The Impact Of Anaxagoras Of Clazomenae

Pythagoras made influential contributions to philosophy and religion in the late 6th century BC. He is often revered as a great mathematician and scientist and is best known for the Pythagorean theorem which relates the two sides of a triangle to the hypotenuse using the formula a squared plus b squared equals c squared. However, because legend and obfuscation cloud his work even more than that of other pre-Socratic philosophers, one can give only a tentative account of his teachings, and some have questioned whether he contributed much to mathematics or natural philosophy. Many of the accomplishments credited to Pythagoras may actually have been accomplishments of his colleagues and successors. Some accounts mention that the philosophy associated with Pythagoras was related to mathematics and that numbers were

This essay attempts to explain Descartes’ epistemology of his knowledge, his “Cogito, Ergo Sum” concept (found in the Meditations), and why he used it [the cogito concept] as a foundation when building his structure of knowledge. After explaining the concept I give a brief evaluation of his success in introducing and using this cogito as a foundation. Finally, I provide reasons why I think Descartes succeeded in his epistemology.

In Parmenides’ poem “On Nature”, he argues that all things must meet three criteria to be classified as possessing ‘isness’, or having qualities that constitute existence. In order for anything to exist, the object must have no genesis or perishing, no change, and no qualitative distinction. In this paper, I will argue that Anaxagoras provides the best objection to Parmenides’ argument compared to both Empedocles and Democritus because he addresses more of the criteria put forth by Parmenides.

Since Plato, two mutually exclusive yet essential categories of reality have been posited, one of concrete particulars and the other being abstract universals. Particulars are “unproblematic,” but universals may be entirely extant in many positions with no influence on the universal itself. A particular “distinguishing mark is that is exhausted in the one embodiment, or occasion, or example.” (Campbell 298) Particulars are unproblematic because they are restricted to a single point at any given time, not like universals which exist in different locations and are wholly present in those instances. The number of examples which contain the abstract universals are not diminished in quality of the universal. Campbell posits that this “problem” can be alleviated if properties were not universal at all. There is a distinction between abstract and concrete which differs from the distinction between universals and particulars. This is because particulars and universals can both be abstract where only particulars can be concrete. The particulars that

There have been many philosophers in our world’s history, perhaps the most famous of them would be Aristotle. Aristotle was a Greek philosopher who contributed to many different sciences including, logic, metaphysics, mathematics, biology, and countless others. Although Aristotle is famous now, he wasn’t very famous in his own time. Aristotle’s beliefs contradicted many of the modern beliefs in his time. Ben Waggoner, a professor at the University of California Museum of Paleontology, states, “Where Aristotle differed most sharply from medieval and modern thinkers was in his belief that the universe had never had a beginning and would never end; it was eternal.” Aristotle received much criticism for his divergent beliefs but is well-known

This question defines the nature of Aristotle’s inquiries, at least for a large part of the Metaphysics, and it thus offers a fourth account of the study or science of metaphysics.“The science of first principles, the study of being qua being, theology, the investigation into substance – four compatible descriptions of the same discipline? Perhaps there is no one discipline which can be identified as Aristotelian Metaphysics? And perhaps this thought should not disturb us: we need only recall that the metaphysics was composed by Andronicus rather than by Aristotle. But the four descriptions do have at least one thing in common: they are dark and obscure” (Ross, 1996, p174).

Nicholas Copernicus was the first to question the universal truths and teachings of the church. He devised a theory that the earth along with the other planets revolved around the sun. This theory disagreed with Aristotle and the old teachings that the universe revolved around the earth, and that man was the center of the universe.

One of the most interesting and influential thinkers of all time was Socrates, whose dedication to careful reasoning helped form the basis for

He was the first to study formal logic, founded called the Lyceum and tutored kings. He influenced Jewish, Christian and Islamic traditions and beliefs. The Catholic Church took his view of a universal hierarchy and added the divine, the heavenly and the demonic to make their “Great Chain of Being.” Aristotle even had a basic idea of evolution based on God’s plan for the world (IEP). It is possible that he was the last person to know everything there was to know in his own time (Neill 488). His contributions to our understanding of the world are innumerable, despite that only about a third of his work survived. He contributed to philosophy as much as Plato, if not more. He took Plato’s theory of forms and changed it, making it his own, and in the process resolved the problems that he had noted, as well as those pointed out by Plato and others. He called his new theory he called Hylomorphism. Hylomorphism’s way of thinking stands directly opposite that which Plato’s forms encourage. Aristotle did not see the world as a reflection of another filled with forms but as the physical embodiment of the forms. The substances are created by the innate forms in the matter and are the only way we can perceive forms. This means that to Aristotle a substance did not have form only in an abstract world of forms but was contained by the object in and of

In this essay, I argue that Empedocles’ views on cosmogony and theology maintain the mythological frame of reference of the Ancient Greek myths, while expanding on the ideas of creationism. To present this, I will compare and contrast the stances of Empedocles and the myths. After, I will clarify my thesis and use the compared and contrasted ideas to support it. In Empedocles’ cosmogony and theology and Hesiod’s

This paper evaluates an argument against Perdurantism and presents possible alternatives to demonstrate that substances do not always overlap. Firstly, we utilize the Lump and Clay example from Effingham’s (20xx) An Introduction To Ontology to illustrate what Perdurantism entails. Afterwards, we object the anti-perdurantist’s argument because it is arbitrary to claim that a substance’s career only begins when it is born and it ceases when it dies. Then, we provide a response on behalf of the anti-perdurantist to show that our objection can be implausible because it can lead to unintuitive commitments. Lastly, we provide a general assessment to show that our objection only works if we can accept the unintuitive consequences.

During the 17th and 18th century two philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, arose carving for themselves a trench in the philosophical world. We can see the biggest distinction between the two in their theories of how we know things exist. The traditions of Plato and Aristotle have been dubbed rationalism and empiricism respectively. Under these traditions many well known philosophers have formed their own theories of God, existence and the material world. Through these individual theories I will show how each fits into the category of either Rationalist or Imperialist. The Plutonian philosophers to be

It is the purpose of this essay to examine both Descartes’ Cogito argument and his skepticism towards small and universal elements, as well as the implications these arguments have on each other. First, I will summarize and explain the skepticism Descartes’ brings to bear on small and universal elements in his first meditation. Second, I will summarize and explain the Cogito argument, Descartes’ famous “I think, therefore I am” (it should be noted that this famous implication is not actually something ever said or written by Descartes, but instead, an implication taken from his argument for his own existence). Third, I will critique the line of reasoning underlying these arguments. Descartes attacks

There are many great philosophers in this world. Some of which are extremely well known and almost everyone knows their names like Socrates, Plato Aristotle Locke and so very many more. Pythagoras is a less known philosopher who had a lot of discoveries while leading a life in a secretive manner. He was an enigma and the leader of a religious sect cult who believed the universe to consist solely of whole numbers and their ratios. Pythagoras said "Do not talk a little on many subjects, but much on a few." Has one ever wondered where did he learn his vast knowledge of mathematics and religious aspects leading to the Pythagorean cult, or what was all of his discoveries besides

The pythagoreans thought of knowledge as a religion, and they had strict rules about how they did what. They did some crazy things, but they had many great ideas because of this “religion.” They considered knowledge to be the ultimate purification, thus the reason they called knowledge a type of religion. The pythagoreans were obsessed with math in a way. These people made a lot of things that are important today, so you could say that they “created some