On the Nature of Things
It was a treat finally to read Lucretius's masterpiece, "On the Nature of Things" ("De Rerum Natura"). I knew it was an exposition of atomism, but I didn't know what to expect in the way of reasoning behind or developement of the idea. It is actually a poem, and, thanks to the excellent translation, the writing style makes it easier to understand rather than more difficult. (I can't imagine trying to tackle it in Latin, however.) It was written explicitly to argue against religion; right at the beginning, Lucretius makes clear that he thinks religion is nonsense and he is going to prove it by explaining physical phenomena without reference to the gods.
The central argument of his explanation is that the world is composed of atoms, and he can use atoms to explain everything from a purely physical point of view. It is truly extraordinary to see how far reason can work out things about the physical world even when observations are made at such a gross level, without the benefit of any specialized equipment. Lucretius argues that movement would be impossible without the existence of empty space -- the void -- into which things can move, and from this (and other things) he deduces the existence of elementary particles that constitute all things. It would take nearly two thousand years before science could demonstrate the thing that he had intuited before the birth of Christ.
Unfortunately, Lucretius's insights do not carry much further than the existence of atoms and the void. He believes in parthenogenesis, for example. He also has no concept of energy's being expressed in heat, instead believing that heat and cold are their own special particles. He identifies the chest as the seat of reason in man (consistently with what other people believed in pre-modern times), but what is really surprising is that he thinks that intelligence itself exists as particles. I'm not really sure what alternatives could have existed at his time -- certainly a neural network would have been out of the question -- but this absolute materialism strikes the modern reader as quaint, to say the least.
Another curious part of the work is a lengthy complaint about women and marriage. It is so vehement and seemed so out of place that it made me think Lucretius must have been very unlucky with women. It's curious, because he actually begins the work with a prologue in praise of Venus, but then in this sections traces so many of man's ills to her.
Materialism has been a strong influence on philosophers, and Lucretius has been at the center of materialist thought for the last 2000 years. Marx wrote his doctoral dissertation on "De Rerum Natura," so there is a fairly straight line between ancient atomistic materialism and the dialectical materialism that has been such a plague on the modern world. Inevitably, Lucretius expects us to accept some aspects of his world view on faith, such as the idea that there is infinite space and an infinite number of atoms; and, of course, we know now that even atomism isn't strictly true (in the original sense of indivisible particles) since atoms are composed of protons and electrons, which are composed of quarks, which perhaps at some level are best modeled as strings...
Lucretius writes forcefully, with the confidence that he is proving some things beyond dispute, which is hard to take too seriously when some of his speculations (such as the origins of volcanoes) bear so little relation to what we know as physical reality. Nevertheless, he is clearly right in principle about some very basic ideas, and many philosophers have taken him as a starting point. Even Marcus Aurelius, who clearly disagrees with the materialist premise, sounds a great deal like Lucretius when he talks about how the life of a man is such a small space of time compared to eternity, and they both draw the same conclusion from this point -- namely, that we should not care so much whether we live another few days or years. Atomism is such a fundamental part of our world view that it is easy to take it for granted, but reading Lucretius demonstrates to me that the idea had sound foundations long before scientists could even remotely prove it.
The central argument of his explanation is that the world is composed of atoms, and he can use atoms to explain everything from a purely physical point of view. It is truly extraordinary to see how far reason can work out things about the physical world even when observations are made at such a gross level, without the benefit of any specialized equipment. Lucretius argues that movement would be impossible without the existence of empty space -- the void -- into which things can move, and from this (and other things) he deduces the existence of elementary particles that constitute all things. It would take nearly two thousand years before science could demonstrate the thing that he had intuited before the birth of Christ.
Unfortunately, Lucretius's insights do not carry much further than the existence of atoms and the void. He believes in parthenogenesis, for example. He also has no concept of energy's being expressed in heat, instead believing that heat and cold are their own special particles. He identifies the chest as the seat of reason in man (consistently with what other people believed in pre-modern times), but what is really surprising is that he thinks that intelligence itself exists as particles. I'm not really sure what alternatives could have existed at his time -- certainly a neural network would have been out of the question -- but this absolute materialism strikes the modern reader as quaint, to say the least.
Another curious part of the work is a lengthy complaint about women and marriage. It is so vehement and seemed so out of place that it made me think Lucretius must have been very unlucky with women. It's curious, because he actually begins the work with a prologue in praise of Venus, but then in this sections traces so many of man's ills to her.
Materialism has been a strong influence on philosophers, and Lucretius has been at the center of materialist thought for the last 2000 years. Marx wrote his doctoral dissertation on "De Rerum Natura," so there is a fairly straight line between ancient atomistic materialism and the dialectical materialism that has been such a plague on the modern world. Inevitably, Lucretius expects us to accept some aspects of his world view on faith, such as the idea that there is infinite space and an infinite number of atoms; and, of course, we know now that even atomism isn't strictly true (in the original sense of indivisible particles) since atoms are composed of protons and electrons, which are composed of quarks, which perhaps at some level are best modeled as strings...
Lucretius writes forcefully, with the confidence that he is proving some things beyond dispute, which is hard to take too seriously when some of his speculations (such as the origins of volcanoes) bear so little relation to what we know as physical reality. Nevertheless, he is clearly right in principle about some very basic ideas, and many philosophers have taken him as a starting point. Even Marcus Aurelius, who clearly disagrees with the materialist premise, sounds a great deal like Lucretius when he talks about how the life of a man is such a small space of time compared to eternity, and they both draw the same conclusion from this point -- namely, that we should not care so much whether we live another few days or years. Atomism is such a fundamental part of our world view that it is easy to take it for granted, but reading Lucretius demonstrates to me that the idea had sound foundations long before scientists could even remotely prove it.
Comments
Post a Comment