Reaction Paper On Heraclitus

1360 Words6 Pages

Heraclitus

Heraclitus is a Greek philosopher of which not much is known beyond his works. What we do know is that he lived in Ephesus, a city on the Ionian coast of Asia Minor, and that his character has largely been inferred from his writings on philosophical issues. Two philosophical theories come to mind when the name Heraclitus is mentioned: The Doctrine of Flux and the Unity of Opposites. In his espousal of these theories he managed to draw the ire of many -- even Aristotle and Plato, who believed that his hypothesis of the world was one of logical incoherence. Heraclitus posited the theory of the Doctrine of Flux and the Unity of Opposites by claiming that everything is constantly changing and opposite things are identical, so that everything …show more content…

As founder of the Milesian School of Philosophy, he shaped a new doctrine; one which sought to have logical and rational explanations to natural phenomena, not explanations steeped in the supernatural dogma of that time. In his cosmological doctrine that all things emerge from and return to water, not from the divine hand of the Gods, Thales evokes a naturalist pattern of thought – nature is all that exists, and all things supernatural therefore do not exist; while yes, Thales did prescribe to this materialist and rational school of thought, Aristotle claims that he still believed that God was present in all things. Thales is considered to be one of the first subscribers to both Naturalism and Materialism as he searched not for answers in mythological or paranormal and explanations, but through observation of nature and looking for the “Physis” (or nature) of entities, seeking to understand the cause behind their characteristic …show more content…

Parmenides posited the theory that our perception of reality is erroneous, and phenomena of movement and change are appearances of a static and pre-planned reality. (Philosophy Basics, 2008) It is in Parmenides deductive arguments about the nature of reality where he comes to a conclusion that “What-is-not” does not exist, and that “no-longer” and “not-yet” are variations of “what-is-not” asserting that what has come and what has gone – the past and the present —do not exist and that change is impossible. (Philosophy Basics,

Open Document