Quest for 'the First Principle': From Thales to Aristotle

Photo from http://lh6.ggpht.com/

It has been long that the western philosophy has begun searching "the first principle" – the fundamental element or principle that caused all the diverse things in the world. Though many things have been lost by now, traces of philosophical attempts to define the first principle can be found back from the seventh century BC. By the time of Aristotle in the fourth century BC, in Greece itself, there had been many attempts to know the first principle. In fact, the first principle was the most important aspect of pursuit of knowledge in the ancient Greece which every other aspect of knowledge revolved around.  The developments of the western mind in Greece from Thales up to Aristotle can be summed up as quests for the first principle.

It is found that there have been many philosophers before Socrates who talked about the first principle. It is difficult to know what they exactly thought about the world. Yet, their views have been documented in philosophical studies based on references made to them by later philosophers.

The first important Pre-Socratic philosopher to search the first principle is Thales (636–546 BC). Since the body of knowledge was dependent on mythology before him unquestioned ever and he tried to justify existence of each material on their own, he is regarded as the first philosopher in the western world. He viewed that everything in this world is water; either one of different forms of water or something made up of water. To justify this, he claimed that everything has moisture which is a property of water.

Another important philosopher after Thales is his student Anaximander (611-547 BC). He rejected Thales's idea that everything is water. For him, the fundamental element that causes everything in this world is "indefinite", which is deathless and indestructible. It is indefinite, thus it can change itself to many different matters.

A contemporary of Anaximander, Anaxemenes (586-525 BC) rejected both Thales and Anaximander and claimed that everything is air. He "attempted to demonstrate the manner in which that single substance could change itself into other forms of matter through the processes of rarefaction and condensation" (Tarnas 471). By explanations of rarefaction and condensation, Anaxemenes asserted that everything has an essence that remains same even in many transformations; and this idea has been followed by later scientific pursuits. These three Ionian philosophers are known as "material monists" because they all claimed that all the materials come from one single thing ("monism") which itself is matter.

Immediately some years after the monists, Pythagoras (582-507 BC) claimed that everything can be reduced to numbers; and the numerical patterns govern all phenomena from tones of music to movement of the heavenly bodies and the universe. For him, "to uncover the regulative mathematical forms in nature was to reveal the divine intelligence itself" (Tarnas 46). He tried to connect both rational analysis of the natural world and mythological belief in the transcendental world for both have the same mathematical patterns and structures. Thus, for Pythagoras, both natural science and mystic religion are equally important for understanding of the fundamental principle.

After Pythagoras, another noticeable philosopher for the first principle is Heraclitus (535-475 BC).  His basic idea is: everything is in flux; everything is in constant movement of change. But, underlying all those changes is something unchangeable, which he calls "logos" that governs and regulates all changes. Hence, for Heraclitus, the first principle is "logos". He exemplifies ceaseless flux and unmoved logos underlay with fire; people see fire going up regularly, but at the same time the fire remains there unchanged. 

But Heraclitus is strongly rejected by Parminedes (515 BC) who viewed that change is impossible in this world, thus the first principle is "one". For Parminedes, change is impossible because change means something being something else which it is not. And, "what is not" is not thinkable, which ultimately means non-existent. Thus, nothing can become the thing that doesn't exist. His "one" is round, perfect and absolute which never changes and never ceases. This "one" ("to be") already exists all the time because nothing comes out of nothing. Parminedes's theory is called "absolute monism" because he thought everything is one and that is absolute.

Parminedes's rationality was further developed by Anaxagoras (500-428 BC) and Empedocles (495-435 BC). Anaxagoras accepted all previous materials as the fundamental principles; but added to them that everything is controlled and governed by the Mind ("Nous"). For him, the world was one in the beginning, but it has diverse elements now and all are caused by motion of the Nous. Similarly, Empedocles claimed that the universe has four fundamental elements: fire, air, earth and water; and every other thing in the world are composed of these four things; either they are mixed or separated in different degrees. There is either "love" to cause mixture or "strife" to cause separation. Both Anaxagoras and Empedocles are "pluralists" as they acknowledged that there are numerous fundamental elements as sources of the universe.

But Zeno of Elea (490-430 BC) questioned all these previous developments about the first principle with his interesting paradoxes. With those paradoxes, he questioned to those who believed that everything is caused by one (monists) and who believed there are many root elements (pluralists). But he didn't claim anything else as the first principle. His ideas only added further uncertainties to the quest of the first principle.

After Zeno, two "atomists" – Democritus and Leucippus – accepted and rejected Parminedes at once. For the atomists, everything is composed of "atom" – a unitary changeless substance like "One" ("is") for Parminedes. They explained that beside atoms, there are "voids" ("is not" for Parminedes, empty space to allow atoms to move and combine), which are also equally necessary for any matter. Thus, they accepted Parminedes for everything comes from one source, but rejected him that "is not" could exist. They also rejected the pluralist Anaxagoras that atoms move and combine out of natural necessity, but not due to the Nous. Shapes, arrangements and positions are the qualities that make things different from each other; else all atoms are identical. Other qualitative features (such as taste or smell) besides these three for the atomists exist only out of convention, with no difference in essence. Since the atomists saw roles of only atoms and voids for everything, they are considered materialistic. Besides, "Democritus considered that human beliefs in gods was no more than an attempt to explain extraordinary events…by means of imagined supernatural forces" (Tarnas 24).  

A group of philosophers including Protagoras at the latter half of the fifth century BC tried to divert philosophy from quest for the first principle claiming that the knowledge about what orders the world does not have any use value in life, nor is comprehensive to common mind. They focused themselves in pragmatic application of knowledge. But their influence in society was so limited that they got rejected by the time of Socrates (469-399 BC) and Plato (427-347 BC).

The quest for the first principle was again resumed by Socrates after a break by the Sophists. Though Socrates didn't concretely claim any single or few things to be the first principle, he acknowledged existence of some first principle and thought that it is possible to know it with constant and rigorous intellectual struggles within self. Tarnas remarks, "Socrates appears to have studied the natural science of his time with some enthusiasm… concerned with speculative analysis of the physical world. Eventually, however, he found these unsatisfying" (32). Based on this comment, it can be fairly argued that he too began his quest for the first principle. Though he also talked about some other disciplines of knowledge like ethics and logic, he was always after the "essence" of Soul, Good, Beauty, Truth etc. believing that true knowledge of these leads one to the "first principle". He tried to achieve that with his famous dialectical method of arguments.

The quest for what governs this mysterious world was probably the greatest during the time of Plato, a student of Socrates who wrote many dialogues of his master. Since Socrates wrote nothing for himself, it is from Plato that Socrates is known. Plato attributed the transcendental world of Forms / Ideas as the source of this world of matters. The Ideas are eternal, universal and absolute; and true, good and beautiful. The particular things that are in this world are only reflections of those Ideas. The world of Ideas is the real world; but this world of matters is only illusion. Plato argued that everything in this world is in the process of "becoming", in the process of transformation from one thing into another. "But one thing does enjoy real being, as distinguished from rarely becoming, and this is the Ideas – the only stable reality, that which underlies, motivates and orders the flux of phenomena" (Tarnas 9). Thus, for Plato, the first principle is the world of archetypal Forms / Ideas. Though it is not noticed by sense perceptions, active and intuitive mind can know the Ideas.   The Ideas themselves were god, for Plato.

Plato has differentiated the real world of Ideas and the world of illusion with an allegory, popularly known as "allegory of the cave". For him, human beings are like prisoners chained to the wall of a cave in which a light is thrown from an end. The humans in general cannot see anything of outer world in itself, but only shadows made up of the light. Thus, they perceive shadow itself as real. With this allegory, Plato states that people in this world live in illusion and whatever they perceive to be true are only shadows of truths, but not truths themselves. The true force that orders this world ("the first principle") is the light that came into the cave from outside that the chained people there cannot see. But, if someone succeeds in escaping that chain and coming out of the cave, s/he can. Thus, for Plato, not everyone can know the true knowledge only with senses, but only the philosophers with their intellect in disciplined education.

For Plato, the concept of Ideas itself is the sole basis for various disciplines he talks about. He has discussed many genres of knowledge from ethics through cosmology to epistemology; but all have a common conception that there lies the world of Ideas as one to guide and regulate everything in this world. For example, his epistemological theory is the theory of recollection: human beings already possess knowledge about the world of Ideas, but the knowledge is veiled. And, our attempts to know in this world are only attempts to unveil, to "recollect" the lost knowledge.  Similarly, in cosmology, he talks about the heavenly planets in a perfect sphere and circular motion, that embody the world of Ideas and that are capable of influencing earthly existence in various ways. Besides that, Plato also has included an irreducible element of irrationality and necessity, which he calls "ananke". "Ananke" too has some role in composition of the world and worldly phenomena.

The most known student of Plato, Aristotle (384-322 BC), however, rejected Plato's concepts of the first principle and developed new theories in the quest. For the empiricist Aristotle, the world of Ideas doesn't exist as Plato had thought. Whereas Plato viewed that the particulars depend on the universal Form; for Aristotle the particulars themselves have the forms along with the matter as fundamental elements for "being". Thus, nothing needs to "participate" into something transcendental for being the thing; everything has its fundamental element within.

The matter in an object gives it a potentiality and the form gives it an actuality. Every matter in itself has potential of becoming the form, the actual. Thus, for Aristotle, everything is the result of such teleological transformation form potentiality to actuality; but not any reflection of the transcendental Idea as Plato claimed. He also described four types of causes that involve during this transformation: material, efficient, formal and final.  These causes work together to give an actual form to any potential matter.

Aristotle acknowledges to existence of an "unmoved mover" for movements of the universe. For him, the universe as a matter is in move controlled by the form of the unmoved mover. And, that form is the only form existing separate from the matter. A matter doesn't move without any form to guide that; and a form loses the potential once it becomes an actual disabling to change further into another. Thus, to move continuously, the universe needs to be guided by a separate but already perfectly actualised form; the supreme, universal, absolute form. It is a logical necessity, but not a religious conviction for Aristotle.

Aristotle also discussed ten types of categories: substance, quality, quantity, relation, place, time, position, state, action, and affection; among which the substance can only bear essential and primary element of the thing. Without any substance, other categories cannot exist: "the tallness and whiteness of the horse depend for their existence entirely on the primary reality of the particular horse" (Tarnas 56). Aristotle has covered many issues ranging from ethics to taxonomy into his philosophy. But, he has given a considerable focus on the quest for the first principle with his teleological theory of actualisation, theory of causation and categorisation.

From Thales to Aristotle, many scholars discovered and defined diverse principles as the first principles that order the world. Despite these numerous attempts the quest was not completely solved since there have been numerous different views that contradict each other. Yet, the philosophical journey from Thales to Aristotle spent its greatest time in an important quest for the first principle of this world. 

Works Cited

Tarnas, Richard. The Passion of the Western Mind. London: Pimlico, 1996.