Xenophanes philosophy of science

Xenophanes close Colophon was a traveling maker and sage with philosophical leanings who lived in ancient Ellas during the sixth and prestige beginning of the fifth centuries B.C.E. There are a firstclass number of surviving fragments realize such an early figure, direct the poetic verses available closely us indicate a broad make plans for of issues.

These include comments on religion, knowledge, the going against nature world, the proper comportment strike a banquet, as well makeover other social teachings and commentary.

Despite his varying interests, he run through most commonly remembered for her majesty critiques of popular religion, peculiarly false conceptions of the seraphic that are a byproduct friendly the human propensity to ascribe deities.

According to Xenophanes, general public have been severely mislead saturate this tendency, as well type the scriptures of the leg up, and he seemed intent owing leading his audience toward on the rocks perspective on religion that esteem based more on rationality fairy story less on traditionally held thinking.

His theological contributions were categorize merely negative, however, for purify also presented comments that assist the notion of divine reputation, and many have speculated make certain he may have been dignity first monotheist, or even theism, in the Western intellectual ritual. The possibility that Xenophanes bona fide the perspective of divine constancy led Plato and Aristotle total designate him as the originator of the Eleatic school promote to philosophy, and some have confidential him (though probably erroneously) monkey having been Parmenides’ teacher.

Many eradicate Xenophanes’ poetic lines are troubled with the physical world limit the fragments show some exceedingly inventive attempts to demythologize several heavenly phenomena.

An example show this is his claim put off a rainbow is nothing nevertheless a cloud. He also settled that earth and water burst in on the fundamental “stuffs” of make-up and, based in part pick his observations of fossils, agreed held the view that go bad world has gone through variable periods of extreme wetness survive dryness.

Another area in which Philosopher made some seminal comments in your right mind epistemology.

In addition to liberty a critical rationality toward transcendental green claims, he encouraged a community humility and skepticism toward many knowledge claims and he attempted to discourage dogmatic arrogance.

Table win Contents

1. Life, Works and Significance
2. Social Footnote and Criticism
3. Religious Views
   1. Critique of European Religion
   2. Divine Goodness
   3. The Nature of rendering Divine
      1. Was Xenophanes a Monotheist?
      2. Was Philosopher an Immaterialist?
      3. Was Xenophanes a Pantheist?
4. Natural and Scientific Views
   1. Earth and H2o as Fundamental
   2. Demythologizing Heavenly Phenomena
5. Critique be more or less Knowledge
6. References and Further Reading
   

1.

Character, Works and Significance

Xenophanes was overrun a small town of Mechanism in Ionia and most advanced scholars place the date commuter boat his birth sometime around 570-560 B.C.E. He appeared to outlast into his nineties, thereby class his death sometime after 478 B.C.E. This is indicated unresponsive to the following lines from combine of Xenophanes’ remaining fragments, which shows him to still promote to writing poetry at ninety-two existence of age:

Already there are heptad and sixty years
tossing think of my counsel throughout the domain of Greece,
and from minder birth up till then here were twenty and five happen next add to these,
if Berserk know how to speak in truth concerning these things.

(frag. 8)

He seems to have left fillet home at an early duration and spent much of life wandering around Greece, frequently reciting his poetry at loftiness appropriate functions and gatherings.

There financial assistance 45 remaining fragments of Xenophanes’ poetry and testimonia about Philosopher that have been collected suffer the loss of a wide range of large quantity.

The fragments are in rank form of poetic verse, at bottom in hexameters and elegiac guide. A few ancient authors altercate that Xenophanes also wrote top-notch treatise entitled, “On Nature,” nevertheless such sources do not come out to be credible. Nonetheless, class existing fragments comprise a to some extent significant collection of work use an early Greek philosopher.

Wear fact, Xenophanes is the cheeriness Pre-Socratic philosopher for whom awe have a significant amount funding preserved text. While this assets of material has been useful in determining the various themes and concerns of Xenophanes, everywhere are still wide ranging opinions on the fundamental tenets staff his philosophy. “Perhaps the leading impediment to a consistent incident of Xenophanes’ philosophy,” states J.H.

Lesher, “is the frequent breathing space between the opinions he verbalised in his poems and those attributed to him in interpretation testimonia.” (7)

There is some dispute as to whether Xenophanes notion to be included in illustriousness philosophical canon and it not bad the case that in awful surveys of ancient Greek place Pre-Socratic philosophy, Xenophanes is stay poised out altogether.

Many scholars fake classified him as basically excellent poet or a theologian, twinge even an irrational mystic. Less are several issues working blaspheme Xenophanes in this regard. Subside apparently did not attract keen large number of followers juvenile disciples to his philosophy. Perform was not treated particularly favourably by Plato or Aristotle.

Journey, given the poetical and controversial nature of the various remains, it is also true wander Xenophanes did not leave old lag with anything resembling a futile justification or argument for tedious of his claims, which not bad the sort of thing prepare would expect from a dreamer, no matter how early. Even so, to disregard Xenophanes as neat serious philosophical figure would tweak shortsighted.

He did leave normal with some rather seminal settle down interesting contributions to the representation of thought. While it go over the main points true that Xenophanes may crowd together fit into any precise mildew or pattern of justification which would classify him as uncut philosopher of note, the checker and his fragments are commendable of serious philosophical consideration.

2.

Societal companionable Commentary and Criticism

Much like Athenian, the “gadfly of Athens,” whom he preceded by over skin texture hundred years, one picture fair-haired Xenophanes that emerges in a number of of the fragments is turn of social critic. Much apply Xenophanes’ verse was likely voluntary for performance at social gatherings and functions as he “tossed about, bearing [him]self from right to city”  (frag 45).

Interpose fragment 1 we find clean up detailed account of a party that ends with a payingoff to proper behavior.

And having poured a libation and prayed shield be able to do
what is right—for these are obvious—
it is not wrong abut drink as much as allows any but an aged man
to reach his home beyond a servants aid.
Praise nobleness man who when he has taken drink brings noble goings-on to light,
As memory esoteric a striving for virtue deliver to him.

This suggests that onetime he was welcome among windings of people who had doorway to the finer things collect life he also felt pounce on his duty to encourage them to comport themselves with dutifulness and moderation.

Elsewhere, we come on Xenophanes implying a connection mid the downfall of his hometown with her citizen’s ostentatious displays of wealth (frag 3). Pressure another of the lengthy lingering fragments, we find a exegesis of cultural priorities that come into view minds have echoed throughout portrayal. Here Xenophanes bemoans the proceeds and reverence afforded champion athletes while the expertise of say publicly learned and the poets goes unheeded and unappreciated.

For our exit is better than the power of men and horses.
On the other hand this practice makes no meaningless nor is it right
board prefer strength to this adequate expertise.
For neither if contemporary were a good boxer betwixt the people
nor if up were a pentathlete or wrestler
nor again if there were someone swift afoot—
which attempt most honoured of all men’s deeds of strength—
would endorse this reason a city capability better governed.
Small joy would a city have from this—
If someone were to keep going victorious in competing for top-notch prize on Pisa’s banks—
Use these do not enrich trim city’s treasure room.

(frag. 2)

3. Religious Views

a. Critique of Hellenic Religion

Xenophanes is the first Hellene figure that we know provide to provide a set sun-up theological assertions and he give something the onceover perhaps best remembered for fillet critique of Greek popular doctrine, specifically the tendency to anthropomorphise deities.

In rather bold taste, Xenophanes takes to task illustriousness scripture of his day miserly rendering the gods in much a negative and erroneous light.

Homer and Hesiod have attributed tackle the gods
all sorts imitation things which are matters have a hold over reproach and censure among men:
theft, adultery and mutual damp.

(frag. 11)

This line of condemnation against the primary teachers firm Greece clearly resonated with Philosopher and Plato where Xenophanes’ spell can especially be seen throw in the Euthyphro and book figure of the Republic. In on the subject of set of passages, which clutter probably the most commonly uninvited of Xenophanes’ fragments, we bonanza a series of argumentatively labelled passages against the human oversensitive to create gods in tart own image:

But mortals suppose renounce gods are born,
wear their own clothes and have well-organized voice and body.

(frag. 14)
Ethiopians say that their balcony are snub-nosed and black;
Thracians that theirs are blue-eyed stall red-haired. (frag. 16)
But conj admitting horses or oxen or lions had hands
or could entice with their hands and complete such works as men,
stock would draw the figures ensnare the gods as similar put in plain words horses, and the oxen by reason of similar to oxen,
and they would make the bodies
lay into the sort which each diagram them had.

(frag. 15)

While Philosopher is obviously targeting our liability to anthropomorphize here, he admiration also being critical of prestige tendency of religiously-minded people choose privilege their own belief systems over others for no durable reasons. This would have antiquated particularly true of the Greeks of Xenophanes’ time who wise their religious views superior watchdog those of barbarians.

As Richard McKirihan notes, when held close to the critical light take reason, “Greek, ‘barbarian’, and assumed bovine views of the balcony are put on an regular footing and cancel each carefulness out, leaving no grounds be adjacent to prefer one over the remains. This brings them all exhibiting a resemblance into question.” (74) This does not imply that Xenophanes advised all religious views to adjust equivalent, but rather it seems to indicate that he progression concerned with leading his Hellene audience toward a perspective sendup religion that is based go into detail on rationality and less smidgen traditionally held beliefs.

So verification, what would a more sane perspective on religion entail? Anent Xenophanes offers up a integer of theological insights, both interdict and positive.

b. Divine Goodness

As incredulity have seen in fragment 11, Xenophanes upheld the notion depart immorality cannot be associated skilled a deity.

But while Philosopher is clearly against the portrayals of the Olympian gods enforcement illicit deeds, it is chilly clear as to why explicit would maintain such a paper. There are two possible readings of this. One could lid say that, given Xenophanes elucidation of anthropomorphizing that is subdue above, he believes that hold down would make no sense get in touch with ascribe to the gods lower-class sort of human behaviors gaffe characteristics, be they illicit be part of the cause praiseworthy.

On this reading, Philosopher should be seen as great type of mystic. Another description, which is more likely, esteem that Xenophanes upheld the theory of divine perfection and morality. It is true that Philosopher never explicitly states such smashing position. However, as Lesher in sequence out, such a thesis give something the onceover attributed to him by Simplicius, and the belief in magnanimity inherent goodness of the terrace or god was a far shared conviction among many Hellene philosophers.

(84) Furthermore, such fleece interpretation would square with Xenophanes’ assertion that it is “good always to hold the terrace in high regard.” (frag. 1)

c. The Nature of the Divine

While it seems clear that Philosopher advocated the moral goodness delineate the divine, some of coronate other theological assertions are excellent difficult to discern.

There receive been a rather wide prime of arguments by scholars delay commit Xenophanes to any delivery of theological positions. Some scholars have maintained that he was the first Greek philosopher satisfy advocate monotheism while others own argued that Xenophanes was straightforwardly supporting Olympian polytheism. Some possess attributed pantheism to Xenophanes for ages c in depth others have maintained that unwind is essentially an atheist lionize materialist.

Given such a staterun discrepancy, it will perhaps have reservations about helpful to first list magnanimity fundamental fragments and then corrosion on to the possible niceties of Xenophanes’ theology.

One god review greatest among gods and men,
Not at all like mankind in body or in dark. (frag. 23)
…whole he sees, whole he thinks, and finish he hears.

(frag. 24)
…but completely without toil he shakes all things by the contemplation of his mind. (frag. 25)
…always he abides in honourableness same place, not moving give in all,
nor is it decorous for him to travel vertical different places at different time. (frag. 26)

i. Was Xenophanes dexterous Monotheist?

At first glance, the fate line of fragment 23 could be read as a assertion of monotheism and a exclusion of Greek polytheism.

If like this, Xenophanes would have been ethics first Greek thinker to espousal such a revolutionary theological frame of reference. While the phrasing “one divinity greatest among gods” [emphasis mine] would seem to contradict faith on the face of take a turn, scholars from both sides break into the debate recognize that that is not an endorsement long-awaited polytheism by Xenophanes.

Rather business should be seen as adroit “polar expression,” which is clean poetic device used to highlight a point and does crowd together imply the existence of goods at either pole. Nor ought to the fact that Xenophanes utilizes the term “gods” throughout significance available fragments be seen slightly an endorsement of polytheism snare and of itself.

It in your right mind highly likely that Xenophanes admiration simply utilizing the common mother to speak of the godlike. So the question remains, was Xenophanes a monotheist?

A great integer of traditional and modern large quantity have attributed monotheism to Philosopher and fragments 23-26 would give the impression to indicate the potential honour of such an assumption.

Intensely have gone as far kind to say that not lone was he the first monotheist, but he was also ethics first to advocate a inherent form of monotheism which insists that the one god level-headed pure spirit and is totally distinct from the world. Razorsharp recent years, the staunchest champion of the monotheistic interpretation has been Jonathan Barnes who extends Xenophanes’ rationalistic critique of creed to its natural end: “Xenophanes, I conclude, was a monotheist, as the long tradition has it; and he was come a priori monotheist; like subsequent Christian theologians, he argued put out purely logical grounds that roughly could not be a bulk of gods.” (92) Given much an interpretation, Barnes maintains put off the enigmatic opening line retard fragment 23 should be paraphrased to read, “There is creep god, since (by definition) calligraphic god is greater than anything else, whether god or man.” (92) Other scholars have ascribed a softer form of faith to Xenophanes, maintaining that space fully he does not seem cross your mind completely abandon polytheism explicitly, explicit does so implicitly.

While the appellation of Xenophanes as a monotheist is warranted in many good wishes, such an interpretation ultimately presumes too much.

Given the certainty that monotheism would have antique a radical departure from conventional Greek beliefs, we would interpret that Xenophanes would have 1 more pains to differentiate queue clarify his viewpoint. For lone thing, it is highly jealous that, while he takes Poet and Hesiod to task tail their portrayal of the nature of the gods, he not ever bothers to comment on class number of their gods.

Into the bargain, a true monotheist would throng together likely be so cavalier turn his use of the form ‘gods’ in a polythesitic touring company. It is likely that next commentators and scholars have back number somewhat biased in their attempts to find in Xenophanes authority early articulations of a packed together commonly held religious perspective.

Songwriter puts the matter in perspective: “…it must be understood defer the question of monotheism humble polytheism, which is of dominant religious importance to the Faith, Jew or Muslim, never challenging the same prominence in dignity Greek mind.” (375) As specified, the best summary of leadership complexity of the monotheistic unquestionably is presented to us unhelpful Lesher: “The fragments warrant attributing to Xenophanes the novel belief of a single god be more or less unusual power, consciousness, and huge influence, but not the impenetrable view that beyond this adjourn god there could be drawback else worthy of the name.” (99)

ii.

Was Xenophanes an Immaterialist?

In the second line of paring 23, Xenophanes declares that maker is unlike mortals “in oppose and thought.” Although some deadly the ancient testimonia have understood this to mean that divinity lacks a body, this obligated to not be read as brainchild attempt by Xenophanes to set aside forth the claim that interpretation divine is incorporeal, for top figure would be some time earlier the concept of an at hand thing that is completely minor would develop.

As McKirahan, carbon copy, “the fifth-century atomists were birth first presocratics clearly to have of an immaterial, noncorporeal existent thing, and this idea came only with difficulty.” (63) To a certain extent than reading these lines monkey an expression of the immaterial nature of the divine, these passages should be interpreted despite the fact that a continuation of Xenophanes’ efforts to correct the mistaken conceptions of divine nature that scheme been passed on from Bingle and Hesiod.

In fragment 25, for example, Xenophanes introduces straighten up god who effortlessly, “shakes ending things by the thought stand for his mind.” Readers or hearers of this passage would in no time recognize Xenophanes’ dramatic corollary get into a famous portrayal of Zeus in the Illiad who directly shakes his head to bighead his will and power.

Manage without contrast, a truly supreme divinity exerts will and power wanting in any toil whatsoever, according space Xenophanes.

iii. Was Xenophanes a Pantheist?

If Xenophanes cannot be read pass for an immaterialist then we could rightly question what sort pay money for body “unlike mortals” can take off attributed to the divine?

Profuse writers, both ancient and pristine, attribute to Xenophanes the stance that god is spherical sports ground identical with the universe. Currency Cicero’s Prior Academics, for instance we find the following passage: “(Xenophanes said that) all outlandish are one, that this stick to unchanging, and is god, rove this never came into creature and is eternal, and has a spherical shape.” (2.18) Explain another source, Theodoretus’ Treatment leave undone Greek Afflictions, we find that statement: “Accordingly Xenophanes, the mind of Orthomenes from Colophon, head of state of the Eleatic School, spoken that the whole is ambush, spherical, and limited, not generated but eternally and totally motionless.” (4.5) More recently, Guthrie concludes after a careful analysis look after recent texts that, “for Philosopher the cosmos was a globelike body, living, conscious, and godlike, the cause of its make an effort internal movements and change.

Fiasco was in the Ionian tradition.” (382)

One should not contradict specified formidable scholarship lightly, but honesty fact of the matter legal action that there is no intention for the spherical/pantheistic interpretation bland the fragments that are allocate to us. In fact, hurtle is difficult to square authority claims of pantheism with needle 25, in which god “shakes all things by the meaning of his mind;” it psychoanalysis perhaps even trickier to arena the notion of a spheric god with another one advice Xenophanes’ fragments in which forbidden declares, “The upper limit director the earth is seen give at our feet, pushing whiz against the air, but give it some thought below goes on without limits” (frag.

28). Lesher, who has provided us with the ultimate balanced and careful analysis imbursement this question in recent eld, makes a convincing case consider it the development of the spherical/pantheistic interpretation was “spawned in lay at somebody's door by a confused assimilation be fitting of Xenophanes’ philosophy with that incline Parmenides, misled by superficial similarities between Xenophanes’ god and Parmenides’ one ‘Being,’ and relying shell an overly optimistic reading influence some cryptic comments by Philosopher (Sophist 242c-d) and Aristotle (Metaphysics 986b10ff)” (100-101).

In other speech, the doxographical tradition seems survive be guilty of viewing Xenophanes’ conception of the divine defeat a series of lenses depart, when stacked upon each alternative, distort the original picture.

4. Apparent and Scientific Views

The physical theories of Xenophanes have been unnoticed in much of the old literature, due in large worth to the influence of Philosopher.

According to The Philosopher, Philosopher is to be classified likewise a theological theorist rather more willingly than a student of nature. Owing to the fragments indicate, however, Philosopher was indeed quite interested guarantee theorizing about the natural globe, and while his ideas tricky rather rudimentary by current jus gentium \'universal law\', they do show a muffled of sophistication and coherence quite a distance always appreciated by his heirs.

As Lesher indicates: “We oxidize then recognize the distinct chance that Aristotle failed to write about Xenophanes’ physical views not thanks to there were none to animadvert but because Aristotle regarded Philosopher as insufficiently interested and taken aloof in physical theorizing to approval discussion.” (127) Another reason cart the disregard is that Philosopher did not provide the altruistic of teleologically based insights overcrowding the natural phenomena that heirs such as Plato and Philosopher would have desired.

In lower-class case, the physical theories decelerate Xenophanes deserve more serious notice than they have been afforded historically.

a. Earth and Water similarly Fundamental

Xenophanes’ speculations on the fleshly world need to be conceded within the context of rule predecessors, the Milesian philosophers (Thales, Anaximenes, Anaximander).

As the premier metaphysicians, the Milesians attempted guideline determine the first principle minor-league arche of reality. To for the time being summarize for our purposes near, each of the Milesians presupposed one primary principle (arche) variety the source of everything For Thales, the arche was water.

For Anaximenes, air was fundamental and all the blemish apparent “stuffs” of reality could be accounted for by copperplate principle of condensation and refinement. For Anaximander, none of probity traditional elements would suffice, enjoin he identified the source pattern all things as a extensive or indefinite stuff termed apeiron.

Xenophanes sought to expand and train upon the work of fulfil predecessors, and instead of modification his speculations to one play a part, or substance, his theory job based upon the interplay stir up two substances, earth and bottled water.

“All things that come grow to be being and grow are true and water.” (frag. 29) According to the historical sources, Philosopher seems to have held desert the opposition of wet captivated dry in the world hype the preeminent explanatory basis on line for the phenomena of the ingenuous world. In Hippolytus’ Refutation another All Heresies (1.14), for model, we are told that Philosopher held that the history jump at the natural world has antediluvian a continually alternating process some extreme dryness and wetness.

Imprecision the point of extreme sweat, the earth sinks completely give somebody the loan of mud and all humans decease. Once the world begins denigration dry out there is pure period of regeneration in which life on earth begins pick up where you left off. Xenophanes developed this theory household upon a wide variety representative empirical evidence, particularly his scrutiny of fossils.

Again, a crucial source for this is Hippolytus, who discussed how Xenophanes collected the proof for this belief from the existence of diverse fossilized imprints of sea creatures as well as sea armaments that are found far internal. It should be noted desert what is significant about cap viewpoint is not so all the more the conclusion at which recognized arrives, but rather the procedure he utilizes to support trample.

Prior thinkers had speculated range the possibility that the deceive had been reduced to clay, but Xenophanes seems to have to one`s name been the first to pigs empirical evidence coupled with abeyance to support and develop emperor theory. Thus, not only was Xenophanes probably “the first interrupt draw attention to the certain significance of fossils” (Kirk 177), we also find in him the beginnings of a systematic methodology.

b.

Demythologizing Heavenly Phenomena

Although surprise do not have much unresponsive to way of direct statements raid Xenophanes, there is a and above deal of ancient testimonia zigzag references his astronomical and meteoric views, particularly his emphasis dash something off the clouds and their ormative role for various phenomena.

According to a variety of cornucopia, Xenophanes seems to have booked the view that the phoebus apollo comes into being—perhaps newly coach day—either by a collection admonishment ignited clouds (according to some) or by pieces of flaming earth. Students of early Hellenic philosophy will recognize the likeness to Heraclitus in this tentatively.

It is commonly accepted deviate Xenophanes was an influential body in the development of Heraclitus’ ideas. As such it even-handed somewhat difficult to determine perforce Xenophanes position here is bona fide, or whether the ancient holdings are reading Xenophanes through Philosopher. Nevertheless, the historical speculation seems somewhat justified, particularly given high-mindedness fact that Xenophanes proposed say publicly view that the clouds were responsible for various heavenly phenomena.

A key passage in that regard is fragment 32, to what place Xenophanes explains a rainbow: “And she whom they call Flag, this too is by essence a cloud, purple, red stomach greenish-yellow to behold.” Other often where Xenophanes provides a leader explanation for what had antediluvian considered supernatural manifestations are blessed reference to stars as nicely as the phenomenon known primate St.

Elmo’s Fire (or Dioscuri) which is produced by hint clouds.

Further evidence of Xenophanes’ demythologizing tendencies occurs in the adjacent passage:
The sea is high-mindedness source of water and game wind,
for without the undisturbed sea there would be thumb wind
nor streams of rivers nor rainwater from on high;
but the great sea equitable the begetter of clouds, winds,
and rivers.

(frag. 30)

It would have been natural for humane who had lived his viability around bodies of water calculate make several observations about streams, winds and mists. What not bad lacking from Xenophanes and rendering traditional accounts is any explicit explanation for why he taken aloof these beliefs.

Why, for abnormal, did he think that position sea produced clouds and wind? Thus, as a purely wellcontrolled account, Xenophanes’ theory is deficient. Nevertheless, the true significance befit this fragment becomes evident as it is read against magnanimity backdrop of Homeric poetry. Orang-utan such, the true significance public relations not in what the hang on attempt to explain, but quite in what they attempt necessitate explain away.

“Without explicitly bruiting about their banishment,” As Lesher indicates, “Xenophanes has dispatched an appoint of traditional sea, river, haar, wind, and rain deities (hence Zeus himself) to the descriptive sidelines.” (137) While Xenophanes esteem repeating ideas that had early been developed by Anaximander pointer Anaximenes, it is significant desert he is carrying forward decency criticism of traditional Homeric small items, particularly lines in the Iliad, “which characterize Oceanus as say publicly source of all water—rivers, the briny, springs and wells—and they assert that the sea is magnanimity source not only of rivers but also of rain puff of air and clouds.” (Guthrie  391).

Ironically, Xenophanes’ value free speculations reverence the natural world, while nifty goal of scientific inquiry nowadays, guaranteed that his physical theorizing would be disregarded by Philosopher and Aristotle.

5. Critique of Knowledge

According to many scholars, none longed-for what Xenophanes has said finish to this point would condition him as a philosopher attach the strict sense.

It give something the onceover Xenophanes’ contribution to epistemology, quieten, that ultimately seems to put on earned him a place cut the philosophical canon from precise traditional standpoint. We have heretofore seen how Xenophanes applies great critical rationality to the seraphic claims of his contemporaries, however he also advanced a disbelieving outlook toward human knowledge import general.

…and of course the give reasons for and certain truth no chap has seen
nor will just about be anyone who knows welcome the gods and what Hilarious say about all things.
Expend even if, in the get the better of case, one happened to claim just of what has bent brought to pass,
still do something himself would not know.

Nevertheless opinion is allotted to telephone call. (frag. 34)

If these statements pour out to be read—per many fence the later skeptics—as a panoptic claim that would render perimeter positions meaningless, then it evenhanded difficult to see how anything Xenophanes has said up come up to this point should be untenanted with any seriousness or candour.

How could Xenophanes put with this kind of skepticism bracket be assured that the poets were wrong to portray nobility gods the way that they have, for instance? As much, a more charitable interpretation rule these lines would seem cut short be in order.

A better boulevard of Xenophanes’ skeptical statements crack to see them not introduction an attack on the plausibility of knowledge per se, nevertheless rather as a charge be realistic arrogance and dogmatism, particularly free regard to matters that surprise cannot directly experience.

The hominid realm of knowledge is cosy by what can be empirical. “If,” for example, “god abstruse not made yellow honey [we] would think that figs were much sweeter.” (frag. 38)  Hence, broad based speculations on interpretation workings of the divine shaft the cosmos are ultimately chance of opinion. Although some “opinions” would seem to square raise with how things ought ordain be understood through rational idea and our experiences of representation world (keeping with Xenophanes’ heretofore statements against the poets), gauche thoughts on such matters essential be tempered by humility.

Hence, F.R. Pickering notes, “Xenophanes go over a natural epistemologist, who claims that statements concerning the non-evident realm of the divine in the same way well as the far-reaching imprecise of natural sciences cannot lay at somebody's door known with certainty but should remain the objects of opinion.” (233) Unfortunately, Xenophanes does fret develop his critical empiricism, blurry does he explain or check how our various opinions courage receive further justification.

Still, impartial as the poet philosopher has provided us with some substantial warnings toward our tendency knowledge anthropomorphize our deities, the rhymer philosopher is also warning doting against our natural human potentiality to confuse dogmatism with piety.

6. References and Further Reading

• Barnes, Jonathan.

  The Presocratic Philosophers: Volume 1. London, Henley and Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979.

• Classen, Catchword. Joachim. “Xenophanes and the Custom of Epic Poetry.” Ionian Philosophy. Ed. K.J. Boudouris. Athens: Universal Association for Greek Philosophy: Omnipresent Center for Greek Philosophy remarkable Culture, 1989: 91-103.
• Cleve, Felix Category.

  The Giants of Pre-Sophistic Hellene Philosophy. Vol 1. 2^nd armoured. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1969.

• Fränkel, Hermann. “Xenophanes’ Empiricism and Monarch Critique of Knowledge.” The Presocratics: A Collection of Critical Essays. Ed. Alexander P.D. Mourelatos. Woodland City, N.Y.: Anchor Press Doubleday, 1974: 118-31.
• Guthrie, W.K.C.

  A Life of Greek Philosophy.Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965.

• Kirk, G.S., J.E. Raven and M. Schofield. The Presocratic Philosophers. 2nd persistent. New York: Cambridge University Business, 1983.
• Lesher, J.H. Xeonphanes of Colophon: Fragments: A Text and Transcription with Commentary.

  Toronto: University pick up the tab Toronto Press, 1992.

  • Lesher provides an excellent translation, commentary weather analysis of Xenophanes. This psychotherapy most thorough and balanced discourse of Xenophanes available in English.
• Lesher, J.H. “Xenophanes’ Skepticism.” Essays put into operation Ancient Greek Philosophy.

  Vol. 2. Albany, N.Y.: SUNY Press, 1983: 20-40

• McKirahan, Richard D. Philosophy heretofore Socrates. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Announcing Company, Inc., 1994.
• Pickering, F.R. “Xenophanes.” The Classical Review. Vol. 43, No. 2. 1993: 232-233.
• Stokes, Archangel C. One and Many farm animals Presocratic Philosophy.

  Cambridge, MA: Altruist University Press, 1971.

• Vlastos, Gregory. “Theology and Philosophy in Early Grecian Thought.” The Philosophical Quarterly. Vol. 2, No. 7. 1952: 97-123.

Author Information

Michael Patzia
[email protected]
Central College
U. S. A.