80 likes | 180 Views
Standards of Explanation: the Presocratic Revolution. Before the Revolution: Mythopoetic Explanations. Features: Natural phenomena are the result of the actions taken by divine persons existing outside the world
E N D
Before the Revolution:Mythopoetic Explanations Features: • Natural phenomena are the result of the actions taken by divine persons existing outside the world • What divinities do is unpredictable (their actions depend on their personal interests, desires, needs, which cannot be predicted in advance) • Divine power is magical, i.e., unexplained (Thor-makes-lightning-because-he’s-got-that-hammer [how does it do it? We don’t know])
What Mythopoets Assume About the World • The world is unsystematic and capricious (because the various divine persons have often-conflicting interests, desires, needs) • The causes of natural phenomena cannot be known except by people (oracles) who can detect the interests, desires and needs of the Gods in advance • What oracles can tell us does not explain how the Gods do what they do. • Human interests, desires and needs can only be served by serving those of the Gods.
After the Revolution:Presocratic Explanations Good-making Features: • Universality (the explanation applies everywhere and everywhen to everything within the ‘scope’ of the explanation [scope=everything to be explained]) • Simplicity (Occam’s Razor satisfied…no deus ex machina [unexplained contrivance that solves a problem] • Naturalistic (=employs all and only things that are in nature to explain natural phenomena) • Noncircular (does not explain X by means of X)
Why are each of these good-making properties of an explanation? Universality: any explanation that fails to cover everything that it applies to is incomplete, and thus bad (e.g, the shirt that wants to be lavender). Simplicity: if you can explain something using fewer elements, why use more? Naturalism: rejects divine, magical causes (hmmm….why would that be good?) Noncircular: consider what it means to say “the fire was caused by the fire”. Sounds like a failure to explain, doesn’t it?
The Hidden Assumptionsof Presocratic (Proto-Rational)Explanation • The world is intelligible (i.e., the reality of phenomena we wish to explain can be apprehended by the thought of some mind[s]) • The world is intelligible to us (our minds can think about it usefully) • The world to be explained is regular (i.e., it has a set of systematic, structure properties which remain the same over time….the world is predictable)
There is some set of true statements about the world, the contraries of which are false • In respect to these statements it cannot both be the case that P is true and P is false (the world is consistent with the logical law of noncontradiction)
Going Forward to the Presocratics Not all of the Presocratic philosophers offer explanations that satisfy all the foregoing good-making features of a proto-rational explanation mentioned. Often they go too far with some of them (e.g., Thales’ account of nature is too simple [radically parsimonious]) Chief departure from the mythopoets: rejection of divine causes + naturalism + reliance on specifically human powers of thought and experience.