The Origins, Nature, and Development of Science in Ancient Greece
(after G.E.R. Lloyd)
Philosophy 6396, Spring 1997
Dr. Cynthia Freeland
The Origins of Science
A. Key developments in science in the ancient near east (Egypt and
Babylon):
Geometry, astronomy, medicine
B. Possible explanations for the Greek origins and emphasis on science:
- Technology
- Economy
- Contacts and Trade
- Literacy
- *Politics
*This is the hypothesis Lloyd advocates.
[Sources: "The Debt of Greek Philosophy and Science to the Ancient Near East," "The
Invention of Nature," "The Social Background of Early Greek Philosophy and Science," in
Methods and Problems in Greek Science; also,"Greek Science and Greek Society," in
Magic, Reason, and Experience.]
C. Views on the development of science in Greece: Karl Popper vs. G. S.
Kirk
[Source: "Popper vs. Kirk: A Controversy in the Interpretation of Greek Science", in
Methods and Problems in Greek Science]
Part II. Polarity and Analogy
[Source: Polarity and Analogy: Two Types of Argumentation in Early Greek Thought]
A. Polarity
See Aristotle's remarks from Physics 188b27ff (p. 15)
Why opposites? Possible origins or explanations Lloyd considers and rejects:
- empirical? (based on observation of natural processes)
- anthropological? (reflects primitive social organizations)
- positivist? (based on factors of geography, climate of Aegean regions)
Lloyd rejects these but considers the "comparative evidence" from Levi-Strauss and others
(on thought systems from peoples in South America, Indonesia, Kenya, China, early
North America)
- social? (Durkheim's view that polar systems of though reflect dualistic social
organizations is also too simple).
- spiritual or religious? (as in right/left where right=good, or as in light-dark where
light=good. A number of pairs in early Greek thought are similar: sky/earth, etc.)
Lloyd asks: Does this cover all the opposites used by the Greeks? Is it a unified
system?
Strengths of categorial systems of opposites
- simplify, produce order, introduce more clarity and comprehensiveness
Problems:
- experimentation, evidence (exs. of menstruation, water animals)
Summary of Why? polarities (p. 80)
Types of Polarity/Examples
- Homer
- Pythagoras, Heraclitus, the Eleatics, the Hippocratics
- The Sophists, Plato, Aristotle
- Notable Exceptions: The Atomists
B. Analogy
Introduction
- Remarks on the role of analogy in science (cp. Bacon, Hume, Mill, Keynes) (pp. 172-3
- Comparative Evidence (177) [on this, see also Foucault]
- Early Greek Literature (180)
Three Main Analogies of the Cosmos
- (1) Political (Cosmos as Society or State)
Homer; Anaximander, Empedocles, Heraclitus
Equality and balance vs. Monarchy and dictatorship (Anaxagoras, Plato)
- (2) Organismic (Cosmos as Living Being)
Hesiod's Theogony; images of sleep, lightning
The Milesians, Heraclitus, Pythagoras, Parmenides, Anaxagoras, Atomists, Plato,
Aristotle
- (3) Technological (Cosmos as Designed Artefact)
Anaximander, Heraclitus, Empedocles, Plato, Aristotle
Chief roles of technological images: (a) separate the moving cause, (b) emphasize
rational order in the universe
Craftsman models in Plato and Aristotle fit badly with their anti-craftsmen political
views (their elitism)
Summary: How philosophical views differ from pre-philosophical views:
- 1. They emphasize the unity of cosmos and accounts of it as a whole;
- 2. They are more abstract and general, vs. personal and particular;
- 3. They use better drawn distinctions (e.g. between animate/inanimate);
- 4. Plato distinguished myth or story vs. reason or logos;
- 5. Aristotle is even less dependent on imagery and metaphor.
return to:
Ancient Science Main Page