Most scholars contend that Anaxagoras of Clazomenae lived during the time period of 500 to 428 BCE. He was born in Ionia and later travelled to Athens, where he spent thirty years teaching and writing. Unfortunately, Anaxagoras suffered a similar fate to that of Socrates. On the charges of impiety, the Athenian government sentenced Anaxagoras to death. Fortunately, Anaxagoras decided to forego this penalty, dissimilar to Socrates, and he moved to Lampsacus, where he lived until his death. It seems as though Anaxagoras violated the religious beliefs of the Athenians; however, his ideas were directly consistent with the other Pre-Socratic natural philosophers that preceded him. In any event, he set himself apart from his tradition when he authored a very unique and innovative philosophy of first principles.
Unfortunately for us, we no longer have any existing works of Anaxagoras. Scholars, however, have been able to construct a general idea of his philosophy by studying secondary sources and the fragments we still have today. Anaxagoras particularly challenged the thought of Parmenides who preceded him, but some also claim he wished to discredit Parmenides' student, Empedocles, as well.
Parmenides, a brilliantly innovative thinker himself, denied that change and plurality were even possible. To him, we stand at a metaphysical fork, where we must choose being or nonbeing. Nonbeing was an impossibility, he thought, because if something ceased to exist it would be insensible and no longer be anything at all. Therefore, nonbeing was a ridiculous metaphysical account. Furthermore, for change to occur, something would first start as nonbeing and become being. This, again, is an impossibility because the conclusions is based on premises that are impossible (i.e., nonbeing). Therefore, Parmenides believed that being must be unified and immutable. Scholars would call this a metaphysical monism.
Anaxagoras agreed partly with Parmenides, namely on the fact that nonbeing is an impossibility. However, he wanted to provide a way in which plurality was still possible so that being was not static and unchanging. As a result, Anaxagoras claimed that all things contained everything, or all of reality, in themselves with varying consistency. For example, any particular thing may contain in itself all of the possible substances of which reality may be with greater and lesser proportions of substances. He described this as "a portion of everything in everything."
He backed this theory up by describing the diets of animals. Food, for instance, must be made up of hair, flesh, etc., because animals must get their hair from hair and their flesh from flesh. As a result, all food and all other beings must contain greater or less proportions of all the possible substances in the world, an infinite number. Thus, beings become differentiated because they have a higher amount of particular substances versus lower amounts of other substances. The higher portions give beings their distinctive essence(s).
Anaxagoras did content, however, that being originally was a unified substance. But how can a unified substance provide for difference and plurality? To explain this, Anaxagoras introduced the principle of the Nous, or the "Mind," that ordered, structured, and differentiated Being. The Mind differentiated Being by first "shaking" Being into a vortex of motion. Like the Ionians before him, he needed opposites to account for difference and plurality. As the Nous set Being into motion, Being then created the first pair of opposites, "air and ether." Anaxagoras called this "air and ether" by another phrase, "mixture and seeds." From mixture and seeds, or the initial opposites, all beings can come into existence. By mixture and seeds, Anaxagoras created the conditions for difference and, hence, beings.
As mixture and seeds differentiate Being, the Mind begins to order reality with an infinite possible number of beings. It is only through mixture and seeds that a plurality of being is possible while staying within the Pre-Socratic and Ionian traditions of unified Being. Although the Nous accounted for an efficient cause of Being and beings, or how Being became beings, his theories still lack any ultimate cause, or why Being became beings. Socrates, in fact, criticizes Anaxagoras for proposing such an innovative and full-of-potential metaphysics without providing any account of why.
Though some of Anaxagoras' theories lay in interpretive gray areas, he certainly introduced an original system of metaphysics and first principles that revived the possibility of change after Parmenides seemingly annihilated it. In any event, we should rightly remember Anaxagoras' philosophy for its influence and relevancy to later thinkers such as Gottfried Leibniz (the universe being contained in all things) and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (being versus becoming, being versus nonbeing).
Unfortunately for us, we no longer have any existing works of Anaxagoras. Scholars, however, have been able to construct a general idea of his philosophy by studying secondary sources and the fragments we still have today. Anaxagoras particularly challenged the thought of Parmenides who preceded him, but some also claim he wished to discredit Parmenides' student, Empedocles, as well.
Parmenides, a brilliantly innovative thinker himself, denied that change and plurality were even possible. To him, we stand at a metaphysical fork, where we must choose being or nonbeing. Nonbeing was an impossibility, he thought, because if something ceased to exist it would be insensible and no longer be anything at all. Therefore, nonbeing was a ridiculous metaphysical account. Furthermore, for change to occur, something would first start as nonbeing and become being. This, again, is an impossibility because the conclusions is based on premises that are impossible (i.e., nonbeing). Therefore, Parmenides believed that being must be unified and immutable. Scholars would call this a metaphysical monism.
Anaxagoras agreed partly with Parmenides, namely on the fact that nonbeing is an impossibility. However, he wanted to provide a way in which plurality was still possible so that being was not static and unchanging. As a result, Anaxagoras claimed that all things contained everything, or all of reality, in themselves with varying consistency. For example, any particular thing may contain in itself all of the possible substances of which reality may be with greater and lesser proportions of substances. He described this as "a portion of everything in everything."
He backed this theory up by describing the diets of animals. Food, for instance, must be made up of hair, flesh, etc., because animals must get their hair from hair and their flesh from flesh. As a result, all food and all other beings must contain greater or less proportions of all the possible substances in the world, an infinite number. Thus, beings become differentiated because they have a higher amount of particular substances versus lower amounts of other substances. The higher portions give beings their distinctive essence(s).
Anaxagoras did content, however, that being originally was a unified substance. But how can a unified substance provide for difference and plurality? To explain this, Anaxagoras introduced the principle of the Nous, or the "Mind," that ordered, structured, and differentiated Being. The Mind differentiated Being by first "shaking" Being into a vortex of motion. Like the Ionians before him, he needed opposites to account for difference and plurality. As the Nous set Being into motion, Being then created the first pair of opposites, "air and ether." Anaxagoras called this "air and ether" by another phrase, "mixture and seeds." From mixture and seeds, or the initial opposites, all beings can come into existence. By mixture and seeds, Anaxagoras created the conditions for difference and, hence, beings.
As mixture and seeds differentiate Being, the Mind begins to order reality with an infinite possible number of beings. It is only through mixture and seeds that a plurality of being is possible while staying within the Pre-Socratic and Ionian traditions of unified Being. Although the Nous accounted for an efficient cause of Being and beings, or how Being became beings, his theories still lack any ultimate cause, or why Being became beings. Socrates, in fact, criticizes Anaxagoras for proposing such an innovative and full-of-potential metaphysics without providing any account of why.
Though some of Anaxagoras' theories lay in interpretive gray areas, he certainly introduced an original system of metaphysics and first principles that revived the possibility of change after Parmenides seemingly annihilated it. In any event, we should rightly remember Anaxagoras' philosophy for its influence and relevancy to later thinkers such as Gottfried Leibniz (the universe being contained in all things) and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (being versus becoming, being versus nonbeing).
About the Author:
See what Philosophy books and resources are out there to help you broaden your intellectual horizon. At our website Best Philosophy Books, we can give you some suggestions!