Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
About Me
- dsm
- Biostatistician, Biology and Philosophy Faculty, Lacrosse Addict
Posts
14 comments:
Comment by Ryan Keene:
In regards to what we know about science today, Thales was wrong, but not immature, and his idea was not implausible for the science that they knew back then. He was in fact mature enough to actually think about a theory that most people of that time did not even care to ponder on. He was on the right track and realized that water was a very natural substance as well as plentiful. I think that he was just not thinking through enough to realize that water is not the most pure universal substance that everything broke down to, because air is not water, which Anaximenes theory entailed. However, the same molecules that make up air, make up water, so if he had just thought his theory through longer and more thoroughly, he might have actually discovered the atom before Democritus. Anaximander was on this track as well when he theorized apeiron. I would not change their theories because theirs were the basis for scientists of that era, as well as the foundation that scientists of today have built on. If they had actually discovered the things that we know today, then what would we know today? I'm sure that it would be a continuance of these theories and attempting to further break them down, but it still is a foundation that we all stand on for scientific development.
Liz Stern
I can think of a couple examples that support Thales view of reality; 1. Tables are made from wood, wood comes from trees, trees can not grow without water, 2. Clothes are mostly made from cotton, cotton grows on plants which also cannot grow without water. These ideas lead me to understand Thales view of reality and to not find it implausible or childish at all. I feel that he was a idealist with his own way of thinking and as many, seemed to believe that he was 100% right. He may be right about many things being mainly water such as humans, animals, plants and other living organisms but not correct in saying that the source of everything is water. I'm not sure if they knew about elements and minerals in his times but these are examples that contrast his belief system.
I feel that he may have been ahead of his time in his way of thinking. We don't have any record of too many others in his time asking philosophical questions such as what is real or how is everything the way it is. As discussed in class, we know that they didn't have time for philosophical thinking because they were all consumed with making their living. Thales must have been an intelligent person to think of such questions of the universe and come to such conclusions but maybe a little inconsiderate of earths other natural elements.
To improve but not change Thales view of reality, I would agree that the source of many things is water and without water we wouldn't have living organisms but I would expand my theory. If I said my theory as simply as Thales, I would say the source of everything is made up of the natural elements of the earth. We might then be asked what the source of earth's natural elements are but that goes into creation vs. evolution and I'm not ready for that yet. So, I would state that we would not have the life or lifestyle that we have if the earth was not composed of such things as water and elements and minerals.
Thales was ahead of his time. Both because he tried to logically solve the nature of the universe and also because he picked water. With the limited technology and research of his time he concluded that the nature of the world is water. Water is essential for all life on this planet and makes up most of the Earth’s surface and most of our bodies. At the same time it is implausible/childish because of his simplicity. The Earth and Universe are made of many elements. He limited his beliefs to just one without many explanations as to why he left out other obvious elements. Also, he only looked at one physical element of what he considered reality; he didn’t explore any mental or spiritual aspects of reality. I’m not sure if you can improve/change ones notion of reality because it is ones own theory, but I would certainly add to his philosphical beliefs before accepting them as my own. I think that the reality of the World is that it is made up of atoms of several different elements. I also believe that reality is what is contained in each individuals mind, therefore, making each individuals reality their own unique reality. I also believe that reality is composed of constant change of all elements as well as the mind. I do believe in a Spiritual world that does parallel our own that I can’t physically see. And I believe in a Spiritual world that is not connected to the Earth. Those four things are what make up my vision of reality. But I don’t wish to discredit Thales vision of reality, as it is his own.
No, I don't believe that Thales was childish or implausible in fact I believe that he had a very good theory that everything was made of water just from the information about water that comes to mind: It can appear in three different states liquid, solid, and a gaseous state. We also know that there are many "things" that are in a liquid form and that there are many things that can be turned into a liquid form. We also know that water covers over 50% of the Earth's surface and that the human body and other living things are made up of a good part of water. Yes, he may have been ahead of his time do to the lack of technology and the lack of discovering other elements. I do believe he took what knowledge he had obtained and put together a reasonable theory of reality.
He might have been able to improve his notion by doing more research, but i believe that by Thales theory was a stepping stone for other scientist to to come up with their theories of what is "real", because they actually had another theory to test their theory against.
S.Q.Hall
Jessica Meza
9/18/08
PHI 101
DS Martin
Water is an essential element that all living organisms need to survive. If there were no water left on this earth, not only would human’s parish as would animals, plants and sea life. For these reasons Thales view of reality, in my opinion, was ahead of his time and not so far fetched. Today it is true that a person could so much as lose their life due to dehydration. Water can also simultaneously cause people to suffer from floods, drownings, and natural disasters. Despite all of these facts there could be and have been, over time, many improvements on Thales theory of reality. Another focus that Thales could have explored is the catastrophic events that would have occurred as a result of water becoming a nonexistent reality of life and discussed that, as with everything it contributes to life in a positive manner with moderation. Therefore, water is necessary for us to exist coinciding with food, shelter, and clothing but, I do not believe it is the only reality in this world.
I don't believe that Thales was completely wrong. I think that he was
ahead of his time when he said that water is the source of everything.
I feel that if he had all the resources that we have today, he would
have been able to make a more accurate statement.
Water is one of the main things that we need to survive; in fact the
human body is somewhere between 65 and 70 percent water, and the brain
is up to 75% made up of water. A person can survive much longer without
food than water. Somewhere between 70 and 75 percent of the earth's
surface is covered with water. Most everything needs some amount of
water. If we didn't have water, everything would die.
I do believe that Thales Theory was a stepping stone for all scientists
after him. If we didn't have scientists coming up with theories, where
would we be today? Even if the theory is incorrect or incomplete, the
discussions and research it causes help provide scientific understanding
and advancement. What will we know 100 years from now that we learned
because someone had a theory, however odd it may have sounded?
Zabrina Ybarra
Thales day in age was a time where not even the question or reason of reality was thought of or mentioned by a 'philosopher'. Perhaps because it was much to thing about, or possibly because it was a start from scratch that not many took the time to begin or take steps as Thales did.
He was one of the first people to persist and search for the logical answers to what is life, moreover the reality of life.
However, I believe Aristotle thought of his conclusion of views as 'childish' because his views were more of thought. To me, Thales began reasoning on the obvious. He had to begun to build his thought somewhere and come to some kind of conclusion in order to build off anything with his views of reality to even be questioned or argued.
In this case, Thales played an important role in philosophical history with his thoughts on reality and beliefs because it caused many to think, then be able to argue against his beliefs with their own. This being said, many view points can now be constructed which in history, brought the philosophers closer to figuring out an even more logical conclusion to what reality really is.
Also, living in his time , there is no way I could even begin to actually step into his shoes knowing more than he did at his time or, being to try to erase knowledge that I already have to come up with what I would have thought at his time. However, it's obvious that Thales mind set was on the most logical thought. I would have seen the exact view point of his claims of water and nourishment being true.
Nowhere do I see his views being childish or unreasonable. To me they were very wise and thought of.
And I am sure that if Thales would have had the chance of knowing the scientific knowledge of the universe we have today, he would have been able to better include his views and possibly add more thought to build from.
I believe he was ahead of his time. Water is the main source of the human body. Everything on earth needs water from humans to animals and a majority of the other life on earth. I believe his theory's were way better the some of the other ones out there during his time. He actually had a plausible idea thinking that water is the core of everything. Other philosophers during his time were wrong to even question this man who's idea of life was way more logical then theirs. Even his own students didn't agree with him but used elements such as air in their beliefs. So i believe that he was ahead of his time and way more sane then some of the philosophers in his age.
Nabilah Keys
I do believe Thales was wrong with the theory of everything in the universe being made up of water. However I must agree with his way of thinking which was very open minded and mature. It is a given fact that the body can live longer with out food than water. our bodies are also over 40% water. With that being said think of all the other living things that require water or rain to survive. There is probable cause that in Thales century this could have been believeable. I do believe that the things unkown to mankind now will be the key to success for the future. Keeping that in mind the world is always changing so whose to say decades from now things wont mostly be water. When we speak on the unkown who is right and who is wrong?
Stephanie Spencer
Thales view of reality was not childish or implausible. His view of reality is actually interesting. He actually took the time to think whats out of the cave. I think if it weren't for him, none of us wouldn't think whats real to us & about the world. And water is the main source to our bodies and mainly everything on earth. Water is life, we need water to survive and we need water to grow things. I don't think we could never survive without water. Maybe thats why he thinks water is reality to him. I don't think he was ahead of his time, it was meant to happen.
Nicole Hahlen
From what we know today, we would say that Thales is wrong but back than in his time, he could have been right for the fact that they had no knowledge back than of how much our bodies really consisted of water. We might even say Thales was ahead of his time because he assumed that our entire bodies consisted of water he was not completly right nor was he completly wrong. He was not considered childish because of his ideas. His ideas actually interest me, because he had a unique way of thinking and had supporting reasons as to why he believed the way he did. Many people would think that Thales was very smart and ahead of his time because we know so much more today about water than he did back in his days, such as this universe consisting of nothing more than water, and our bodies requiring so much water to just stay alive, so although water is a major part of our everydays lives there is more to the world than just water and not everything consists of purly water.
Water is in our every day life, it is everywhere. I don't believe that Thales theory is childish or implausible; in fact I think that he was ahead of his time. Living organisms need water; humans for examples need water to survive. Even though water is not the source of everything it is a major contributor. But when you look at science today it proves that there is not one source for everything. It would be nearly impossible for there to be just one source for everything. Thales could have showed that water may not be the source of everything but when you look at the world around us most everything has had water at one time or another needed water or use water to move forward. Humans Body's are 80% water, which means that over half of our body is water. So water may not be the source of everything, it has a big impact on the world. Without water it would have been impossible the make clay, which build the house that were lived in. Without water plants and vegetation would not be able to grow. When you sit down and think about Thales and his students Theory's were not at all that far fetched and at there time it would make it nearly impossible to prove them. They could have trying to build something without using water, which would indicate that water, is probably the greatest source. Thales said that the reason that water was the source of everything is because the earth floats upon water, which is strange because he did not have the technology to prove that. Even though when you go to the ocean and look out it appears that we are floating on the water. I believe that Thales new what he was talking about it's just that he had no way to go further and prove it to his students. There is not only one source it is a combination, nothing started out just as water.
Jessica Southland
Peter Ngor
Metaphysics-Position Paper.
If we compare what we about science and what scientists can do today thales was not on the target. But I don’t think he was immature in his thinking, because some the science did not really did away with his theory. The today Scientists just kind of build on the foundation that he laid in regard to this theory. Matter of fact is that he was the scientist of his days because none of his colleagues even both to thinks the way he thinks anyway. In reality we know that everything needed water to live human being animals and plants needed water survive. Thales knew that water is base of life and so with his little knowledge he had he assume that water is life itself. If he would have thought through enough he would have just like our today Scientists but due his limited knowledge of his days that he stop there. However I have to give it to him because he did a very good job on doing that even some of us today might not even think about and he gave us something to talk about in our days. So for this reason I will not say that he childish in any way.
hen evaluating Thales view of water - modern scientific data and evidence still support the statement that "All life on Earth today originated in the water". Would this alter your views any? Why or why not? Complexity does not necessarily mean superiority. Sometimes the simplest of theories or experiments are the most elegant. What if the mind is also nothing more than simple biochemical compounds as well? Isn't philosophy at least partly about questioning your own ideas and others to better understand the world and to increase knowledge and wisdom? Wouldn't that make it ok then to argue all sorts of positions as a mental exercise, regardless of whether or not we can "prove" anything......
Post a Comment