Bibliotheca Alexandrina – National Library Egypt – UNESCO 2002.
After the few saucy and sensational end notes on Plato, Aristotle and the brief account of Hellenism in yesterday’s post, spiced with the due measure of violence with, Philip and the Greek civil war, the military campaign of Alexander against Darius and the Persian Empire, (during which Parmenion, Philotas and Cleitus among others, were killed), the (probably violent) end of Alexander after the campaign, the civil war in Rome with Lepidus, Crassus, Sulla, Suetonius and Cicero, the assassination of Pompeius, Cleopatra and the civil, royal, spiritual and scientific legacy of Egypt, Julius Caesar, Augustus Caesar, Tiberius Caesar, Jesus Christ, the Roman Empire etc, here is some further sexy commentary on the theory and philosophy of science.
On the issue of universals, both Plato and Aristotle refer in essence, to the main properties of energy such as time, motion, information, variation, limitation, dimension and (material) mass.
In mathematics, physics, quantum mechanics and the derivative sciences through to biology, psychology, anthropology and beyond, these properties are exemplified in interaction (relation), reproduction (organization) and condition (of the two).
- In quantum mechanics, definition is abstract and approximate, because the energy levels are higher and the organization of (structured) mass is more dynamic.
- In classical physics, definition is applied and precise, because the energy levels are lower and the organization of (structured) mass is less dynamic.
In both cases and always, definition is relative.
Energy and the dynamics of energy, meaning power (non dimensional) and force (dimensional) are ever present in any state of universal mass and at any level of definition. See, for comparison, in physics, gravity, nuclear and electromagnetic interactions, in astrophysics, dark energy, black holes, super novas and interstellar mass, etc).
The universe is dynamic, energetic, active and kinetic. There is nothing static in the universe and even (or especially) gravitational singularity, is not fixed. So the non-physical, timeless, absolute, and unchangeable essences of all things, of which objects and matter in the physical world are merely limitations, do not exist in theory (ontology) and in reality (metaphysics).
What is essential, existential, conceptual and evolutionary, is energy and its properties of variation, limitation, dimension, mass, motion, information and definition. To be exact what non-physical, timeless, absolute and quantum exists, is the interchanging duality between the energy states of singularity (dynamic contraction) and plurality (multiplicity and dynamic expansion) in energy dynamics. Plus, and no less importantly, the interactive, reproductive and conditional features of these. Full stop – end of story. Short of pufferies, the rest are interesting, commendable and romantic, intellectual and mental exercises in philosophical dialectics.
Plato, in the Theory of Forms, refers to recurrences, repetitions, replications and reproductions, therefore patterns and programs, models and motifs. Here Plato is philosophically true (epistemology) and scientifically correct. Plato also refers to the concept of energy (and the quantum – physical duality) in his world of the forms. More specifically he refers to the sunlight as the real world and to the shadows as the imperfect or partially real world, with his outstanding in literature, story of the Cave. Today, definition is classic and as mentioned always relative, in science, starting with mathematics, quantum mechanics and theoretical physics.
Ontology, is the realm of such physics, quantum mechanics and modern mathematics. In metaphysics, the only non-physical, timeless, absolute, is energy. Yet this true essence is ever changeable, and even in gravitational singularity, is approximate. Certainty is dynamic. Uncertainty is fixed. To be exact again, the only non-physical, timeless, absolute and quantum is the interchanging duality between the energy states of singularity (dynamic contraction) and plurality (multiplicity and dynamic expansion). Plus, and no less importantly, the interactive, reproductive and conditional features of these, Plato does understand (senses) himself. This is why he refers in his theory of realism to the mental limitations of the ideal forms, besides the Cave story and his (early) reference to quantum mechanics. Meanwhile, modern idealism has carried Platonic realism precariously closer to the alleged quality of the eternal Forms as mental artifacts (conjectures), where empiricism menacingly lurks.
Philosophy is dialectic but not forgiving (or compromising) in the matter of essence or to the negligence or intimidation of it, for this very reason. Especially to great thinkers and valiant intellectuals.
Plato’s student Aristotle disagreed with his tutor, in the precise areas outlined above. Aristotle elevated Plato’s forms (models) into “formal causes” (programs), the blueprints or essences of individual things. Whereas Plato idealized geometry, Aristotle emphasized nature and related disciplines and therefore much of his thinking concerns living beings and their properties. Aristotle was a conscientious learner and scholar. He understood dynamics better than Plato. The nature of universals in Aristotle’s philosophy therefore hinges on his view of natural kinds. Instead of categorizing being according to the structure of thought, he proposed that the categorical analysis be directed upon the structure of the natural world. He is therefore closer to evolution.
In his technique of rational thinking, Aristotle used the principle of predication in Categories, where he established that universal terms are involved in a relation of predication if some facts expressed by ordinary sentences hold. In his work On Interpretation, he maintained that the concept of “universal” is apt to be predicated of many and that singular is not. This was considered part of an approach to the principle of things, which adheres to the criterion that what is most universal is also most real. Aristotle was a new, moderate sort of realist about (modern) universals.
Notably in the end of the studies and discourses, Aristotle took his followers and established his own academy, which he called the Lyceum. To underline the theoretical and academic variation from the Academy of Plato, he made Lyceum a peripatic school, meaning that the lectures were given in nature and in motion. Aristotle is hellenist and so closer to (modern) science. In another historical interjection, it must be reminded that Athens at the time was still a democracy and academic liberty was not in question. Yet Socrates had been relatively recently convicted and executed and spirits in politics were still running high in Athens. Aristotle was academic envoy of the Macedonian court. With the Lyceum he distanced from Plato and the Academy and moved closer to the contingent of the Macedonian army, which was stationed in Athens at the time.
In recap, energy and its properties of variation, limitation, dimension, mass, motion, information and definition, is the towering essence in epistemology and overall in philosophy and in science. So like Plato, Aristotle is not excused, although this negligence, becomes more visible in the light of modern scientific discoveries. Their scholarship is not in dispute but Aristotle and Plato, are not excused, each for different reasons and jointly, because they followed Democritus, a Thracian pre-Socratic and student of Leucippus.
Democritus had argued that atoms and the vacuum were the beginning of the universe; and that everything else existed only in opinion. He concluded that divisibility of matter comes to an end, and the smallest possible fragments must be bodies with sizes and shapes. The smallest and indivisible bodies he called “atoms.” Atoms, Democritus believed, are too small to be detected by the senses; they are infinite in numbers and come in infinitely many varieties, and they have existed forever and that these atoms are in constant motion in the void or vacuum. The middle-sized objects of everyday life are complexes of atoms that are brought together by random collisions, differing in kind based on the variations among their constituent atoms.
For Democritus, the only true realities are atoms and the void. What we perceive as water, fire, plants, or humans are merely combinations of atoms in the void. The sensory qualities we experience are not real; they exist only by convention. Finally of the mass of atoms, Democritus said, “The more any indivisible exceeds, the heavier it is.” However, his exact position on atomic weight is disputed.
P.S.
- This note does not to seek to make enviable or critical examples in compromises of Plato or Aristotle in principles of philosophical morality or diligence, particularly in the matter of essence. Which are moreover discovered a posteriori. To associate them with historic and political events of orbital relevance or to impress with the crossing (algorithmic) power of the modern Alphabet of Knowledge (and Evolution) – ABC in the relevant solutions, like in the concept of universals. This note seeks simply to underline the compelling essence of time and the concentration and composure, required in the current validation of the arguments, in the theoretical discourse.
- The problem of universals engages issues of the mind – body problem. The solution which ABC offers in this problem is drawn from evolution and is briefly described in the previous post. For the economy of the post, the full reference is not repeated here, save for convenience of the reader and researcher, I add here the note on, interactive metabolism and reproduction, in biology, the sensory – motor control of motion, in neurology, reason and emotion, in psychology, etc.
- Technology, ecology, economy, administration, management and the control of motion.
