The Dawn of Logical-Rational Thought in Ancient Greece
The logical-rational thought began its long process of separation from mythical thought in Western culture in the Greek polis of the sixth century BC. This separation occurred at the hands of pre-Socratic philosophers who focused on the question of the physical operation of the cosmos and its origin from chaos. These thinkers, while not entirely free of mythical features, attempted to understand the world around them by examining observable elements such as water or fire. Reason could detect regularities expressible in laws, allowing humans to understand the cosmos as somewhat predictable, rather than the result of the whims of supernatural beings. The discovery of an underlying order beneath the surface marked the starting point of rational thought.
Thus, Greek culture generated the first school of Miletus, comprised of three authors (Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes). They attempted to explain the phenomenal multiplicity by reducing it to the regularities of a first principle observable (water, Apeiron, air). Empedocles of Agrigento, in turn, extended this discussion by noting that the “roots” or elements should be four (air, water, earth, and fire), in conjunction with two forces of attraction or repulsion, known by the legendary names Phobos and Eros. Heraclitus again pointed to fire as an essential element, but in a way that was intended to be allegorical of the importance that the author gives to the evolution in the cosmos.
Parmenides and his disciple Zeno initiated the metaphysical argument about the logical impossibility of change, and its uncompromising conclusion leads us to dispose of the senses and cling to a monolithic Ser-One. Also of note are the Pythagoreans, who discovered mathematical accuracy and, amazed by that wonder, led them to a merger between the sacred and the rational that fascinated Plato. Anaxagoras of Clazomenae and Democritus of Abdera arrived at two very different, and very influential, conclusions regarding cosmology. Anaxagoras indicated the importance of teleological explanations, because matter alone could not have formed the Cosmos from Chaos without the intervention of a superior intelligence. For his part, the father of Greek atomism indicated that this is precisely what happens, and that everything must be explained rationally on the basis of matter (atoms) and without seeking any purpose, but mechanically.
The dispute between mechanism and purposefulness has continued throughout the history of our thinking. The debate between Socrates and the sophists charted a new course in philosophy, which became primarily concerned with ethical and political issues. Socrates refused to be a master to anyone, but his tireless pursuit of absolute truths, always in dialogue to get from the criticism of individual opinions to the common truth, profoundly influenced Plato. The Sophists represented the relativistic counterpart to Socratic thought, because they questioned the universal validity of any human idea. Our knowledge is so limited that we can never be sure of any truth, so the most useful activity would be rhetoric, the art of convincing about anything, because all of our truths may be wrong. This relativism and use of rhetoric fit perfectly with a democratic political approach, political habitat.
In this debate about the absolute nature of truths accessible to reason, or their relative and conventional character, Plato was a privileged witness. The unjust execution of his teacher reaffirmed his conviction that the discovery of absolute and universal ideas is the ultimate purpose of human beings, and they must be based on life both individually and political organization. In this conception of the Ideas, Plato founded his philosophy, one of whose main points is the achievement of a just and stable political order, based on the immutable Idea of justice. Applying his belief in the immortality of the soul, those persons in whom the desire to know is very strong (rational soul) must be those who govern the polis, which thus could be characterized as an aristocracy of philosophers, or a philosopher-king. In this way, the polis achieves a fair and stable government, the great desire of the philosopher.