.
the vital force that creates all things and the cosmic intellegence that governs it from
Roman and Greek mythology are filled with multiple interpretations of how the creator, be it the gods or nature, contributed to the birth of the world. These stories draw the backgrounds of the gods and goddesses that govern much of classical mythology. Ovid’s Metamorphoses and Hesiod’s Theogony are two pieces of work that account for how our universe came to be. A comparison of Theogony with Metamorphoses reveals that Hesiod’s creation story portrays the deities as omnipresent, powerful role whose actions triggered the beginning of the universe whereas in Metamorphoses, the deities do not play a significant role; rather the humans are center of the creation. The similarities and differences are evident in the construction of the universe, ages of man, and the creation of men and women on earth.
The book written by Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, contains two controversial debates between distinguished speakers of Athens. The two corresponding sides produce convincing arguments which can be taken as if produced as an honest opinion or out of self-interest. The two debates must be analyzed separately in order to conclude which one and which side was speaking out of honest opinion or self-interest, as well as which speakers are similar to each other in their approach to the situation.
There have been many attempts at formulating a theory that accounts for our intuitions regarding the harm of death. Most theories attempt to account for this intuition by attributing the harm of death to a deprivation of some sort. That is a person is harmed when she dies because she is deprived of some good thing. This paper is a defense of Epicurius's argument regarding death as a response to deprivation theories.
A great example of Heraclitus’ view would be one of his most famous quotes which is “No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man.” This quote demonstrates his views on change because in this quote he clearly shares his idea of what change really is. He believes that everything is constantly changing for instance the water in the river is flowing and thus it is always changing and as for the person standing in the river, they too have changed because since time passes they are not the same person that stepped into the river. Heraclitus also stated that there is a flux in the universe for everything there is an opposite and that is mentioned in (B88), “the same thing is both living and dead, and the waking and the sleeping, and young and old; for these things transformed are those, and those those transformed back again are these.” These contradictions give us a precise idea of how they are connected to each other; old-young, alive-dead, and asleep-waking up.This quote is an example of how one thing can be changed into
It seems as if the classical works are replete with dysfunctional families. Oedipus the King is no exception. If the core of a society is found in the nuclear family, then it may be sensible to assume that the Greeks were maligned at the center. On the other hand, they may have been the pinnacle of familial honor if they rooted out their most devious and dangerous escapades in the theater rather than the commons. Whatever the interpretation, there may be value in seeking greater understanding of these people and the meanings of their theatrical themes. One way to gain insight on these matters is to consult one of the greatest critics of ancient times. Aristotle made an interesting commentary about Oedipus the King. He branded the main character of the play a tragic hero. Perhaps, there is more to Oedipus and his tragic story than meets the eye.
The famous Greek philosopher Aristotle outlined the requirements for a good tragedy, and he based his ideals on the classic Greek play Oedipus Rex, written by Sophocles. As Aristotle stated, the perfect tragedy must be an imitation of one’s life, realistic and narrow in its aspects. Such is the case with the play Oedipus Rex, a Greek play revolving around the tragedies of the life of King Oedipus. Oedipus Rex, the protagonist of the first of the three Oedipus plays, has a life of luxury and promise. However, because of the life fate has dictated him and the obstacles he has faced, Oedipus has been proven to have three hamartias, or tragic flaws. His attributes of determination, impatience/disrespect, and hubris greatly contribute to his downfall.
This theory describes relationships between all things and how they relate to one another. “The living have come from the dead no less than the dead from the living… souls of the dead must exist in some place from which they are reborn” (136). Socrates explains that souls are immortal and there is a never-ending cycle of living and dying, to live one must have died and to die one must have lived. No matter what something is, there is always an opposite. The opposite of “being alive” is “being dead”. If someone is not alive than they are dead and if they are not dead than they are alive. Something with an opposite replies on its opposites existence to exist. Without it, it would not exist at all. Although I find the theory of opposites confusing, it is logical. Socrates stated that if something becomes bigger than it must have been smaller ergo if something becomes smaller than it was once bigger. Opposites are the reason for everythings existence. Life and death, sleeping and waking, weaker and stronger, are all opposites, one ceases to exist without its opposite. I cannot think of a word that can falsify this theory. Socrates understood what he was talking about and had evidence to back up his theories, he could usually refute others when they countered
In addition, the nature of the universe can be also explained when Aquinas mentions that “the property, that the things signified by the words have themselves also a signification.”
Xenophanes of the late 6th and early 5th centuries BC should be credited, in opposition to his critics and misinterpreters, with an advanced contribution to the Western philosophy of religion, namely that there is one God. First, he exposes the weaknesses of the Greek pantheon. Then he satirically demonstrates the narcissistic limitations of human conceptions of the nature of the divine. Third, he logically structures a coherent concept of the nature of the only God. Then finally he reveals how his concept explains certain observable natural phenomena in an account of physical reality.
In the book Timaeus, Plato described the Father of the universe as a very masterful being and a divine planner of the human body. Plato revealed that the Father told the other Gods to create mortal figures of them. Plato recalled the words of God, “There are three kinds of mortal creature yet uncreated, and unless they are created the world will be imperfect, as it will not have in it every kind of living creature which it must have if it is to be perfect” (57). The Father of the universe is very precise in the way the beings are created. He tells his Gods to use the mixture from the soul of the world to create the ...
He then go on to giving us the theory of flux by Heraclitus. The theory of flux is based on the claim that all things are constantly changing. The view is that no objects is stably consistent with stably existing properties. The explanation for this is that everything in which any basis can be functional, according to one perception, can also have the cancelation of that basis applied to it, according to an opposite perception. Socrates gives us a few statements that Heraclitus implies with his theory. The first is that all qualities do not exist in time or space independently. The second is that qualities do not exist except in perception of the...
Greek Drama had three main categories The Comedy, Satyr Plays, and The Tragedy. The most popular of the three is The Tragedy, its themes are often such as loss of love, complex relationships between men and the gods, and corruption of power. These dramas taught the people of the city the difference between good and bad behavior and the ramifications of going against the gods. According to Aristotle, the perfect tragedy consisted of the downfall of the hero through a great misunderstanding, causing suffering and awareness for the protagonist meanwhile making the audience feel pity and fear. The prominent writer who Aristotle based his perfect tragedy theory was Sophocles, his drama Oedipus the King had all the elements of a perfect tragedy.