Democritus by Paul Cartledge

Democritus Reviews

• 
  Skallagrimsen

  Democritus was an ancient Greek philosopher best remembered for postulating that material reality ultimately consists of tiny indivisible particles he called "atoms" (atomos: unsplittable).
  
  When Nineteenth century physicists discovered what they presumed to be the most fundamental particles of matter, they also called them "atoms."
  
  But then, a twentieth century physicist, Ernest Rutherford, succeeded in splitting these particles. According to Paul Antony Cartledge, this proved that Democritus got it all wrong.
  
  This is a basic category error.
  
  Rutherford proved, not that matter doesn't really consist of indivisible particles, but that the particles named "atoms" by physicists aren't the same thing as the atoms hypothesized by Democritus.
  
  Perhaps quarks or the one dimensional filaments of string theory are the "true" atoms; perhaps something even more fundamental.
  
  Or maybe Democritus was altogether wrong after all, and material reality isn't reducible to unsplittable particles.
  
  We won't know until we understand the ultimate nature of material reality--which is to say, probably never.
  
  Otherwise, this short book is a decent primer on the life and philosophy of Democritus.
• 
  Mengsen Zhang

  I picked up the book in a favorite used-book store. It's a very brief overview of Democritus' views on nature, politics, and ethics etc. I don't know if it's that I'm not in tune with Democritus, or the author has casted him in a peculiar light that didn't show him as a lover of wisdom (philosopher). Democritus has been adored by many physicists for his "atomic" theory that compliments modern scientific worldview. But when I turn to philosophy I usually look for logical inspiration that builds on but also reach far beyond my scientific work to guide it through reasoning. Yet this guy said "Do not let a woman practise reasoned argument (logos); that is frightful. (D/K B110; G/W 20)". The author closed the book with his favorite Democritean passage on not judging success/failure based on one's possessions, which says, in short, just compare yourself to people who has less, you'd feel much better. Excuse me - if material possession is not important, why are you even comparing people on that dimension to feel good about yourself? I really don't get it.
  Nevertheless, my favorite discovery in this book is that the much applauded "atoms and the void" quote was in fact from a dialogue between "Intellect" and "Senses". Intellect says: ... in truth there are but atoms and the void, to which Senses reply: ... Our overthrow is your own downfall. (D/K B125)
  Anyhow, I wish someone can recommend a better coverage of Democritus' work.
• 
  Kid A

  The Book Contains a deep dive into Democritus, a presocratic philosopher that I enjoied reading about in
  Reality is Not What it Seems: The Journey to Quantum Gravity by Carlo Revolli. The book starts by a simple description of the life-time and the culture surrounding democritus at that time. And in the Next chapters we are looking at each subject that he philosophized about. Since there's not much left from his thoughts, it's mostly quotes and writings of others.
  ----
  نقد فارسی:
  به عنوان یک علاقه‌مند به مسائل فلسفه دوست داشتم بیشتر با دموکتریتوس آشنا بشوم. و این کتاب بنظر من به صورت مختصر ولی جامع مسائل مورد نظر این فیلسوف پیشا سقراطی را به نمایش گذاشته است. در قسمت اول این کتاب ما با مختصری از زندگی و زمانه او آشنا میشویم. اینکه چیز زیادی از این فیلسوف برای ما در دسترس نیست و دلیل آن به صورت کلی توجه نکردن، و یا در مواردی مخالفت های شدید فیلسوفان بعد از او با نظراتش بوده است.
  - فصل دوم: فیزیک و معرفت شناسی
  در این فصل به بررسی نظرات دموکریتونس در علوم فیزیکی و معرفت شناسی میپردازیم. بسیاری او را ماتریالیست میدانند، البته که او پدر نظریه اتمی نیز معرفی شده است. دیدگاه بسیار دقیق از علم در آن زمان جزو خصوصیاتی بوده که این فیلسوف را از دیگر فیلسوفان یونان برای من متمایز میکرد.
  
  او باور داشت که چیزی را نمیتوان آن طور که حقیقتش است شناخت، بلکه تنها میتوان تصویری از چیزی که حقیقت است برای خود بدست آورد. دیدگاهی که همچنان علم مدرن به آن پایبند است. به درستی ما هیچگاه کره زمین را توصیف نکرده ایم؛ تنها مدلی نشان داده ایم که اگر ضرایب درس را برایش بکار ببریم میتواند نتایجی شبیه به نتایج زمین بدهد. هرچند که هرچه تجربه و دقتمان بیشتر میشود میبینیم که نیازمند تصحیح بهتری نیز هستیم.
  "ما در واقع هیچ چیز را دقیقا ادراک نمیکنیم، بلکه تنها آن‌چه را که مطابق با ساختمان تن ما دگرگون میشود‌ و چیز هایی را که در آن وارد میشوند یا در برابر آن مقاومت میورزند"
  دموکریتوس سعی داشت تمام دنیای مارا با استفاده از جز هایی تقسیم ناپذیر به نام اتم توصیف کند که خاصیتی بجز شکل ندارند. از همین رو این بخش از کتاب به توضیح همین مدل و مدارک و شواهد ان میپردازد.
  
  - فصل سوم: کیهان‌شناسی و کیهان‌نگاری
  نکته جالبی در این فصل به نمایش گذاشته میشود که از دید من میتواند به مدل انفجار بزرگ حال حاضر بسیار شبیه باشد. جایی نوشته شده که
  "لئوکیپوس میگوید که کل نامحدود است... بخشی از آن پر است و بخشی تهی... از اینجاست که جهان هایی بی شمار پدید میآیند و از اینجاست که دوباره در این عناصر منحل میشوند. جهانها چنین پدید میآیند: اجسام بسیاری (بخوانید انرژی) با همه گونه شکل ها، ��س از بریده شدن از بیکران در فضای تهی بزرگ به حرکت در می آیند. آنگاه گرد هم جمع میشوند و چرخشی واحد پدید میآورند که در آن، درحالی که به هم میخورند و به همه گونه ها میچرخند، آغاز به جداشدن میکنند، همانندهااز همانند ها. اما هنگامی که بر اثر انبودهی شماره‌ی آنها ، دیگر نتوانستند به حالت تعادل بچرخند آنها که لطیف اند به فضای تهی پیرامون میگرایند، چنان که گویی غربال شده اند، حال آنکه بقیه با هم میمانند و چون در هم پیچیده اند، حرکت های خود را یگانه میکنندو نخستین ساختار کردهای شکل را پدید میآورند."
  
  -فصل چهارم: مردم شناسی و جامعه شناسی
  در این فصل نیز به بررسی زبان مشترک مردم حکم کشتارو... پرداخته شده
  ولی بدلیل اینکه علاقه من درابتدا تنها بخاطر فیزیک و علم بود این مطالب را چندان عمیق نخواندم.
  
  "بنظر میرسد پیام بنیادی این باشد که انسان ها که در اصل در گروه های جداگانه اسیر دست جانوران وحشی اند، خود را ناگزیر از آن میبینند که برای خاطر صیانت ذات در شهر ها با یکدیگر زندگی کنند و ناگزیرند همین که به این ترتیب متمدن شدند قوانینی را با حدت و شدت بر ضد تهدیدهای انسانی و غیر انسانی به مورد اجرا بگذارند و تنها تابع محدودیت های منهیات اساسا دینی باشند"
• 
  Noah Goats

  Over the past few years I've read a number of surveys of philosophy. In all of them, the pre-Socratics get the short shrift and each of them is generally boiled down to one idea. Thales was the "everything is made out of water" guy, Heraclitus was the "no man steps into the same river twice guy," and Democritus was the "the Universe is made out of atoms and the void" guy. In this little monograph Paul Cartledge tries to give us a more complete picture of Democritus. This is no easy task since his books are lost and his ideas exist only in fragments or in descriptions of them composed by other philosophers who disagreed with him on many points. The loss of his writings is a tragedy because, according to Cartledge, Democritus had a reputation as a very good writer, a rival of Plato even.
  
  Cartledge puts Democritus in his historical context for us, and he fleshes out his ideas as much as is possible given the available sources. His concept of atoms and the void is indeed his most enduring contribution to both philosophy and science. (Richard Feynman once said that if all knowledge was about to be lost, and we could only pass one sentence of information on to the next generation, it should be this, "All things are made of atoms — little particles that move around in perpetual motion, attracting each other when they are a little distance apart, but repelling upon being squeezed into one another." In other words, the essence of Democritus.) But he also had interesting things to say on subjects like ethics, medicine, and politics.
  
  Like the ideas of any pre-Socratic philosopher, some of what Democritus had to say now looks pretty ridiculous, but the best of his ideas have reverberated down the centuries. He not only inspired modern research into the fundamental building blocks of the universe, he also influenced materialist philosophy from Epicurus to the present day.
  
  This little books was entertaining and enjoyable.
  
  
• 
  Mika Auramo

  Paul Cartledgen kirjanen on oivallinen johdatus Demokritoksen filosofiaan. Hän on yksi merkittävimmistä antiikin Kreikan filosofeista ja oli kotoisin Abderasta Traakiasta. Demokritos tunnetaan erityisesti atomiopistaan sekä uskonnon ja tieteen erottamisesta toisistaan. Aikansa radikalismina voidaan pitää hänen käsitystään, ettei maailma ole sinällään suunnitelman tai minkään tarkoituksen tulos. Lisäksi hän oli fyysikko, geologi, eetikko ja varsinkin poliittinen filosofi.
  
  Ajattelija eli 400 luvulla eaa., ja yksi tunnetuimmista hänen oppilaistaan oli muuan Theofrastos. Muista aikalaistutuista mainittakoon Hippokrates, joka sai Platonin tavoin Demokritokselta vaikutteita. Esimerkiksi Platonin käyttämiä dialogimuotoisia filosofisia pohdiskeluja oli jo Demokritoksen teksteissä. Valitettavasti vain monet esisokraattiset filosofit ovat painuneet unholaan tai heidän tuotannostaan on tallella vain rippeet. Näin on myös Abderan kasvatille käynyt, eikä hänen noin 60 teoksestaan ole kuin fragmentit jäljellä. Vielä heikommin on käynyt Protagoraalle, sillä moni nykylukija tunnistaa hänet vain Platonin dialogeista Sokrateen väittelykumppanina.
  
  Tässä kirjassa Cartledge esittee muun muassa Demokritoksen ja Platonin eroja. Demokritos uskoi Herakleitoksen tapaan kaiken olevan pysyvän muutoksen tilassa, toisin kuin Parmenides tai Platon, joka puolestaan lanseerasi muuttumattomat ideansa. Niistä oli johdettavissa niin moraalitotuuden perusta kuin muutkin täydelliset ideat. Niitä platonismin kaikuja kohdataan vielä tänäkin päivänä, kun pomo suuremmassa tai pienemmässä viisaudessaan saa päähänsä kokeilla omia ideoitaan vaikkapa työtehon lisäämiseksi.
  
  Muutamia muita Demokritoksen keskeisiä aiheita sivutaan jonkin verran. Heikko itsehillintä romauttaa ihmisten terveyden pidäkkeettömien halujen takia. Hän tunnisti hyvin yhteyden kehon hyvinvoinnista mielenterveyteen ja siten (perustoalaisten tapaan) moraaliseen terveyteen. Gynokratiaa eli naisvaltaa hän suorastaan kauhistui ja varsinkin naisten harjoittamaa järkiperäistä päättelyä?!
  
  Moraalifilosofian ydin rakentuu tyyneyteen eli euthymiaan ja sen lisäksi tasapainoiseen hyvinvointiin. Sittemmin Epikuros on ottanut mallia Demokritoksen ajatuksista käytännön filosofisille päämäärille saavuttaa autuaallinen tyyneys eli ataraksia.
  
  Edelleenkin nykyihmiselle Demokritoksella on painavaa sanottavaa kaiken neomanian ja kadehtimisen keskellä: ”Vertaa elämääsi huonompiosaisten elämään ja pidä itseäsi onnekkaana ajatellessasi, mitä he joutuvat kokemaan, koska sinulla menee niin paljon paremmin kuin heillä. Jos pidät kiinni tästä arvostelmasta, elät tyytyväisempänä ja ajat tiehensä nuo vähäpätöiset elämän vaivat, mustasukkaisuuden ja kateuden ja pahan tahdon.”
  
  ”On suunnattava arvostelukykynsä mahdolliseen ja oltava tyytyväinen siihen, mitä omistaa, sekä omistettava vain vähän ajatuksia kadehdittaville ja ihailtaville ajatuksille.”
  
  "Emme tiedä mitään todella, sillä totuus on kätketty syvälle."
• 
  Noah Letner

  Short and sweet bio about an early and not well-known philospher/scientist.
• 
  Martin Omedo

  Democritus is an excellent read trying to highlight the little well-known philosopher who was great by any definition in the modern sense and the enlarged ancient understanding of the term.
  
  Democritus is an ancient Greek philosopher who’s credited with devising a theory called Atomism (460–370 BC). The concept of Democritus was something like this. Take a piece of bread and cut in half with a knife. Take half of the bread and cut again. Continue cutting the bread, infinitely. What is going to happen? You can continue cutting ad infinitum, i.e. the matter is continuous, or you will reach a point where you can no longer cut the bread, and the last piece is indivisible. Call atom this piece of indivisible matter. Do atoms exist or not? Can you slice the matter infinitely?
  
  Too bad the Aristotelians and Platonists (think today’s string theorists) strangled this progress and led us into the Dark Ages for many centuries, until the Renaissance scientists rediscovered the wisdom of the Democritus and other ancient Greek scientists and got the ball rolling again.
  
  Never underestimate the size of the book; it is small but very intense.
• 
  Ocean G

  This is a 2nd read-through for me, and I think I enjoyed it more this time (I gave it 3 stars last time).
  
  It is rather short, also given the fact that we don't have much information about Democritus. He is credited with coming up with the idea of the indivisible "atom", making up everything.
  
  Interesting how he states that thoughts are also made up of atoms:
  "We know nothing truly about anything, but for each of us opining is a rearrangement (of soul atoms). (p. 10)
  
  Also, he talks about how bodies and worlds are held together by "a membrane", which seems like his version of explaining gravity, and which seems to work quite well.
  
  Some of my other notes:
  "All those who make their pleasures from the belly, exceeding the right time (or measure) for food, drink or sex, have short-lived pleasures - only for as long as they eat or drink - but many pains." (p. 30)
  
  "Poverty in a democracy is preferable to so-called prosperity among dictators to the same extent as freedom is to slavery. (p. 38)
  
  Apparently Karl Marx wrote his doctoral thesis on a scholarly comparison between Democritus and Epicurus.
• 
  Jared

  This premier is probably about all I could handle of this style of writing. The author was probably trying to cram in every little bit he could about Democritus, so I'll give him a pass on how dry the reading was (and, hey, maybe he intended it to be nothing more than an additional text book for a college class on the history of philosophy).
  
  However, I really enjoyed the journey of discovery it took me on. I wasn't aware that Democritus was the first recorded individual to theorize the existence of the atom/quark. I also learned plenty of other fascinating things about his philosophy and political philosophy.
  
  It may be a small book, but it isn't a fast read. Don't be fooled by it's size.
• 
  Eric

  A brave attempt to tie together the disparate fragments of the teachings of Democritus. His works are nearly nonexistent today, thanks to Plato's jealousy and the eventual thorough sacking of the Library of Alexandria by "Saint" Cyril of Alexandria, the Christian mob and later Arab invaders. Perhaps these despoilers would have stayed the torch if they had absorbed a modicum of Democritus's teachings on moderation and selflessness.
• 
  Luke

  An excellent survey of Democritus' ideas on many subjects, including physics, medicine, politics, and ethics, that draws heavily on the extant fragments of his work. A quick read but a worthy one.