Given what we know about science today, was Thales view of reality childish and implausible? Or was he ahead of his time? How might you improve his notion of what is real?
I don’t believe Thales’ views were either childish nor implausible. Over the course of time many theories have come out of the minds of individuals who have tested what is considered to be normal. His ideas may now prove to be implausible given advances in science and technology: however when he made the claim that water was the only true reality there was nothing to prove otherwise, with the exception of the opinions of others. Therefore his philosophy of water being the only true reality was plausible. I personally don’t believe this could be to far fetched, given that everything in nature depends deeply on water for survival it is one of the key elements in life.
Thales of Miletus held the cosmological thesis that the earth’s substance originated from water. Thales directly influenced other philosophers that followed him with his theories on matter and form. “Heraclitus Homericus stated that Thales drew his conclusion from seeing moist substance turn into air, slime and earth. It seems clear that Thales viewed the Earth as solidifying from the water on which it floated and which surrounded ocean. 1
‘ “Thales,” says Cicero, “assures that water is the principle of all things; and that God is that Mind which shaped and created all things from water”’ 2
‘Aristotle stated quite unequivocally; “Thales…declared that the earth rests on water.” He explained that it floated because of a particular quality…of buoyancy similar to that of wood.’ 3
Thales earthquake theory stemmed from his hypothesis that the earth floats upon water and that the quakes happen because of the roughness of the oceans. 4 Even though his theory was wrong, it did advance the cosmological view of substance and logic instead of merely relating natural events as the result of actions by the supernatural gods. From Thales on, the personification of matter and natural actions, was replaced with a “removal of mind from substance opening the door to a non-divine principle of action” bringing us to Einstein’s cosmological view which does not distinguish between matter and energy. 5
Thales hypothesis that water is the principle of all things was not far off. The largest constituent of the universe is hydrogen and in the nuclei of each living cell is an hydrogen atom. Two of the three atoms in water is hydrogen. The missing oxygen atom was added later when our planet formed. 6
Water did play a crucial role as a prerequisite to life, therefore the theories that Thales held to were not childish or implausible. He was far ahead of his time regarding the earth being a sphere, predicting the solar eclipse, and the prerequisite thinking of reality regarding matter and form. It would be difficult to improve upon the work that he did given his circumstances and the era that he lived in. His work influenced many philosophers and scientists throughout history.
I do not think Thales views were childish, rather a leap of faith for him in a time when no one else was willing to do so, breaking out of the box that enclosed so many minds. I can see why he could assume the world is made of water, for it made up the vast oceans that surrounded his world (in a time when the world was flat), it was what you would find in the ground if you dug deep enough, it was in the air he breathed on a humid day, it fell from the heavens during a thunderstorm, and it spawned creatures and plant life which thrived in rivers and oceans. Plants, animals, and people alike needed it to survive and would perish without it. For me it’s easy to see how he could base the worlds existence on this theory. With today’s technology in science, we can more closely examine what makes up stuff and we have been told that all things are made up of atoms, we know which atoms combine to make water, and through testing we have come to conclude that not all things contain water molecules in their make up. At least, that is what the scientists of today report. In that regard I would have to agree that his theory was implausible. But, as time progresses, granted the human species lasts on this Earth for another 1000 years, who’s to say that todays scientists really know what they are claiming to be the truth? Science may progress, just like it has over the last 1000 years, and turn our world inside out. What we perceive to be reality may turn out to be the naive illusion of the 21st century scientists who think they know, when, in my reality, no one really knows anything for certain. I believe that Thales was definitely ahead of his time.
I think Thales was ahead of his time for many reasons. Though Aristotle called his theory “childish” and it was easily proven implausible by Thales’ students, Thales is credited with being the first person to look at the world in a scientific way; he has even been called the first scientist. Being the first one to ask, “What is real?” must have been so difficult. It is a question that seems almost impossible to answer, as any philosophy student will tell you, and he was the first one to try. Our philosophy text says, “He was the first Greek thinker to break with common sense and religion and offer a general theory about the ultimate nature of reality.” Not only was Thales the first to offer a theory of reality that didn’t involve mythological gods, he was the first to logically use argumentation to establish a truth. First he offered a premise, “The seeds of everything have a moist nature” and since “that from which anything comes into being is it’s first principle”. The premise then leads to his desired conclusion, “The source of everything is water”. Maybe Thales realized his theory would be proven wrong, but he wanted his students to learn something by rejecting his conclusion. He might have wanted them to come up with counter points or examples that proved his theory false. Just by creating the first theory of “What is real?” Thales gave us the opportunity to come up with better more plausible explanations. From the perspective of the 21st century Thales doesn’t seem as silly as his students believed he was. We know now that life did originate in the water. Thales was also the first to realize that water has more than one form. Scientific advances make it possible to understand that some of Thales’ ideas were way ahead of their time. Having said that I can see one easy way that Thales could have come up with a more plausible explanation of “What is real?” He could have tried to prove his own theory wrong. He would have quickly come up with some examples of substances that were not moist. Having come up with counter points to his argument, such as rock, earth, or fire, he could improve his theory before he shared it with his students or come up with arguments proving the counter points wrong.
Works Cited: Solomon, Robert C. Introducing Philosophy a Text with Integrated Readings. New York: Oxford UP, 2008. Print
“Thales”. Wikipedia.org: The Free Encyclopedia .n.p. 6 February 2009. Web. 8 February 2009.
Thales’ view on reality, I believe was ahead of his time. Thales as we learned believed that the source of everything was water, and all things are made of water. Although Thales faced many critics for his study in nature and his beliefs, his theory was plausible and far from childish. Thales could have clarified his statement that all things are made of water, to all things came from water, or that life begins in water. This statement would have been somewhat more conceivable for those who did not share his views. For example a pregnant woman’s water breaks before she gives birth, and during pregnancy the baby is protected and grows in womb which also composed of water and other fluids, with out this water we would not be able to survive and there would be no more life. Even out of the womb, as adults we all need water to stay alive with out our bodies would shut down and eventually we would die, so water is absolutely necessary for there to be life. Without water all living things would cease to exist. The idea that water is the absolute substance is acceptable. The reality is that life as we now know through the advances of modern science; did indeed begin in water. Although Thales did not have this knowledge, it is believed that life began in water 4 billion years ago with a prokaryote (microorganism which used photosynthesis to feed). Even without any modern technology, Thales knew that life came from the water, and his reality of water being ultimate substance was too advanced for the people of his time to grasp.
Thales view of reality was based on the theory that the source of everything was water.
I wouldn’t consider his view childish. I believe that all theories on what the world is and what is real had to start somewhere. Thales just happened to start with water.
For what we know today about the makeup of things, I think he was right on. Scientists over the years have just been able to expand on his original notion. Scientists have been able to break down what water is made of. It is found that the elements that make water are the same elements in a lot of the make up of “stuff.”
For instance the human body is made up of an amount of hydrogen and oxygen. Would we be able to survive without hydrogen and oxygen? I would think not. It is necessary for plant life to thrive as well with water. So the things that we eat and the moisture necessary for our body to survive is all based on water.
Now, back to the original point of view with Thales. In the time period were Thales made his theory we just did not have the technology to pick things apart. Had that have been available in his time who’s to say that he would not have worked out his theory with “proof.”
Also as our reading material points out, this was a break through of an idea. Which if he had not have been brave enough to voice his beliefs would there have been any other philosophers that would have tested and voiced their theories?
I think his ideas were a good start. Improving on his ideas I would say would just have to do with what we know now about the earth and its general make up.
Thales was ahead of his times regardless if his theories turned out to be more scientific than he knew. The fact that he pondered such questions and decided to look outside the box was a breakthrough in itself. I can easily understand how he thought everything was made up of water, because it was everywhere, in everything, and without it there would be no life. During those times having plentiful amounts of clean water to drink, grow crops, bathe, etc, was their reality. Even today there isn’t much that we own that didn’t need water to be created. Regardless of all the possessions we have, they can easily be taken away and no longer be a part of our reality. However, if we no longer have water which sustains life, this reality that most of us share would be no more. I don’t think it was coincidental that his theory was fairly accurate. He must have had some sense of understanding that water was not only needed in life, but needed to build the world he knew from the earth he lived on to the massive buildings creating Greece.
Thales used observation of the natural world and reasoning to determine what their fundamentally is or what the world is made of. He concluded that water was the source of building block for everything we see. Thales was ahead of his time in his approach. Science today has similar approach perhaps his view was even plausible at that time. A rock for example if you ask someone to examine it and think about where that rock began you might jump to respond with it’s just a rock. Thales would look at the rock and say it is a rock which originated from water. It would be a little far fetched for someone to believe that theory. Only because the rock is solid and water in its liquid form is clear and wet. However, science today can see and reason that water was and is an element to a rock, being a rock but many other molecules are also needed to make the rock a rock. However it couldn’t be proven based on the resources he had back in his time period to protest his belief. Science today however is able to with the help of a microscope see atoms and even smaller molecules. Now we can see that water is a key element, but also is not the only element. Science and Thales theory are similar in approach however the ending results are different.
Thales view of reality was very innovative for his time. Despite the lack of scientific evidence, Thales seemed to have a solid idea of how relevant water is to everything. Even today, it is well known that water constitutes most of our bodies and that most living organisms need it to survive. Earth's surface itself is occupied by more than 70% of water. It's a fact that water helps keeping the planet alive. Politically, it is the subject of future conflicts between African nations. Moreover, fresh water scarcity worldwide could become the biggest crisis of all during this century. Water is the essence of life and it affects all of us directly and indirectly. Although modern science has managed to solve many of life's misteries, Thales's philosophy could have been used as insight. For that reason, I thinkThales was ahead of his time and I don't catalog his ideas as implausible, not even as childish.
I don't think Thales' view of reality was off the mark. Heraclitus supposed that the fundamental "stuff" of reality was fire. Pythagoras believed that numbers were the basis of everything. Even Democritus hypothesized that atoms actually make up what is real. I don't see Thales' view of water as the basic "element" of reality as being childish or implausible at all.
I think that Thales was ahead of his time in the sense that he was one of the first to try and describe the way the world really is. Thales was supposing that reality was made up of things that are tangible or definable/knowable, and not something that was created out of thin air by some mystic god. This was dynamic and revolutionary thinking at the time.
Thales view of water as the "stuff" that reality is made of, I think, is very plausible. Our bodies are 3/4 water. The earth's surface is 3/4 water. Water is at the center or core of most, if not all, of living things. Not to mention that it provides for the most basic of needs: sustenance. It actually gives life.
Now, we have the benefit of scientific progress and development to show us how the world works and what constitutes its make-up. In Thales' day, his hypothesis was a radical and very forward thinking one. Improving on Thales' idea of what is real, in those days, might have been a difficult task, unless you were say, a conservative or opposing voice. Other philosophers thought other elements or other "things" as the "real stuff". As is widely believed today, atoms are the DNA of what is real. This thought was first held by Democritus during the time of Thales. To some (perhaps, even most), Democritus already had "the answer" back then. He knew what future thinkers would come to accept as true and demonstrable.
The idea that a "thing" like water could comprise the make-up of reality might have been so ahead of the curve that most had not reached Thales' level of philosophical thinking.
The Greek philosopher Thales suggested that the source of everything was water. The earth floats upon water, and it and all things on it are made of water. Aristotle called him "childish." To my opinion I dont think he was childish when he came up with that suggestion. Throughout the years human kind has come to known that the source of everything was not made up of just water. Since, Thales was probably the first one to come up with such thing, his suggestion has been criticized by others. After Thales, there were many philosophers that had their own ideas of reality. Just as many people learn from their mistakes, the future philosophers improved and made more credible their ideas of what is realistic.
Thales could have been considered childish and implausible back in the old days, but today he is a famous philosopher. I don’t believe Thales’s theory was childish because that was his reality. I wonder why he thought that everything was made up of water because all living organisms do need water in some form, but other materials do not have anything to do with water. Even though he didn’t have evidence of why he believed everything was made out of water, he still helped many philosophers, scientists and us to improve on what the world is made up of.
Many people thought or think that his idea is foolish, but he went beyond of all possible theories and what other people believed at that time to say that he thought it was water. Thales was ahead of his time because many believed certain ideas and that no one could contradict. He didn’t care what others thought because he told others what he had been thinking. It was beneficial of whatever Thales had said because after what he thought other philosophers began to research and began to contradict him. They had evidence to proof their ideas and why Thales’s theory didn’t make sense.
mrcarmel3 said... I felt that Thales view of reality was far from childish and implausible. I thought that he was thinking way ahead of his time. If I were to try to improve his notion of what is real. I would say that anything that is real must have a creator.
Thales belief that water was the source of all things is a childish conclusion, to me. If you examine one of nature’s most destructive forces, fire, you would question how water could be the source of it. Although water can put out a fire, there must first be enough of it to do so, and fire can dry up water first. That question would lead one to question how it could be the source of other things, such as wind, air, and earth. Water is certainly ubiquitous and an element in many things; however, even water has more than one component, hydrogen and oxygen. The lack of scientific equipment would have prevented Thales from learning this so he cannot be faulted for his conclusion. If I was going to try to improve his idea of reality in his time, I would start by describing and discussing each of the basic elements, fire, air, water, and earth. I would start with air, describe what it looks, feels, smells and tastes like. I would also experiment with it to see how it interacts with other elements. I would follow this process with each of the elements and present my findings to him, for comparison with his belief that water was the source of all things. Without the tools scientists have today, observation and the use of the senses are basically all there is to work with.
Posts
16 comments:
test
I don’t believe Thales’ views were either childish nor implausible. Over the course of time many theories have come out of the minds of individuals who have tested what is considered to be normal. His ideas may now prove to be implausible given advances in science and technology: however when he made the claim that water was the only true reality there was nothing to prove otherwise, with the exception of the opinions of others. Therefore his philosophy of water being the only true reality was plausible. I personally don’t believe this could be to far fetched, given that everything in nature depends deeply on water for survival it is one of the key elements in life.
Thales of Miletus held the cosmological thesis that the earth’s substance originated from water. Thales directly influenced other philosophers that followed him with his theories on matter and form. “Heraclitus Homericus stated that Thales drew his conclusion from seeing moist substance turn into air, slime and earth. It seems clear that Thales viewed the Earth as solidifying from the water on which it floated and which surrounded ocean. 1
‘ “Thales,” says Cicero, “assures that water is the principle of all things; and that God is that Mind which shaped and created all things from water”’ 2
‘Aristotle stated quite unequivocally; “Thales…declared that the earth rests on water.” He explained that it floated because of a particular quality…of buoyancy similar to that of wood.’ 3
Thales earthquake theory stemmed from his hypothesis that the earth floats upon water and that the quakes happen because of the roughness of the oceans. 4 Even though his theory was wrong, it did advance the cosmological view of substance and logic instead of merely relating natural events as the result of actions by the supernatural gods. From Thales on, the personification of matter and natural actions, was replaced with a “removal of mind from substance opening the door to a non-divine principle of action” bringing us to Einstein’s cosmological view which does not distinguish between matter and energy. 5
Thales hypothesis that water is the principle of all things was not far off. The largest constituent of the universe is hydrogen and in the nuclei of each living cell is an hydrogen atom. Two of the three atoms in water is hydrogen. The missing oxygen atom was added later when our planet formed. 6
Water did play a crucial role as a prerequisite to life, therefore the theories that Thales held to were not childish or implausible. He was far ahead of his time regarding the earth being a sphere, predicting the solar eclipse, and the prerequisite thinking of reality regarding matter and form. It would be difficult to improve upon the work that he did given his circumstances and the era that he lived in. His work influenced many philosophers and scientists throughout history.
Sources:
1.http://www.iep.utm.edu/t/thales.htm#H6
2,3,4,5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thales#Background
6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_hydrogen_production
I do not think Thales views were childish, rather a leap of faith for him in a time when no one else was willing to do so, breaking out of the box that enclosed so many minds. I can see why he could assume the world is made of water, for it made up the vast oceans that surrounded his world (in a time when the world was flat), it was what you would find in the ground if you dug deep enough, it was in the air he breathed on a humid day, it fell from the heavens during a thunderstorm, and it spawned creatures and plant life which thrived in rivers and oceans. Plants, animals, and people alike needed it to survive and would perish without it. For me it’s easy to see how he could base the worlds existence on this theory. With today’s technology in science, we can more closely examine what makes up stuff and we have been told that all things are made up of atoms, we know which atoms combine to make water, and through testing we have come to conclude that not all things contain water molecules in their make up. At least, that is what the scientists of today report. In that regard I would have to agree that his theory was implausible. But, as time progresses, granted the human species lasts on this Earth for another 1000 years, who’s to say that todays scientists really know what they are claiming to be the truth? Science may progress, just like it has over the last 1000 years, and turn our world inside out. What we perceive to be reality may turn out to be the naive illusion of the 21st century scientists who think they know, when, in my reality, no one really knows anything for certain. I believe that Thales was definitely ahead of his time.
I think Thales was ahead of his time for many reasons. Though Aristotle called his theory “childish” and it was easily proven implausible by Thales’ students, Thales is credited with being the first person to look at the world in a scientific way; he has even been called the first scientist. Being the first one to ask, “What is real?” must have been so difficult. It is a question that seems almost impossible to answer, as any philosophy student will tell you, and he was the first one to try. Our philosophy text says, “He was the first Greek thinker to break with common sense and religion and offer a general theory about the ultimate nature of reality.” Not only was Thales the first to offer a theory of reality that didn’t involve mythological gods, he was the first to logically use argumentation to establish a truth. First he offered a premise, “The seeds of everything have a moist nature” and since “that from which anything comes into being is it’s first principle”. The premise then leads to his desired conclusion, “The source of everything is water”. Maybe Thales realized his theory would be proven wrong, but he wanted his students to learn something by rejecting his conclusion. He might have wanted them to come up with counter points or examples that proved his theory false. Just by creating the first theory of “What is real?” Thales gave us the opportunity to come up with better more plausible explanations.
From the perspective of the 21st century Thales doesn’t seem as silly as his students believed he was. We know now that life did originate in the water. Thales was also the first to realize that water has more than one form. Scientific advances make it possible to understand that some of Thales’ ideas were way ahead of their time. Having said that I can see one easy way that Thales could have come up with a more plausible explanation of “What is real?” He could have tried to prove his own theory wrong. He would have quickly come up with some examples of substances that were not moist. Having come up with counter points to his argument, such as rock, earth, or fire, he could improve his theory before he shared it with his students or come up with arguments proving the counter points wrong.
Works Cited:
Solomon, Robert C. Introducing Philosophy a Text with Integrated Readings. New York: Oxford UP, 2008. Print
“Thales”. Wikipedia.org: The Free Encyclopedia .n.p. 6 February 2009. Web. 8 February 2009.
Thales’ view on reality, I believe was ahead of his time. Thales as we learned believed that the source of everything was water, and all things are made of water. Although Thales faced many critics for his study in nature and his beliefs, his theory was plausible and far from childish.
Thales could have clarified his statement that all things are made of water, to all things came from water, or that life begins in water. This statement would have been somewhat more conceivable for those who did not share his views. For example a pregnant woman’s water breaks before she gives birth, and during pregnancy the baby is protected and grows in womb which also composed of water and other fluids, with out this water we would not be able to survive and there would be no more life. Even out of the womb, as adults we all need water to stay alive with out our bodies would shut down and eventually we would die, so water is absolutely necessary for there to be life. Without water all living things would cease to exist. The idea that water is the absolute substance is acceptable.
The reality is that life as we now know through the advances of modern science; did indeed begin in water. Although Thales did not have this knowledge, it is believed that life began in water 4 billion years ago with a prokaryote (microorganism which used photosynthesis to feed). Even without any modern technology, Thales knew that life came from the water, and his reality of water being ultimate substance was too advanced for the people of his time to grasp.
Thales view of reality was based on the theory that the source of everything was water.
I wouldn’t consider his view childish. I believe that all theories on what the world is and what is real had to start somewhere. Thales just happened to start with water.
For what we know today about the makeup of things, I think he was right on. Scientists over the years have just been able to expand on his original notion. Scientists have been able to break down what water is made of. It is found that the elements that make water are the same elements in a lot of the make up of “stuff.”
For instance the human body is made up of an amount of hydrogen and oxygen. Would we be able to survive without hydrogen and oxygen? I would think not. It is necessary for plant life to thrive as well with water. So the things that we eat and the moisture necessary for our body to survive is all based on water.
Now, back to the original point of view with Thales. In the time period were Thales made his theory we just did not have the technology to pick things apart. Had that have been available in his time who’s to say that he would not have worked out his theory with “proof.”
Also as our reading material points out, this was a break through of an idea. Which if he had not have been brave enough to voice his beliefs would there have been any other philosophers that would have tested and voiced their theories?
I think his ideas were a good start. Improving on his ideas I would say would just have to do with what we know now about the earth and its general make up.
Thales was ahead of his times regardless if his theories turned out to be more scientific than he knew. The fact that he pondered such questions and decided to look outside the box was a breakthrough in itself. I can easily understand how he thought everything was made up of water, because it was everywhere, in everything, and without it there would be no life. During those times having plentiful amounts of clean water to drink, grow crops, bathe, etc, was their reality. Even today there isn’t much that we own that didn’t need water to be created. Regardless of all the possessions we have, they can easily be taken away and no longer be a part of our reality. However, if we no longer have water which sustains life, this reality that most of us share would be no more. I don’t think it was coincidental that his theory was fairly accurate. He must have had some sense of understanding that water was not only needed in life, but needed to build the world he knew from the earth he lived on to the massive buildings creating Greece.
Thales used observation of the natural world and reasoning to determine what their fundamentally is or what the world is made of. He concluded that water was the source of building block for everything we see. Thales was ahead of his time in his approach. Science today has similar approach perhaps his view was even plausible at that time. A rock for example if you ask someone to examine it and think about where that rock began you might jump to respond with it’s just a rock. Thales would look at the rock and say it is a rock which originated from water. It would be a little far fetched for someone to believe that theory. Only because the rock is solid and water in its liquid form is clear and wet. However, science today can see and reason that water was and is an element to a rock, being a rock but many other molecules are also needed to make the rock a rock. However it couldn’t be proven based on the resources he had back in his time period to protest his belief. Science today however is able to with the help of a microscope see atoms and even smaller molecules. Now we can see that water is a key element, but also is not the only element. Science and Thales theory are similar in approach however the ending results are different.
Thales view of reality was very innovative for his time. Despite the lack of scientific evidence, Thales seemed to have a solid idea of how relevant water is to everything. Even today, it is well known that water constitutes most of our bodies and that most living organisms need it to survive. Earth's surface itself is occupied by more than 70% of water. It's a fact that water helps keeping the planet alive. Politically, it is the subject of future conflicts between African nations. Moreover, fresh water scarcity worldwide could become the biggest crisis of all during this century. Water is the essence of life and it affects all of us directly and indirectly. Although modern science has managed to solve many of life's misteries, Thales's philosophy could have been used as insight. For that reason, I thinkThales was ahead of his time and I don't catalog his ideas as implausible, not even as childish.
I don't think Thales' view of reality was off the mark. Heraclitus supposed that the fundamental "stuff" of reality was fire. Pythagoras believed that numbers were the basis of everything. Even Democritus hypothesized that atoms actually make up what is real. I don't see Thales' view of water as the basic "element" of reality as being childish or implausible at all.
I think that Thales was ahead of his time in the sense that he was one of the first to try and describe the way the world really is. Thales was supposing that reality was made up of things that are tangible or definable/knowable, and not something that was created out of thin air by some mystic god. This was dynamic and revolutionary thinking at the time.
Thales view of water as the "stuff" that reality is made of, I think, is very plausible. Our bodies are 3/4 water. The earth's surface is 3/4 water. Water is at the center or core of most, if not all, of living things. Not to mention that it provides for the most basic of needs: sustenance. It actually gives life.
Now, we have the benefit of scientific progress and development to show us how the world works and what constitutes its make-up. In Thales' day, his hypothesis was a radical and very forward thinking one. Improving on Thales' idea of what is real, in those days, might have been a difficult task, unless you were say, a conservative or opposing voice. Other philosophers thought other elements or other "things" as the "real stuff". As is widely believed today, atoms are the DNA of what is real. This thought was first held by Democritus during the time of Thales. To some (perhaps, even most), Democritus already had "the answer" back then. He knew what future thinkers would come to accept as true and demonstrable.
The idea that a "thing" like water could comprise the make-up of reality might have been so ahead of the curve that most had not reached Thales' level of philosophical thinking.
The Greek philosopher Thales suggested that the source of everything was water. The earth floats upon water, and it and all things on it are made of water. Aristotle called him "childish." To my opinion I dont think he was childish when he came up with that suggestion. Throughout the years human kind has come to known that the source of everything was not made up of just water. Since, Thales was probably the first one to come up with such thing, his suggestion has been criticized by others. After Thales, there were many philosophers that had their own ideas of reality. Just as many people learn from their mistakes, the future philosophers improved and made more credible their ideas of what is realistic.
Thales could have been considered childish and implausible back in the old days, but today he is a famous philosopher. I don’t believe Thales’s theory was childish because that was his reality. I wonder why he thought that everything was made up of water because all living organisms do need water in some form, but other materials do not have anything to do with water. Even though he didn’t have evidence of why he believed everything was made out of water, he still helped many philosophers, scientists and us to improve on what the world is made up of.
Many people thought or think that his idea is foolish, but he went beyond of all possible theories and what other people believed at that time to say that he thought it was water. Thales was ahead of his time because many believed certain ideas and that no one could contradict. He didn’t care what others thought because he told others what he had been thinking. It was beneficial of whatever Thales had said because after what he thought other philosophers began to research and began to contradict him. They had evidence to proof their ideas and why Thales’s theory didn’t make sense.
mrcarmel3 said...
I felt that Thales view of reality was far from childish and implausible. I thought that he was thinking way ahead of his time. If I were to try to improve his notion of what is real. I would say that anything that is real must have a creator.
What is Reality?
Thales belief that water was the source of all things is a childish conclusion, to me. If you examine one of nature’s most destructive forces, fire, you would question how water could be the source of it. Although water can put out a fire, there must first be enough of it to do so, and fire can dry up water first. That question would lead one to question how it could be the source of other things, such as wind, air, and earth. Water is certainly ubiquitous and an element in many things; however, even water has more than one component, hydrogen and oxygen. The lack of scientific equipment would have prevented Thales from learning this so he cannot be faulted for his conclusion.
If I was going to try to improve his idea of reality in his time, I would start by describing and discussing each of the basic elements, fire, air, water, and earth. I would start with air, describe what it looks, feels, smells and tastes like. I would also experiment with it to see how it interacts with other elements. I would follow this process with each of the elements and present my findings to him, for comparison with his belief that water was the source of all things. Without the tools scientists have today, observation and the use of the senses are basically all there is to work with.
Post a Comment