PART A- REACTION QUESTIONS

Leucippus and Democritus state that all things in nature are ruled by necessity (Presocratic handout). In contrast, the U.S. legal system presupposes that humans act out of freewill.These two positions (determinism and free will) frame a vexing debate in discussions of legal studies, ethics, philosophy, and theology.

Free will isto choose a course of action from among various alternatives; for example, one can choose to follow the law or violate the lawboth are examples of free will.

Determinism is the claim that all actions are predetermined by prior causes; for example, a computer may seem intelligent but is predetermined by programming.

Answer the following questions as a trial attorney defending or prosecuting Aileen Wuornos on the charges of murder. Read the fact sheet attached to the presocratic reading handout for details about her life and crimes.

1. As a defense attorney, how might you defend Wuornos's innocence on the charge of murder by appealing to determinism? Explain all the factors in the defendant's life that prevented her from acting freely when committing the crime.

2. As a prosecutor, how would you appeal to "free will" to explain the defendant's guilt and responsibility for her actions? (You must address the arguments that you raised as a defense lawyer above.)

Part B-READING QUESTIONS

Rather than appealing to the gods to explain the natural world (muthos), the presocratics offer a scientific explanation through a rational account (logos). Using the presocratic handout, offer a defense for each of the following thinkers' theory about the ultimate principle (arche) underlying all nature. What evidence or experiments can you think of that the theorist might have used to prove his theory? Since the complete works of these theorists are lost, the answers here are based on your own logical analysis. There are three reading selections for this week, which can be found in the Week 4 folder on Blackboard: Presocratic handout; Nature Mythology; Socrates' Critique of 21^st Century Neuroscience.

1. Thales proposed that water is the single substance that can explain all other things. Based on your own knowledge, what are the qualities of water? Why does this make it a good candidate as the primordial substance? (Cite any evidence or experiments to support this theory.)

2.Anaximander-Why would Anaximander argue that all things come from the boundless? What do you think the boundless is? Why might this be more compelling than naming a particular substance?

3. Heraclitus-Describe all the qualities and properties of fire. Why might Heraclitus think this is the primordial substance?

4. Pythagoras-How is Pythagoras' notion of harmony as the substance underlying all reality different from the other theorists? How might you explain the order of things (whether man-made or natural being) as a harmony? How might this concept be used to explain human behavior?

5. Anaxagoras-Read the selection from Plato's Phaedo about Socrates' on "his early studies." Why did Socrates think that Anaxagoras had the missing element that would explain how things come into being (97c-99c)? Why is the human scientist (e.g. historian, sociologist, psychologist, criminologist, etc.) better equipped to explain why Socrates is in prison better than the biologist (98b-99b; also check out Silvermintz's article Socrates' Critique of 21st-Century Neuroscience)? What does Socrates propose as an alternative to the various theories proposed by the natural scientists (99d-100c)?

6. Read the article "Nature (Mythology)" and explain how natural phenomena such as lightning and plagues are understood in mythology such as Homer's Iliad? In contrast, how are these things understood by the presocratic scientists? How does the mythological understanding of these phenomena promote ethics in Ancient Greek society?

7. Please watch Week 4 Spotlight Lecture and answer the following questions based on the lecture. What is Aristotle's bold claim about human nature? How does he prove this? What is the value and limit of street smarts?

These sources might help! Thank you!

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/socrates-critique-of-21st-century-neuroscience/

216 Nature Nature (mythology) 217 In POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, the idea of a ity, or the world, always end up being exclusion- derive norms from the unpredictability of realm of human affairs. When compared with 'state of nature' has formed the basis for consid ary, and prejudiced against that which does not nature's forces results in a notion of ETHICS the unvarying principles of nature, the distinct erations about social and political justice. Social fit the norm? And is any such 'norm' not just, in that is just as capricious. SOCRATES notes the contract theorists (HOBBES, LOCKE, the end, a human construction rather than any- tion between just and unjust actions appears as inability of the poets to defend or explain their arbitrary and conventional. ROUSSEAU and, more recently, John RAWLS) thing given in the 'nature' of things? conceptions of nature: Responding to the upheaval in the ethical have sought to consider how society should be Yet one does not have to be an ecologist to run, by viewing it from the perspective of a world . . . they do not make their work by wisdom, realm, Socrates sought universal definitions for appreciate that there is a value of the concept of but by some kind of talent and by ethical concepts, contending that they do pos- without the fabric of laws, rights and social con- 'nature'. As critics of Hobbes and Rawls have sess unvarying natures. He tells us in an autobio- ventions to which we have grown accustomed. shown, assumptions can be all the more conse- inspiration, like the seers and the 'oracle- graphical reflection in Phaedo that he was only Of course, they differ about what life before quential when they are hidden, or even uninten- mongers'. These people, too, say many able to pursue this sort of enquiry by focusing on `civil government' was like. For Hobbes, tional. Not all the world is human culture; and things, wonderful things, but they know human affairs and abandoning his previous HUMAN NATURE is the source of the conflict, aspects of that non-cultural world are themselves, nothing about what they are saying . . investigation into the entirety of nature. The aggression and acquisitiveness which would in terms of the causal powers they furnish, pre- dominate without the order provided by a heav- conditions of there being a rich, varied, immea- (Apology 22c) inability of Socratic philosophy to address the cosmic order relegates it to be just as one-sided ily powerful state. For Rousseau, the pre-social surably valuable human culture in the first place. In contrast to the irrational but beautiful sto- as the pre-Socratic natural scientists. human is an altogether more cuddly being. We can choose to deconstruct the idea of nature, ries of the poets, scientific enquiry emerges as For several thousand years, Aristotle's Physics Rawls, like many modern philosophers, attempts or to downplay its significance for human life. thinkers begin to forward explanations of the had provided a solution to the schism between to avoid a unck conception of human nature in But even so, not least in the form of our mortal- natural world that can be defended through natural science and ethical enquiry. Rejecting devising social rules, and appeals instead to the ity, nature is indeed likely to catch up with us in argument and demonstration. the disembodied world of Platonic FORMS, priorities which individuals would have regardless the end. Although we have little more than fragments Aristotle engaged in extensive biological studies of knowledge of their own particular prefer- Contributor: Gideon Calder expressing the seminal ideas of early natural sci- of living, breathing organisms. In these studies, ences or orientations. His critics argue that entists, we see how they depart from the tradi- the individual parts of the organism and all its despite its ambitions, such a theory fails to be tion of storytelling and, for the first time, 'neutral' between alternative models of what is NATURE (MYTHOLOGY) motions were understood as purposively con- advance rational arguments. THALES, typically tributing towards the attainment of the organ good for the sort of being that humans are. Essentials of nature and mythology reckoned as the first philosopher and natural ism's final end. The internal striving of living But the very idea of a 'state of nature' throws scientist, boldly propounds water as the sole beings to preserve their own existence ultimately up a fundamental ambiguity about the way in ARISTOTLE considered the origins of philo- cause underlying the entirety of nature. The culminates in the contribution of the individual which nature is discussed. It tends to be pre- sophic enquiry to stem from our innate desire to ability of water to assume the different states of towards the preservation of the species. One can sented in contrast to something else - culture, understand the causes behind the natural world. matter (liquid, solid, gas) suggests how the seem- then investigate the goal of ethical action in a human rationality, 'the unnatural' - as if there He thus links mythology and philosophy, in as ing multiplicity of phenomena might be similar fashion as one can study the consistent were clear dividing lines between such cate- much as they both attempt to explain the forces reduced to a single substance. Simple experi- gories. But what is nature, in and of itself? If we of NATURE. trajectory by which the acorn strives to be an oak ments might bolster this claim as vegetables tree. The failure of some acorns to achieve their look at the 'natural' world, we find that (for bet- could be pulverised and reduced into liquid. ter or worse) it is everywhere shaped and Nature according to myth, science and end when they become fodder for the squirrel philosophy Yet there are consequences that emerge as a does not negate the innate striving of the acorn changed by human influence. Many might say result of the scientific revolution. The persisting towards its end. While the acorn is only pre- the same of human nature, too: that because we The harmony and turbulence of the natural order of the cosmos is now understood as pre- world was understood by early religion and vented from becoming an oak tree by the inter- can describe ourselves, and our projects, in such served by the unvarying forces of nature. Fire, a wide range of ways, it really does not make mythology to be caused by the compassion or vention of outside forces, human beings are for example, exhibits the same nature, regard- peculiar, in so far as they actively cultivate dele- much sense to talk in terms of 'natural' ways of wrath of one of the gods. Individual worshippers less if it burns in Greece or Persia. In contrast, terious habits, leading them to pursue ends con- human living, or authentically 'human' needs or who experienced nature's wrath first-hand ethical norms vary widely from one city to the trary to human nature and the life of virtue. priorities. Does it make a difference whether sys- believed that they had brought on the deity's next. The variability of religious practices, polit- The modern scientific revolution, inaugu tems of 'HUMAN RIGHTS', for example, reflect anger through their misconduct. Fearing the ical systems and social conventions led the rated in the seventeenth century by BACON, real, universal aspects of what it is like to be consequences of divine retribution, the followers SOPHISTS to conclude that the realm of DESCARTES and NEWTON, shares certain fea- human? Often, the 'natural' is contrasted with of mythology were motivated to order their lives human affairs was wholly arbitrary and without a tures with the scientific revolution of the sixth the 'artificial' or 'manufactured'. From many dif- in such a way as to receive their gods' counte- natural basis. This position is nicely summed up ferent angles, recent thinkers have questioned nance. The systems of mythology were thus able century BCE, though now nature is treated as a by HERACLITUS: 'To God all things are fair whether this distinction is viable at all. Which is to provide a primitive means of explanation, as force to harness for the sake of relieving man's and good and right, but people hold some the 'true' depiction of nature: a biology textbook well as an ethical imperative for good behaviour. estate. In the twenty-first century we are pre- things wrong and some right. . .' (fragment 61). or a landscape painting? Is Nazi ideology at odds Notwithstanding the artistic genius employed sented with advances in medicine and technol- The new conception of the divine enacted by the ogy heralded by the prophets of the modern with the true nature of humanity, or just cur- in crafting the various mythological systems, the scientific revolution understands nature's forces scientific revolution. Notwithstanding the many rently unfashionable? Can we ever decide explanations offered by poetry must ultimately as wholly indifferent to the entire moral order. ways in which technology has improved our lives, whether CAPITALISM allows human nature to be recognised as abandoning real enquiry by Just as the lion is not censured for preserving its the ethical sphere once again emerges as lacking flourish, or prevents this, or a bit of both? Must appealing to irrational stories. While mythology life when it eats the lamb, nature does not judge might encourage ethical action, the attempt to any natural basis. Rather than understanding essentialist' claims about the nature of human- the strong from trampling over the weak in the the natural world as purposive, DARWIN218 Nature (mythology) assumes that species EVOLVE through random NEWTON, ISAAC (1642-1727) mutation and the survival of the fittest. Newton was born into a rural family and only his Postmodern RELATIVISM can thus be seen as inability to keep track of the cows led to him the ethical complement of modern science. eventually being allowed to go to Oxford as a Contemporary ethical theory once again awaits kind of assistant scholar to richer students. But an Aristotle who can ground ethics by providing once there he feasted upon the knowledge a unified framework for understanding both the revealed in the libraries, drawing up a list natural world and the world of human affairs. of great questions spanning the whole range of Contributor: Daniel Silvermintz human knowledge that he intended to investigate. In the event, he was woefully unsuccessful, Further reading scarcely proceeding beyond the first half-dozen matters, such as the nature of motion, chemical Aristotle, Physics change, gravity, light - and time. Despite many Bacon, F. (1620) The New Science (also known as secretive years searching for the 'philosopher's the Novum Organum) stone', he never came up with that either. Nonetheless, Sir Isaac is sometimes said to Darwin, C. (1859) The Origin of the Species have been to science what Euclid was to mathe- matics. His Philosophice Naturalis Principia NECESSITY Mathematica (1687) systematised the science of mechanics, that is, the science of objects and That without which we cannot do. For LEIBNIZ, how they move, just as Euclid systematised the God is METAPHYSICALLY 'necessary'; the study of geometry. Both provided the terms and truths of mathematics are 'absolutely necessary'. definitions for all the rest. Newton found it nec- But more recent philosophers have recognised essary to deal with otherwise apparently philo- that both mathematical and LOGICAL necessity sophical issues such as those of the nature of are rooted in mere conventions. Statements are 'space' and of 'true motion' (in particular the only 'necessary' because of the way we define views of DESCARTES) in order to address our terms, and that in turn is just a result of the PARADOXES such as that of how the Earth way we want them to be. could both be 'accelerating' away from the Sun at any moment and yet be motionless. If his nos- NEGRITUDE trums of 'Absolute Space', let alone 'Absolute See African philosophy. Time', seem to have been collapsed by relativity theory, EINSTEIN was the first to acknowledge NEO-PLATONISM that it was Newton who gave the world the frame- Neo-Platonists such as PLOTINUS and work for investigations. PORPHYRY attempted to reconcile the works of the two great masters, PLATO and NIETZSCHE, FRIEDRICH ARISTOTLE, generally by seeing Aristotle's (1844-1900) practical approach as a way into the 'higher wis- dom' of Plato. Of this, the MYSTICAL view that The essential Nietzsche the 'GOOD' is the ultimate and 'transcendent' Friedrich Nietzsche was born in the Prussian truth is the end product and characteristic. town of Rocken in a period of political and eco- nomic ferment. His central interests were the NEWCOMB'S PARADOX death of God' and, with it, he claimed, the Also known as the prediction PARADOX. There "slave morality' of Christianity with its elevation are two boxes, A and B, and a wise Being with a of self-sacrifice and pity over what he considered record of always predicting human behaviour. the true virtue: the pursuit of power. He read Although popular, the paradox is at best inele- SCHOPENHAUER's The World as Will and gant and at worse completely unintelligible, Representation as a revelation, which he adapted which would of course explain its popularity to his own, rather dubious, ends. among philosophers. In any case, it seems not Nietzsche interpreted the world from the worthy of the attention it has received. (So it can point of view that human beings, and ind nd indeed all have a bit less here!) life, are engaged in this struggle to increase their