Arche and Apeiron in Early Presocratic Philosophy :: Philosophy Philosophical Papers

Arche and Apeiron in Early Presocratic PhilosophyMetaphysical speculation began, long before it was so named, among the presocratic Greeks as an enquiry into cosmogony and first principles from two utterly disparate perspectives. The first of these, propounded by Herakleitos, noted the incessant flux (panta rhei) which characterises phenomena the second, advanced by his contemporary Parmenides, taught the doctrine of a star immutable spirit. These riv wholeing perspectives endure to this day they announce one of the basic themes on which metaphysics since then has strung up an immense set of variations. Behind both stands the idea of arche, a term introduced into philosophical discourse by Anaximandros, rendered into English via Latin as principle and bearing the meaning of the first-begotten or underlying substance of all things. Historically this might be called the first brick to leave the kiln in which the metaphysical fire was burning. Moreover, where Thales teachings were a pparently still subject to aural dispersion, Anaximandros, not content with the script of mouth, becomes the first philosopher among the still relatively small band of logographoi to publish his theories in a formal text. His book at once set out to get the picture what was known and to be known and thereby furnished a role model (presumably peri physeos) for a dozen generations to come, carrying echoes down as far as the Romans (De rerum natura). It gave a comprehensive depiction of cosmogony and cosmology, astronomy and geography, meteorology and biology and down to a phylogeny of the human species. For Anaximandros, Barnes writes 19, Nature embraces both object of experience and every subject of rational enquiry except the productions of human contrivance. Meaning of Apeiron His own contribution to the more stringently philosophical debate on archaeai was the startling construct of the apeiron, which leaps out of the pages of Greek philosophy like a spiky porcupine, never form ally groomed as a legitimate occupant of place in a philosophical agenda dominated from the beginning by principles of rationality and intelligibility. We may supposed it to have emerged from debate on candidates for the Urstoff or primeval substance and it is perhaps permissible to suppose lively exchanges on the virtues and demerits of sundry elements, culminating in a shock of recognition by Anaximandros that none of these substances, being determinate, qualified and whence failed to satisfy empirical as well as theoretical criteria. The apeiron, initially perhaps merely a device to evade commitment to untenable propositions, turn out itself in the long run a truly metaphysical conception with ramifications that have resisted erosion by time.