3 ms·

I read quite a lot of ancient philosophy and grappled with basically this exact thought. It was a bit painful to feel as though we've intellectually slid backwa

I read quite a lot of ancient philosophy and grappled with basically this exact thought. It was a bit painful to feel as though we've intellectually slid backwards. There is a theory that calls that era the Axial Age, which is worth looking up. That era contained some of the greatest thinkers in history: Anaxagoras, Aristotle, Buddha, Confucius etc. The thing to keep in mind is that there is incredible selection bias at work here. The vast majority of people living then were illiterate and living brutal lives. They didn't know or care about philosophy, much like the majority of people now. Yes, ancient Athens was special in that it had a special focus on thought, but I would still bet that the modern era has a greater percentage of people who are interested in great thought than ever before, and we've had our own thinkers at great heights.

atmosx 8y ago
I can't speak about Buddha or Confucius. Greek legacy was build in ~100-150 years, which is more like a flash in human history than an era. I'm talking about 5th century BC specifically. Walking to the streets of the Athenian city state you could come across: - philosophers: Socrates, Isocrates, Protagoras, Parmenides - historians: Herodotus, Thucydides and Xenophon - authors: Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Aristophanes - scientists(?): Democritus (the atom guy), Phidias (greatest sculptor in Ancient Greece), Hippocrates (father of modern Medicine) - politicians: Pericles and Demosthenes - military minds: Miltiades, Themistocles I think the fact that democracy was established the century before, had a lot to do with this concentration of minds. That said, of course, slavery was a thing, women were more like objects and only a few had voting rights.
- gnulinux 8y ago
  In which sense Democritus is a scientist? He never emprically observed atoms or used scientific method in any meaningful sense. He was a natural philosopher, and a very crucial figure in his school too. The basic idea is that natural philosophy was heavily challenged by Parmenides who made some really good points about how everything should be one and unitary and thus nothing exists in the sense we see and observe ("everything is an illusion"). Then later philosophers tried to circumvent Parmenides while maintaining some bit of realism and common sense. Democritus is one such philosopher, who tried to agree realism with Parmenides by suggesting that everything may be composed of a single type of objects called atoms and their composition gives us the illusion of "differences" such as color, taste etc and thus everything like feelings, colors, tastes are "by convention" when in reality it is atoms all the way down. This argument is more important in the context of post-Parmenidean Greek Natural Philosophy rather than scientific context. EDIT Fun fact: Democritus -- also known as the founder of materialism -- is highly influential in modern enlightenment too. Most famously, Karl Marx was heavily influenced by his ideas so much so that his Doctoral thesis was on him. If you read Marx's writings chronologically, you'll see that he started his philosophical career as an idealist, and then (possibly with Democritus influence) turned 180 degrees and became a materialist and dedicated his life to argue against idealism.
  - atmosx 8y ago
    Since the scientific method wasn’t known at the time, it’s hard to argue that indeed, he was more of a philosopher. That said the quote: “Nothing exists except atoms and empty space; everything else is opinion.” spelled more than 2k years before J. Dalton, is enough to call him a scientist IMHO. After, the only way one can progress and see the future, is by standing at the shoulders of giants.
- mcguire 8y ago
  Weirdly, in China the major schools of philosophy appeared at roughly the same time. Confucianism, Daoism, legalism, and a stack of others.
stareatgoats 8y ago
Yes, agree that those philosophers did not represent their societies as a whole. But it is not fair to say that they were totally separated from their time either. For example how sortition was the rule of choice in Athens: it echoes a careful thoughtfulness about how to organize society that included every citizen (excluding women, slaves and barbarians, granted) in an intelligent discourse. Our time in contrast has outsourced thinking to experts, who in turn don't think at all, only use various automations (maths or other systems) to synthesize something that is instrumental in some way, be it to sway peoples opinions or (vastly more common) get into their pockets (I've been in marketing, I know how it works). Even free will has been mathematically 'disproved' in our time, and many believe it to be so, so why bother use any moral agency at all? Too broad a brush? Maybe. But history does have a way of labeling eras. And my guess is ours will be labelled as the era of great automation, without any thoughtful direction.
awinder 8y ago
I think this is spot on. Another way of considering this feeling is that despite great minds existing for (probably well over) 2000 years, the wins of great minds may not seem as great as one would have hoped. Don’t get me wrong, great minds have done great things to further humanity. But humanity also has a less-than-stellar record of protecting wins & progress, and the forces that wish to drag us back remain ever powerful and vigilant.

atmosx 8y ago

I can't speak about Buddha or Confucius. Greek legacy was build in ~100-150 years, which is more like a flash in human history than an era. I'm talking about 5th century BC specifically. Walking to the streets of the Athenian city state you could come across: - philosophers: Socrates, Isocrates, Protagoras, Parmenides - historians: Herodotus, Thucydides and Xenophon - authors: Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Aristophanes - scientists(?): Democritus (the atom guy), Phidias (greatest sculptor in Ancient Greece), Hippocrates (father of modern Medicine) - politicians: Pericles and Demosthenes - military minds: Miltiades, Themistocles I think the fact that democracy was established the century before, had a lot to do with this concentration of minds. That said, of course, slavery was a thing, women were more like objects and only a few had voting rights.

gnulinux 8y ago
In which sense Democritus is a scientist? He never emprically observed atoms or used scientific method in any meaningful sense. He was a natural philosopher, and a very crucial figure in his school too. The basic idea is that natural philosophy was heavily challenged by Parmenides who made some really good points about how everything should be one and unitary and thus nothing exists in the sense we see and observe ("everything is an illusion"). Then later philosophers tried to circumvent Parmenides while maintaining some bit of realism and common sense. Democritus is one such philosopher, who tried to agree realism with Parmenides by suggesting that everything may be composed of a single type of objects called atoms and their composition gives us the illusion of "differences" such as color, taste etc and thus everything like feelings, colors, tastes are "by convention" when in reality it is atoms all the way down. This argument is more important in the context of post-Parmenidean Greek Natural Philosophy rather than scientific context. EDIT Fun fact: Democritus -- also known as the founder of materialism -- is highly influential in modern enlightenment too. Most famously, Karl Marx was heavily influenced by his ideas so much so that his Doctoral thesis was on him. If you read Marx's writings chronologically, you'll see that he started his philosophical career as an idealist, and then (possibly with Democritus influence) turned 180 degrees and became a materialist and dedicated his life to argue against idealism.
- atmosx 8y ago
  Since the scientific method wasn’t known at the time, it’s hard to argue that indeed, he was more of a philosopher. That said the quote: “Nothing exists except atoms and empty space; everything else is opinion.” spelled more than 2k years before J. Dalton, is enough to call him a scientist IMHO. After, the only way one can progress and see the future, is by standing at the shoulders of giants.
mcguire 8y ago
Weirdly, in China the major schools of philosophy appeared at roughly the same time. Confucianism, Daoism, legalism, and a stack of others.

stareatgoats 8y ago

Yes, agree that those philosophers did not represent their societies as a whole. But it is not fair to say that they were totally separated from their time either. For example how sortition was the rule of choice in Athens: it echoes a careful thoughtfulness about how to organize society that included every citizen (excluding women, slaves and barbarians, granted) in an intelligent discourse. Our time in contrast has outsourced thinking to experts, who in turn don't think at all, only use various automations (maths or other systems) to synthesize something that is instrumental in some way, be it to sway peoples opinions or (vastly more common) get into their pockets (I've been in marketing, I know how it works). Even free will has been mathematically 'disproved' in our time, and many believe it to be so, so why bother use any moral agency at all? Too broad a brush? Maybe. But history does have a way of labeling eras. And my guess is ours will be labelled as the era of great automation, without any thoughtful direction.

awinder 8y ago

I think this is spot on. Another way of considering this feeling is that despite great minds existing for (probably well over) 2000 years, the wins of great minds may not seem as great as one would have hoped. Don’t get me wrong, great minds have done great things to further humanity. But humanity also has a less-than-stellar record of protecting wins & progress, and the forces that wish to drag us back remain ever powerful and vigilant.