Welcome to Constantinos Grigoriadis' Art: Constantinos Grigoriadis' New Book In Greek Language

Friday, March 13, 2009

Constantinos Grigoriadis' New Book In Greek Language

1 comment:

Chatica said...: Hello Kostas long time!!! I was taking a look to your blog, like always very interesting photos.

I am living now in Brazil moved from Venezuela due current political situation.

Keep in touch.

Chatica; February 17, 2010 at 9:34 AM

Two Worlds

For us, there are Two Worlds of Being.
The First World is the out world we live in, a shell that encases the body, an attitude that stifles the mind and pretends that money is the measure of worth.
The First World is harsh, though comfortable, alluring though vain. It is the popular world where everyone longs to be, yet once they arrive, they dream of a new direction. In this world, everything costs something and what is free costs more. The First World is one of wheels and destinations, membership dues and limitations. It is a sanctuary for those who desire conformity in all things. Here duplicate people wearing duplicate clothes speak a language without meaning and think thoughts without substance to their form. The First World is where everyone lives, yet no one actually survives. It is an acceptable address where you forfeit all that you are for what you will never become and what you are not is what you want those around you to remember. The First World has power-but no strength. It is one of mirrors, but no reflection. In this world, there is success, but no mystery goals, but no journey. In this world, boundaries keep ideas from colliding. The Second World is the inner world of harmony where you can go anytime your spirit aches for company here you can listen to the songs of rocks and leaves and embrace the wisdom of rivers and essential things contained in raindrops or a flower's belly or the earth's warm breath of spring. In this world, beauty is companion to mystery.
The Second World is one of joy and curiosity a connecting thread to birds and oceans, plants and animals. The Second World is one of children's laughter, women's songs, men's stories, the essence that remains long after the experience has passed on. In this world, all circles return. The Second World is where you can travel on the wings of dreams or the tails of newborn stars. This world is revealed though a rainbow's colored eyes, or in a spider's silver road between two leaves, or even in silence, the kind that follows ecstasy. The Second World is able to survive without the First, But the First World cannot last long without the Second. The Second World offers meaning to existence while the First World offers existence only. Between these two Worlds lies reason, the seam that connects one World to another. The Second World is yours for no money. The First World is yours for no effort.
Which one will you choose?

New World

What will you take with you when you are gone?
Neither riches, palaces
Nor precious stones...
No, none of all these...
Only the smiles you gave
And the joy you spreadIn the riding storm of life.
What will you leave to the world when you are gone?
Just good memories of love and hope
And your pure and heavenly soul
Eternally warm and sincere:
The thought of you Will comfort a trembling heart...
What will you wish to the world when you are gone?
Give hope to all the non-believers
Take all the time it takes to reach your goal
And in your giving and taking
Watch a new world unfold In you...

JeanPierre Barakat

Today,Tomorrow and Yesterday

New times are now old ones,
Old ones are now history,
History becomes ancient,
Ancient becomes unknown,
Unknown shifts though time,
Shaping and molding in every which way,
Unknown times become myths,
Myths become religions,
False becomes truth,
Truths move to morals,
Morals are now what we live by,
Now has just become then,
The past has once been the future,
The future will soon become the past,
You were once born in the future of the past,
But the past has caught up,
And taken you with it.
Like a deadly arrow the past pierces life,
The future itself becomes victim to its strike.
As if to be Bonnie and Clyde,
Hand in hand the two opposites collide,
Together bringing everything to their long awaited fate.
Doing what they do best toward their ever most passions,
The future and the past are, and were, the two deadliest assassins,
Today, Tomorrow, And yesterday...

Justin MonacoBarnes

Happy Endings

Is there always a happy ending,to every song and a story.
Some are happy, and others weep, and then there are those, that finish in glory.
Is there a happy ending, to every day, maybe not, when your filled with griefand it's not stopped raining, and the sky is grey.
Happy endings are made by you it's how you work, and go about it, can make that ending come true..
Just be yourself, however small, and smile when things get out of tune, a happy ending, can be found.
Then life becomes, just one honeymoon

Sylvia Spencer

I've had a Dream

I've had a dream where nobody caresand nobody feels.
Its the same world, same place, same people, but nobody feels, nobody cares...
I wish I could tell you moreI wish I could show you.
If only things where different, then maybe I could.
A world without pain,
A world without hurt.
A world without suffering
A world where we all help.
Life is but a dream, where everyone hurtseveryone feelseveryone cares...
With all these feelingswe push people awayto stop the hurt? to stop the pain?
I've had a dream....

Kev Elmer

Young Artist

Come own young Artist and show,
The world what you can do.
Fill this old world with pure love,
Make loving dreams come true.
Come on young Artist,
and Paint,
Paint this old world a new.
And fill each life with true love,
A real world is overdue.
Please,
Paint out all smoke screens,
We're for real me and you.
Bring out all the sweetness,
Leave out all sadness, too.
Paint a beautiful new time of living and worth.
Paint in much more true happiness.
Here on this earth.
Paint true love old, and new,
Paint away all tears young Artist.

Luegenia Van Buskirk

ANCIENT GREEK PHILOSHOPHY

On Ancient Greek Philosophy / Philosophers
Thales was the first to inquire into such matters: he thought God was a Spirit who made all things out of water; Anaximander said that the gods are born and die with the seasons and that there are worlds infinite in number; Anaximenes said God was Air, immense, extensive, ever moving; Anaxagoras was the first to hold that the delineation and fashioning of all things was directed by the might and reason of an infinite Spirit; Alcmaeon attributed Godhead to the Sun, the Moon, the stars and to the soul; Pythagoras made God into a Spirit diffused throughout all nature and from whom our souls are detached; for Parmenides God was a circle of light surrounding the heavens and sustaining the world with its heat; Empedocles made gods from the four natural elements of which all things are compounded; Protagoras would not say whether the gods existed or not or what they are if they do; Democritus sometimes asserted that the constellations and their circular paths were gods, sometimes that God was that Nature whose impulse first made them move; then he said our knowledge and our intellect were God; Plato's beliefs are diffuse and many-sided: in the Timaeus he says that the Father of the world cannot be named; in the Laws he forbids all inquiry into the proper being of God: elsewhere, in these very same books, he makes the world, the sky, the heavenly bodies, the earth and our souls into gods, recognising as well all the gods accepted by ancient customs in every country. Xenophon records a similar confusion in the teachings of Socrates: sometimes he has Socrates maintaining that no inquiry should be made into the properties of God; at other times he has him deciding that the Sun is God, that the soul is God, that there is only one God and then that there are many. The nephew of Plato, Speusippus, holds God to a certain animate power governing all things; Aristotle sometimes says that God is Mind and sometimes the World; at times he gives the world a different Master and sometimes makes a god from the heat of the sky. Zenocrates has eight gods: five are named after the planets; the sixth has all the fixed stars as his members, the seventh and eighth being the Sun and Moon. Heraclides of Pontus meanders along beneath these various notions and ends up with a God deprived if all sensation; he has him changing from one form to another and finally asserts that he is heaven and earth. Theophrastus is similarly undecided, wandering about between his many concepts, attributing the government of the world sometimes to Intelligence, sometimes to the sky and sometimes to the stars; Strato says God is Nature, giving birth, making things wax and wane, but itself formless and insensate; Zeno makes a god of Natural Law: it commands good, forbids evil and is animate; he dismisses the gods accepted by custom- Jupiter, Juno and Vesta; Diogenes of Apollonia says God is Time. Xenophanes makes God round, able to see and hear but not to breathe and having nothing in common with human nature; Ariston thinks that the form of God cannot be grasped: he deprives him of senses and cannot tell whether he is animate or something quite different. For Cleanthes God is sometimes Reason, sometimes the World, sometimes the Soul of Nature, sometimes absolute Heat surrounding and enveloping all things. Perseus, a pupil of Zeno's, maintained that the name god was bestowed on people who had contributed some outstanding useful improvements to the life of Man- or even on the improvements themselves. Chrysiippus made a chaotic mess of all these assertions and included among his thousand forms of gods men who had been immortalised. Diagoras and Theodorus bluntly denied that gods exist. Epicurus has shiny gods, permeable to wind and light, who are lodged between two worlds which serve as fortresses protecting them from being battered; they are clothed in human shape, with limbs like ours which are quite useless. (Michel de Montaigne, 1572)

------------------------------------------------

Ancient Greek Philosophy marked a fundamental turning point in the evolution of humanity and our ideas about our existence in the universe. Over the past 2,500 years their knowledge directly contributed to the evolution of our current science / reason based society. Thus it is unfortunate that many people imagine our post-modern society to now be so 'enlightened' that the Ancient Greek Philosophers have become irrelevant. In fact the opposite is true. As Bertrand Russell observed (History of Western Philosophy), it was the Ancient Greek Philosophers who first discovered and discussed the fundamental Principles of Philosophy, and most significantly, little has been added to their knowledge since. As Einstein wrote;
Somebody who only reads newspapers and at best books of contemporary authors looks to me like an extremely near-sighted person who scorns eyeglasses. He is completely dependent on the prejudices and fashions of his times, since he never gets to see or hear anything else. And what a person thinks on his own without being stimulated by the thoughts and experiences of other people is even in the best case rather paltry and monotonous. There are only a few enlightened people with a lucid mind and style and with good taste within a century. What has been preserved of their work belongs among the most precious possessions of mankind. We owe it to a few writers of antiquity (Plato, Aristotle, etc.) that the people in the Middle Ages could slowly extricate themselves from the superstitions and ignorance that had darkened life for more than half a millennium. Nothing is more needed to overcome the modernist's snobbishness. (Albert Einstein, 1954)
It is therefore both interesting and important to consider the foundations which caused the blossoming of Ancient Greek Philosophy. First and foremost was the realisation that ALL IS ONE, as Nietzsche writes;
Greek philosophy seems to begin with a preposterous fancy, with the proposition that water is the origin and mother-womb of all things. Is it really necessary to stop there and become serious? Yes, and for three reasons: firstly, because the preposition does enunciate something about the origin of things; secondly, because it does so without figure and fable; thirdly and lastly, because it contained, although only in the chrysalis state, the idea :everything is one. ... That which drove him (Thales) to this generalization was a metaphysical dogma, which had its origin in a mystic intuition and which together with the ever renewed endeavors to express it better, we find in all philosophies- the proposition: everything is one! (Friedrich Nietzsche, The Greeks)
Further, the Ancient Greeks realised that Motion (Flux / Activity / Change) was central to existence and reality, as Aristotle writes;
The first philosophy (Metaphysics) is universal and is exclusively concerned with primary substance. ... And here we will have the science to study that which is just as that which is, both in its essence and in the properties which, just as a thing that is, it has. (Aristotle, 340BC)
The entire preoccupation of the physicist is with things that contain within themselves a principle of movement and rest. And to seek for this is to seek for the second kind of principle, that from which comes the beginning of the change. (Aristotle, 340BC)
Only recently (Wolff, 1986 - Haselhurst, 1997) has it been possible, with the discovery of the Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM), to unite the ideas of Ancient Greek Philosophy with modern Physics, Philosophy and Metaphysics. The solution is simple and obvious once known.

---------------------------------------------------------

Socrates (469 - 399 B.C.)

But Socrates divined still more. He saw right through his noble Athenians; he perceived that his case, his peculiar case, was no exception even in his time. The same kind of degeneracy was silently preparing itself everywhere: ancient Athens was dying out. And Socrates understood that the whole world needed him- his means, his remedy, his special artifice for self-preservation. Everywhere the instincts were in a state of anarchy; everywhere people were within an ace of excess: the monstrum in animo was the general danger. 'The instincts would play the tyrant; we must discover a countertyrant who is stronger than they.' (Friedrich Nietzsche, The Greeks)
Reason was then discovered as a saviour; neither Socrates nor his 'patients' were at liberty to be rational or not, as they pleased; at that time it was de riguer, it had become a last shift. (Friedrich Nietzsche, The Greeks)
To be obliged to fight the instincts- this is the formula of degeneration: as long as life is in the ascending line, happiness is the same as instinct. (Friedrich Nietzsche, The Greeks)
.. tends to the view that virtue is knowledge and vice is ignorance. Socrates takes a particular virtue and tries to find its essence by giving a general definition of it. He produces syllogistic arguments, that is, arguments where two premises when put together necessitate a new proposition, the conclusion. (Urmson, The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy and Philosophers, 1991, p299)
He impresses us, more than any other figure in literature, with the supreme importance of thinking as well as possible and making our actions conform to our thoughts. To this end he preaches knowledge of one's own starting-points, hypothetical entertainment of opinions, exploration of their consequences and connexions, willingness to follow argument wherever it leads, public confession of one's thoughts, invitation to others to criticize, readiness to reconsider, and at the same time firm action in accordance with one's present beliefs. (Urmson, The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy and Philosophers, 1991, p301)
--------------------------------------------------------
Philosophy of Socrates
Socrates on Trial / Last Days of Socrates / Death of SocratesThe Apology by PlatoIn the year 399 B.C.
three Athenian citizens - Meletus, Anytus and Lycon- brought a public action against Socrates as being a menace to society.
The first part of the charge - heresy - was no doubt primarily intended to inflame prejudice. ‘Heresy' seems to be a more appropriate word than ‘impiety’, since the latter hardly suggests an indictable offence. It had already been used with success against Anaxagoras, whose views were apparently imputed to Socrates. It could hardly have been substantiated, as Socrates was punctilious in his religious observances. Still, he may well have pointed out incongruities or unworthy elements in traditional beliefs; and his ‘divine voice’ could have been represented as the profane invention of a dangerous free-thinker.
The second and more serious part of the charge was that Socrates ‘corrupted the minds of the young’. This superficial absurdity had a certain political foundation. His circle had included a number of right-wing aristocrats whose memory, even if they were now dead, were still abhorred. One of his closest pupils, the brilliant Alcibiades, was remembered now as a traitor who had ruined his country. It was possible to argue that it was Socrates who had led these men astray and that he was doing the same to others. Also his tendency to regard popular opinion as ignorant made him suspect in the eyes of the democratic party, of which Anytus, the most influential of his accusers, was a prominent member.
Thus the prosecution relied mainly on the powerful conjunction of religious and political hostility. They also counted upon Socrates’ unpopularity with those whose self-pride he had offended; and they hoped that his uncompromising attitude would alienate the jury, which expected flatter and abject entreaties. The procedure in court. Litigants had to state their own case, without the help of counsel. The prosecution spoke first, and when the defendant had replied the jury (which consisted of 501 representative citizens), without any direction or summing-up from the presiding magistrate, at once gave its verdict by a majority vote. If the votes were equal the case was dismissed; if the plaintiff received less than one-fifth of the total number he was fined. When the verdict was Guilty (as in the present case) there was no penalty fixed by law, the plaintiff proposed one, the defendant another and the jury voted between them. The Apology consists of three separate speeches: (1) Socrates’ defence, (2) his counter-proposal for the penalty and (3) a final address to the Court.

--------------------------------------------------------
Speech 1:

Socrates’ DefenceI do not know what effect my accusers have had upon you, gentlemen, but for my own part I was almost carried away by them; their arguments were so convincing. On the other hand, scarcely a word of what they said was true. But of the many falsehoods told by them, there was one which quite amazed me; I mean when they said that you should be upon your guard and not allow yourselves to be deceived by the force of my eloquence- the implication being that I am a skillful speaker. To say this, when they were certain to be detected as soon as I opened my lips and proved myself to be anything but a great speaker, did indeed appear to me most shameless--unless by the force of eloquence they mean the force of truth; for is such is their meaning, I admit that I am eloquent. But in how different a way from theirs!
My accusers, then, as I maintain, have said little or nothing that is true, but from me you shall hear the whole truth: not, however, delivered after their manner in a set oration duly ornamented with words and phrases. No, by heaven! but I shall use the words and arguments which occur to me at the moment; for I am confident in the justice of my cause (Or, I am certain that I am right in taking this course.): at my time of life I ought not to be appearing before you, O men of Athens, in the character of a juvenile orator--let no one expect it of me. And I must beg of you to grant me a favour: If I defend myself in my accustomed manner, and you hear me using the words which I have been in the habit of using in the agora, at the tables of the money-changers, or anywhere else, I would ask you not to be surprised, and not to interrupt me on this account. For I am more than seventy years of age, and appearing now for the first time in a court of law, I am quite a stranger to the language of the place; and therefore I would have you regard me as if I were really a stranger, whom you would excuse if he spoke in his native tongue, and after the fashion of his country:--Am I making an unfair request of you? Never mind the manner, which may or may not be good; but think only of the truth of my words, and give heed to that: let the speaker speak truly and the judge decide justly.
The Old AccusersThe proper course for me, gentlemen of the jury, is to deal first with the earliest charges that have been falsely brought against me, and with my earliest accusers; and then with the later ones. For I have had many accusers, who have accused me falsely to you during many years; and I am more afraid of them than of Anytus and his associates, who are dangerous, too, in their own way. But far more dangerous are the others, who began when you were children, and took possession of your minds with their falsehoods, telling of one Socrates, a wise man, who speculated about the heaven above, and searched into the earth beneath, and made the worse appear the better cause. It is these people, gentlemen, the disseminators of these rumours, who are my dangerous accusers; because those who hear them suppose that anyone who inquires into such matters must be atheist.
All these people, who have tried to set you against me out of envy and love of slander- and some too merely passing on what they have been told by others- all these people are very difficult to deal with; for I cannot have them up here, and cross-examine them, and therefore I must simply fight with shadows in my own defence, and argue when there is no one who answers. So I ask you to accept my statement that my critics fall into two classes: one recent, the other ancient: and I hope that you will see the propriety of my answering the latter first, for these accusations you heard long before the others, and much oftener.
Very well then; I must begin my defence, gentlemen, and I must try, in the short time that I have, to rid your minds of a false impression which is the work of many years. I should like this to be the result, gentlemen, assuming it to be for your advantage and my own; and I should like to be successful in my defence; but I think that will be difficult, and I am quite aware of the nature of my task. Let us go back to the beginning and consider the accusation which has given rise to the slander of me, and in fact has encouraged Meletus to proof this charge against me. Well, what do the slanderers say? They shall be my prosecutors, and I will sum up their words in an affidavit:
'Socrates is an evil-doer, and a curious person, who searches into things under the earth and in heaven, and he makes the worse appear the better cause; and he teaches the aforesaid doctrines to others.'
Such is the nature of the accusation: it is just what you have yourselves seen in the comedy of Aristophanes (The Clouds.), who has introduced a man whom he calls Socrates, going about and saying that he walks in air, and talking a deal of nonsense concerning matters of which I do not pretend to know either much or little. I mean no disrespect for such knowledge, if anyone really is versed in it- I do not want any more lawsuits brought against me by Meletus- but the simple truth is, O Athenians, that I have nothing to do with physical speculations. Very many of those here present are witnesses to the truth of this, and to them I appeal. Speak then, you who have heard me, and tell your neighbours whether any of you have ever known me hold forth in few words or in many upon such matters...You hear their answer. And from what they say of this part of the charge you will be able to judge of the truth of the rest.The fact is that there is nothing in any of these charges; and if you have heard anyone say that I try to educate people and charge a fee, there is no truth in that either. Although, if a man were really able to instruct mankind, to receive money for giving instruction would, in my opinion, be an honour to him.
I dare say, Athenians, that some one among you will reply, 'Yes, Socrates, but what is the origin of these accusations which are brought against you; there must have been something strange which you have been doing? All these rumours and this talk about you would never have arisen if you hadbeen like other men: tell us, then, what is the cause of them, for we should be sorry to judge hastily of you.' Now I regard this as a fair challenge, and I will endeavour to explain to you the reason why I am called wise and have such an evil fame.
The Oracle of DelphiNow, gentlemen, please do not interrupt me is I seem to be making an extravagant claim; for what I am going to tell you is not my own opinion. I will refer you to a witness who is worthy of credit; that witness shall be the God of Delphi--he will tell you about my wisdom, if I have any, and of what sort it is.You know Chaerephon, of course. He was a friend of mine from boyhood, and also a good democrat who played his part with the rest of you in the recent expulsion and restoration. And you know what he was like; how enthusiastic he was over anything that he had once undertaken. Well one day he went to Delphi and boldly asked the oracle to tell him whether anyone was wiser than myself and the Pythian prophetess answered, that there was no man wiser. Chaerephon is dead himself; but his brother, who is in court, will confirm the truth of what I am saying.
Why do I mention this? Because I am going to explain to you why I have such an evil name. When I heard the answer, I said to myself, What can the god mean? and what is the interpretation of his riddle? for I know that I have no wisdom, small or great. What then can he mean when he says that I am the wisest of men? And yet he is a god, and cannot lie; that would be against his nature. After long consideration, I thought of a method of trying the question. I reflected that if I could only find a man wiser than myself, then I might go to the god with a refutation in my hand. I should say to him, 'Here is a man who is wiser than I am; but you said that I was the wisest.'
Accordingly I went to one who had the reputation of wisdom, and observed him--his name I need not mention; he was a politician whom I selected for examination--and the result was as follows: When I began to talk with him, I could not help thinking that he was not really wise, although he was thought wise by many, and still wiser by himself; and thereupon I tried to explain to him that he thought himself wise, but was not really wise; and the consequence was that he hated me, and his enmity was shared by several who were present and heard me. So I left him, saying to myself, as I went away: Well, although I do not suppose that either of us knows anything really beautiful and good, I am better off than he is,--for he knows nothing, and thinks that he knows; I neither know nor think that I know. In this latter particular, then, I seem to have slightly the advantage of him. Then I went to another who had still higher pretensions to wisdom, and my conclusion was exactly the same. Whereupon I made another enemy of him, and of many others besides him.Then I went to one man after another, being not unconscious of the enmity which I provoked, and I lamented and feared this: but necessity was laid upon me,--the word of God, I thought, ought to be considered first. And I said to myself, Go I must to all who appear to know, and find out the meaning of the oracle. And I swear to you, Athenians, --for I must tell you the truth--the result of my mission was just this: I found that the men most in repute were all but the most foolish; and that others less esteemed were really wiser and better. I will tell you the tale of my wanderings and of the 'Herculean' labours, as I may call them, which I endured only to find at last the oracle irrefutable. After the politicians, I went to the poets; tragic, dithyrambic, and all sorts. And there, I said to myself, you will be instantly detected; now you will find out that you are more ignorant than they are. Accordingly, I took them some of the most elaborate passages in their own writings, and asked what was the meaning of them--thinking that they would teach me something. Will you believe me? I am almost ashamed to confess the truth, but I must say that there is hardly a person present who would not have talked better about their poetry than they did themselves. Then I knew that not by wisdom do poets write poetry, but by a sort of genius and inspiration; they are like diviners or soothsayers who also say many fine things, but do not understand the meaning of them. The poets appeared to me to be much in the same case; and I further observed that upon the strength of their poetry they believed themselves to be the wisest of men in other things in which they were not wise. So I departed, conceiving myself to be superior to them for the same reason that I was superior to the politicians.
At last I went to the artisans. I was conscious that I knew nothing at all, as I may say, and I was sure that they knew many fine things; and here I was not mistaken, for they did know many things of which I was ignorant, and in this they certainly were wiser than I was. But I observed that even the good artisans fell into the same error as the poets;--because they were good workmen they thought that they also knew all sorts of high matters, and this defect in them overshadowed their wisdom; and therefore I asked myself on behalf of the oracle, whether I would like to be as I was, neither having their knowledge nor their ignorance, or like them in both; and I made answer to myself and to the oracle that I was better off as I was.
The effect of these investigations of mine, gentlemen, has been to arouse against me a great deal f hostility, hostility of a particularly bitter and persistent kind, which has resulted in various malicious suggestions, including the description of me as a professor of wisdom. This is due to the fact that whenever I succeed in disproving another person’s claim to wisdom in a given subject, the bystanders assume that I know everything about that subject myself. But the truth is, O men of Athens, is this: that real wisdom is the property of God, and this oracle is his way of telling us that human wisdom has little or no value. It seems to me that he is not referring literally to Socrates, but has merely taken my name as an example, as he would say to us ‘The wisest of you men is he who has realised, like Socrates, that in respect of wisdom he is really worthless.’
This is why I still go about seeking and searching in obedience to the divine command, if I think that anyone is wise, whether citizen or stranger; and when I think that any person is not wise, I try to help the cause of God by proving that he is not. This occupation has kept me too busy to do much either in politics or in my own affairs; in fact, my service to God has reduced me to extreme poverty.
There is another thing:--young men of the richer classes, who have not much to do, come about me of their own accord; they like to hear the pretenders examined, and they often imitate me, and proceed to examine others; there are plenty of persons, as they quickly discover, who think that they know something, but really know little or nothing; and then those who are examined by them instead of being angry with themselves are angry with me: This confounded Socrates, they say; this villainous misleader of youth!--and then if somebody asks them, Why, what evil does he practice or teach? they do not know, and cannot tell; but in order that they may not appear to be at a loss, they repeat the ready-made charges which are used against all philosophers about teaching things up in the clouds and under the earth, and having no gods, and making the worse appear the better cause; for they do not like to confess that their pretence of knowledge has been detected which is the truth; and as they are numerous and ambitious and energetic, and are drawn up in battle array and have persuasive tongues, they have filled your ears with their loud and inveterate calumnies.
There you have the causes which led to the attack upon me by Meletus and Anytus and Lycon,; Meletus, being aggrieved on behalf of the poets; Anytus, on behalf of the craftsmen and politicians; Lycon, on behalf of the orators. So, as I said at the beginning, I should be surprised if I were able, in the short time I have, to rid your minds of a misconception so deeply implanted. And this, O men of Athens, is the truth and the whole truth; I have concealed nothing, I have dissembled nothing. And yet, I am fairly certain that this plain speaking of mine is the cause of my unpopularity; and what is their hatred but a proof that I am speaking the truth?—Hence has arisen the prejudice against me; and this is the reason of it, as you will find out either in this or in any future enquiry.
Corruption of the YouthsI have said enough in my defence against the first class of my accusers; I turn to the second class. They are headed by Meletus, high-principled and patriotic, as he claims to be. Against these, too, I must try to make a defence:--Let their affidavit be read: it contains something of this kind: It says that Socrates is a doer of evil, who corrupts the youth; and who does not believe in the gods of the state, but has other new divinities of his own. Such is the charge; and now let us examine the particular counts. He says that I am a doer of evil, and corrupt the youth; but I say, O men of Athens, that Meletus is a doer of evil, in that he pretends to be in earnest when he is only in jest, and is so eager to bring men to trial from a pretended zeal and interest about matters in which he really never had the smallest interest. And the truth of this I will endeavour to prove to you.
Come hither, Meletus, and let me ask a question of you. You think a great deal about the improvement of youth?
Yes, I do.
Tell the judges, then, who is their improver; for you must know, as you have taken the pains to discover their corrupter, and are citing and accusing me before them. Speak, then, and tell the judges who their improver is. ... Observe, Meletus, that you are silent, and have nothing to say. But is not this rather disgraceful, and a very considerable proof of what I was saying, that you have no interest in the matter? Speak up, friend, and tell us who their improver is.
The laws.
But that, my good sir, is not my meaning. I want to know who the person is, whose first business it is to know the laws.
These gentlemen here, Socrates, the members of the jury.
What, do you mean to say, Meletus, that they are able to instruct and improve youth?
Certainly they are.
What, all of them, or some only and not others?
All of them.
Excellent! A generous supply of benefactors. Well, then, do these spectators who are present in the court have an improving influence?
Yes, they do.
And the senators?
Yes, the senators improve them.
But perhaps the members of the assembly corrupt them?--or do they too improve them?
They improve them.
Then every Athenian improves and elevates them; all with the exception of myself; and I alone am their corrupter? Is that what you affirm?
That is what I stoutly affirm.
This is certainly a most unfortunate quality who have detected in me. But suppose I ask you a question: Take the care of horses; does one man do them harm and all the world good? Or is the truth just the opposite, that the ability to improve them belongs to one person or to very few persons, who are horse-trainers, whereas most people, if they have to do with horses and make use of them, do them harm? Is this not the case, Meletus, both with horses and with all other animals? Most assuredly it is; whether you and Anytus deny it or not.Happy indeed would be the condition of youth if they had one corrupter only, and all the rest of the world were their improvers. But you, Meletus, have sufficiently shown that you never bothered your head about the young: your carelessness is seen in your not caring about the very things which you bring against me.
And now, Meletus, I will ask you another question--by Zeus I will: Which is better, to live among bad citizens, or among good ones? Answer, friend, I say; the question is one which may be easily answered. Do not the good do their neighbours good, and the bad do them evil?
Certainly.
And is there anyone who would rather be harmed than benefited by those who live with him? Answer, my good friend, the law requires you to answer--does any one like to be harmed?
Certainly not.
And when you accuse me of corrupting and deteriorating the youth, do you allege that I corrupt them intentionally or unintentionally?
Intentionally, I say.
Why, Meletus, are you at your age so much wiser than I at mine? You have discovered that the good do their neighbours good, and the evil do them evil; am I so hopelessly ignorant as not to even realise that by spoiling the character of one of my companions I shall run the risk of getting some harm from him? Because nothing else would make me commit this grave offence intentionally. No I do not believe it, and I do not suppose that anyone else does as well.
But either I do not corrupt them, or I corrupt them unintentionally; and on either view of the case your accusation is false. If I unintentionally have a bad influence, the correct procedure in cases of such involuntary misdemeanours is not the summon the culprit before this court, but to take him aside privately for instruction and reproof; because obviously if my eyes are opened, I shall stop doing what I do not intend to do. But you deliberately avoided my company in the past and refused to enlighten me, and now you bring me before this court, which is a place appointed to those who need punishment, not for those who need enlightenment.
ImpietyIt will be very clear to you, Athenians, as I was saying, that Meletus has no care at all, great or small, about the matter. But still I should like to know, Meletus, in what I am affirmed to corrupt the young. I suppose you mean, as I infer from your indictment, that I teach them not to acknowledge the gods which the state acknowledges, but some other new divinities or spiritual agencies in their stead. These are the lessons by which I corrupt the youth, as you say.
Yes, that I say emphatically.
Then, by the gods, Meletus, of whom we are speaking, tell me and the court, in somewhat plainer terms, what you mean! for I do not as yet understand whether you affirm that I teach other men to acknowledge some gods, and therefore that I do believe in gods, and am not an entire atheist--this you do not lay to my charge,--but only you say that they are not the same gods which the city recognizes--the charge is that they are different gods. Or, do you mean that I am an atheist simply, and a teacher of atheism?
I mean the latter--that you are a complete atheist.
What an extraordinary statement! Why do you think so, Meletus? Do you mean that I do not believe in the godhead of the sun or moon, like other men?
I assure you, judges, that he does not: for he says that the sun is stone, and the moon earth.
Friend Meletus, you think that you are accusing Anaxagoras: and you have but a bad opinion of the judges, if you fancy them illiterate to such a degree as not to know that these doctrines are found in the books of Anaxagoras the Clazomenian.And do you seriously suggest that it is from me that the young get these ideas, when they can buy them on occasion in the market-place for a drachma at most, and so have the laugh on Socrates if he claims them for his own, to say nothing of their being so silly? Tell me honestly, Meletus, is that your opinion of me? do I believe in no god?
I swear by Zeus that you believe absolutely in none at all.
You are not all convincing, Meletus; not even to yourself, I suspect. It certainly seems to me that you are contradicting yourself in this indictment, which might as well run ‘Socrates is guilty of not believing in the gods, and yet of believing in them. And this is pure flippancy. I should like you, O men of Athens, to join me in examining what I conceive to be his inconsistency; and do you, Meletus, answer. And I must remind the audience of my request that they would not make a disturbance if I speak in my accustomed manner:
Is there anyone in the world, Meletus, who believes in the existence of human things, and not of human beings?...I wish, men of Athens, that he would answer, and not be always trying to get up an interruption. Did ever any man believe in horsemanship, and not in horses? or in flute-playing, and not in flute-players? No, my friend; I will answer to you and to the court, as you refuse to answer for yourself. There is no man who ever did. But now please to answer the next question: Can a man believe in supernatural activities and not in supernatural beings?
No.
How good of you to give a bare answer under compulsion of the court! Well, do you assert that I believe and teach others to believe in supernatural activities? It is a fact that I believe in them according to your statement; as you solemnly swore as much in your affidavit. But if I believe in supernatural activities, it follows inevitably that I also believe in supernatural beings. Is that not so? It is; I assume your assent, since you do not answer. Now do we hold that supernatural beings are either gods or the children of gods? Do you agree or not?
Certainly.
But this is what I call the facetious riddle invented by you: first you say that I do not believe in gods, and then again that I do believe in gods; that is, if I believe in demigods. For if the demigods are the illegitimate sons of gods, whether by the nymphs or by any other mothers, of whom they are said to be the sons—who would ever believe of in the children of gods and not in the gods themselves? It would be as ridiculous as to believe in the young of horses or donkeys and not in horses and donkeys themselves. No, Meletus; there is no avoiding the conclusion that you brought this charge against me as a test of my wisdom, or else in despair of finding a genuine offence of which to accuse me of. As for your prospect of convincing any living person with even a smattering of intelligence that belief in supernatural and divine activities does not imply belief in supernatural and divine beings, and vice versa, it is outside all the bounds of possibility. Gentlemen, I do not feel that it requires much defence to clear myself of Meletus’ accusations; what I have said is already enough.But you know very well the truth of what I said in the earlier part of my speech, that I have incurred a great deal of bitter hostility; and that this is what will bring about my destruction if anything does; not Meletus, nor Anytus, but the slander and jealousy of the world, which has been the death of many other innocent men, and will probably be the death of many more; there is no danger of me being the last of them.
Socrates MissionPerhaps someone will say: And are you not ashamed, Socrates, of a course of life which puts you in danger of the death penalty? To him I may fairly answer: You are mistaken, my friend, if you think that a man who is worth for anything ought to spend his time weighing up the prospects of life and death. He has only one thing to consider in performing any action; that is, whether he is acting rightly or wrongly, like a good man or a bad one.For let me tell you gentlemen, that to be afraid of death is only another form of thinking that one is wise when one is not; it is to think that one knows what one does not know. No one knows with regards to death, which men in their fear apprehend to be the greatest evil, may not be the greatest good. Is not this ignorance of a disgraceful sort, the ignorance which is the conceit that a man knows what he does not know? And in this respect only I believe myself to differ from men in general, and may perhaps claim to be wiser than they are:--that not possessing any real knowledge of what comes after death, I am also conscious that I do not possess it. But I do know that to do wrong and disobey my superior, whether God or man, is wicked and dishonourable, and so I shall never feel more fear or aversion for something which, for all I know, may really be a blessing, than for those evils which I know to be evils.
Suppose gentlemen, you said to me, ‘Socrates, you shall be acquitted on this occasion, but only on one condition. That you give up spending your time on this quest and stop philosophising. If we catch you going on in the same way, you shall be put to death. Well, supposing, as I said, that you should offer to acquit me on these terms, I should reply: Men of Athens, I am your very grateful and devoted servant, but I owe a greater obedience to God than to you, and so long as I have life and strength I shall never cease from the practice and teaching of philosophy, exhorting you and elucidating the truth for everyone that I meet. I shall go on saying, in my usual way, “My friend, you are an Athenian and belong to a city which is the greatest and famous in the world for its wisdom and strength. Are you not ashamed that you give your attention to acquiring as much money as possible, and similarly with honour and reputation, and care so little about wisdom and truth and the greatest improvement of the soul, which you never regard or heed at all?
And if any of you disputes this and professes to care about these things, I shall not at once let him go or leave him; no, I shall question him and examine him and test him; and if it appears that in spite of his profession he has made no real progress towards goodness, I shall reprove him for neglecting what is of supreme importance, and giving his attention to trivialities. And I shall repeat the same words to every one whom I meet, young and old, citizen and alien, but especially to my fellow citizens, inasmuch as you are closer to me in kinship. For know that this is the command of God; and I believe that no greater good has ever happened in the state than my service to the God. For I do nothing but go about persuading you all, old and young alike, not to take thought for your persons or your properties, but for the highest welfare of your souls, proclaiming as I go, ‘Wealth does not bring goodness, but goodness brings wealth and every other blessing, both to the individual and to the State.’ This is my teaching, and if this is the doctrine which corrupts the youth,I am a mischievous person. But if any one says that this is not my teaching, he is speaking an untruth. And so, men of Athens, I say to you, You can please yourselves whether you listen to my accusers and either you acquit me or not; but whichever you do, understand that I shall never alter my ways, not even if I have to die a hundred deaths.
Men of Athens, do not interrupt, but hear me; there was an understanding between us that you should hear me to the end: I have something more to say, at which you may be inclined to cry out; but I believe that to hear me will be good for you, and therefore I beg that you will not cry out. I would have you know, that if you kill such an one as I am, you will injure yourselves more than you will injure me. Neither Meletus nor Anytus can do me any harm at all; they would not have the power, because I do not believe that the law of God permits a better man to be harmed by a worse. No doubt my accuser may put me to death or have me banished or deprived of civil rights; and he may imagine, and others may imagine, that he is inflicting a great injury upon me: I do not agree. I believe that it is far worse to do what he is doing now, trying to put an innocent man to death. For this reason, gentlemen, so far from pleading on my own behalf, as might be supposed, I am really pleading on yours, to save you from misusing the gift of God by condemning me.
The gadflyFor if you kill me you will not easily find a successor to me, who, if I may use such a ludicrous figure of speech, am a sort of gadfly, given to the state by God; and the state is a great and noble steed who is tardy in his motions owing to his very size, and requires to be stirred into life. I am that gadfly which God has attached to the state, and all day long and in all places am always fastening upon you, arousing and persuading and reproaching you. You will not easily find another like me, and therefore I would advise you to spare me. I dare say that you may feel out of temper (like a person who is suddenly awakened from sleep), and you think that you might easily strike me dead as Anytus advises, and then you would sleep on for the remainder of your lives, unless God in his care of you sent you another gadfly. When I say that I am given to you by God, the proof of my mission is this: Does it seem natural that I should not have neglected all my own affairs and endured the humiliation of allowing my family to be neglected all these years, while I busied myself all the time on your behalf, going like a father or elder brother to see each one of you privately, and urging you to set your thoughts on goodness? If I had gained anything, or if my exhortations had been paid, there would have been some sense in my doing so; but now, as you will perceive, not even the impudence of my accusers dares to say that I have ever exacted or sought pay of any one; of that they have no witness. And I have a sufficient witness to the truth of what I say--my poverty.
Socrates’ CourageIt may seem curious that I should go round giving advice like this and busying myself with the concerns of others, and yet never venture publicly to address you as a whole and advise on matter of the state. This reason for this is what you have often heard me say before on many other occasions: that I am subject to a divine or supernatural experience, the divinity which Meletus ridicules in his indictment. This sign, which is a kind of voice, first began to come to me when I was a child; it always dissuades me from what I am proposing to do, and never urges me on. This is what deters me from being a politician. And rightly, as I think. For I am certain, O men of Athens, that if I had engaged in politics, I should have perished long ago, and done no good either to you or to myself. Please do not be offended if I tell you the truth. No man on earth who conscientiously opposes either you or any other organised democracy, and flatly prevents a great many wrongs and illegalities from taking place in the state to which he belongs, can possibly escape with his life. The true champion of justice, if he intends to survive even for a short time, must necessarily confine himself to private life and leave politics alone.
Now do you really imagine that I could have survived all these years, if I had moved in the sphere of public life, and conducting myself in that sphere like an honourable man, had always upheld the cause of right, and conscientiously set this end above all other things? Not by a long way, men of Athens, neither I nor any other man. You will find that throughout my life I have been consistent in all my actions, public as well as private, and never have I countenanced any action that was incompatible with justice on the part of any person, including those whom some people maliciously call my pupils. I have never been any man’s teacher; but if any one likes to come and hear me while I am pursuing my mission, whether he be young or old, he is not excluded. Nor do I converse only with those who pay; but any one, whether he be rich or poor, may ask and answer me and listen to my words. If any given one of these people becomes a good citizen or a bad one, I cannot be fairly held responsible, for I never taught or professed to teach him anything. And if any one says that he has ever learned or heard anything from me in private which all the world has not heard, you may be quite sure he is not telling the truth.
Socrates’ FollowersBut how is it that some people enjoy spending a great deal of time in my company? You have heard the reason, gentlemen; I told you quite frankly. It is because they enjoy hearing me examine those who think that they are wise when they are not; an experience which has its amusing side. This duty I have accepted, as I said, in obedience to God’s commands given in oracles, visions, and in every way in which the will of divine power was ever intimated to any one. This is a true statement, gentlemen, and easy to verify. If I am or have been corrupting the youth, those of them who are now grown up and have become sensible that I gave them bad advice in the days of their youth should come forward as accusers, and take their revenge; or if they do not like to come themselves, some of their relatives, fathers, brothers, or other kinsmen, should say what evil their families have suffered at my hands. Now is their time. Many of them I see in the court. There is Crito, who is my contemporary and my neighbour, and there is Critobulus his son, whom I also see. Then again there is Lysanias of Sphettus, who is the father of Aeschines--he is present; and also there is Antiphon of Cephisus, who is the father of Epigenes; and there are the brothers of several who have associated with me. There is Nicostratus the son of Theosdotides, and the brother of Theodotus (now Theodotus himself is dead, and therefore he, at any rate, will not seek to stop him); and there is Paralus the son of Demodocus, who had a brother Theages; and Adeimantus the son of Ariston, whose brother Plato is present; and Aeantodorus, who is the brother of Apollodorus, whom I also see. I might mention a great many others, some of whom Meletus should have produced as witnesses in the course of his speech; and let him still produce them, if he has forgotten--I will make way for him. Let him state whether he has any such evidence to offer. On the contrary, O Athenians, you will find that they are all prepared to help me- the corrupter and evil genius of their nearest and dearest relatives, as Meletus and Anytus call me. The actual victims of my corrupting influence might perhaps be excused for helping mel but as for the uncorrupted, their relations of mature age, what other reason can they have for helping me except the right and proper one, that they know Meletus is lying and I am telling the truth?
Socrates’ FamilyWell, Athenians, this is all the defence which I have to offer. Yet a word more. Perhaps there may be some one who is offended at me, when he calls to mind how he himself on a similar, or even a less serious occasion, prayed and entreated the judges with many tears, and how he produced his children in court, which was a moving spectacle, together with a host of relations and friends; whereas I, who am probably in danger of my life, will do none of these things. The contrast may occur to his mind, and he may be set against me, and vote in anger because he is displeased at me on this account. Now if there be such a person among you,--mind, I do not say that there is,--to him I may fairly reply: My friend, I am a man, and like other men, a creature of flesh and blood, and not 'of wood or stone,' as Homer says; and I have a family, yes, and sons too, gentlemen, three in number, one almost a man, and two others who are still young; and yet I will not bring any of them hither in order to petition you for an acquittal.
I do not think that it is right for a man to appeal to the jury or to get himself acquitted by doing so; he ought to inform them of the facts and convince them by argument. The jury does not sit to dispence justice as a favour, but to decide where justice lies; and he has sworn that he will judge according to the laws, and not according to his own good pleasure. It follows that we must not develop in you, nor you allow to grow in yourselves, the habit of perjury; that would be sinful to us both. Therefore you must not expect me, gentlemen, to behave towards you in a way which I consider neither reputable nor moral nor consistent with my religious duty; and above all you must not expect it when I am being tried for impiety on the indictment of Meletus. For if, O men of Athens, I tried to persuade you and prevail upon you by my entreaties to go against your solemn oath, I should be teaching you contempt for religion; and by my very defence I should be accusing myself of having no religious belief. But that is far from the truth. For I do believe that there are gods, and in a sense higher than that in which any of my accusers believe in them; and I leave it to you and to God to judge me as it shall be best for me and for yourselves. And to you and to God I commit my cause, to be determined by you as is best for you and me.
--------------------------------------------------
Speech 2:

Sentencing.
What Socrates’ Really DeservesThere are many reasons why I am not distressed, O men of Athens, at the vote of condemnation. I expected it, and am only surprised that the votes are so nearly equal. I should never of believed that it would be such a close thing; but now it seems that if a mere thirty votes had gone the other way, I should have been acquitted.
However, we must fact the fact that he demands the death penalty. Very good. What alternative penalty shall I propose to you, O men of Athens? Obviously it must be adequate. Well, what penalty do I deserve to pay or suffer, in view of what I have done?I have never lived an ordinary quiet life. I did not care for the things that most people care about: making money, having a comfortable home, high military or civil rank, and all the other activities- political appointments, secret societies, party organisations- which go on in our city; I thought that I was really too strict in my principles to survive if I went in for this sort of thing. So instead of taking a course which would have done no good either to you or to me, I set myself to do you individually in private what I hold to be the greatest possible service: I sought to persuade every man among you that he must look to himself, and seek virtue and wisdom before he looks to his private interests, and look to the state before he looks to the interests of the state; and that this should be the order which he observes in all his actions. What do I deserve for behaving in this way? Some reward, gentlemen, if I am bound to suggest what I really deserve; and what is more, a reward which would be appropriate for myself. What is appropriate for a poor man who is a public benefactor, and who requires leisure for giving you moral encouragement? Nothing could be more appropriate for such a person than free maintenance at the State’s expense. He deserves it much more than any victor in the races at Olympia, whether he wins with a single horse or a pair or a team of four. These people give you the appearance of happiness, but I give you the reality; they do not need maintenance, but I do. So if I am to suggest an appropriate penalty, I suggest free maintenance by the State.
I am convinced that I never wrong anyone intentionally, although I cannot convince you of this, because we have had so little time for discussion. If there were a law at Athens, as there is in other cities, that a capital cause should not be decided in one day, then I believe that I should have convinced you. But I cannot in a moment refute great slanders; and, as I am convinced that I never wronged another, I can hardly be expected to wrong myself by asserting that I deserve something bad, or by proposing a corresponding penalty. Why should I? For fear of suffering this penalty of death which Meletus proposes? When I do not know whether death is a good or an evil, why should I propose a penalty which would certainly be an evil? Imprisonment? And why should I live in prison, in subjection to the periodically appointed officers of the law? Or shall the penalty be a fine, and imprisonment until the fine is paid? In my case the effect would be just the same, because I have no money to pay a fine. Or shall I suggest exile? You would be very likely to accept the suggestion. I should have to be desperately in love with life to do that, gentlemen. I am not so blind that I cannot see that you, my fellow citizens, have come to the end of your patience with my discussions and conversations; you have found them too irksome and irritating, and now you are trying to get rid of them. Will any other people find them easy to put up with? That is most unlikely, men of Athens. A fine life should I lead, at my age, wandering from city to city, ever changing my place of exile, and always being driven out! For I am quite sure that wherever I go, there, as here, the young men will flock to me; and if I drive them away, their elders will drive me out at their request; while if I do not, the fathers and other relatives will drive me out of their own accord for the sake of the young.
What Socrates RequestsPerhaps someone may say ‘But surely, Socrates, after you have left us you can spend the rest of your life in quietly minding you own business.’ This is the hardest thing of all to make some of you understand. If I say that this would be disobedience to God, and therefore that I cannot hold my tongue, you will not believe that I am serious. If on the other hand I tell you that to let no day pass without discussing goodness and all the other subjects about which you hear me examining both myself and others is really the very best thing that a man can do, and that the unexamined life is not worth living, you will be even less inclined to believe me. Nevertheless that is how it is, gentlemen, as I maintain; though it is not easy to convince you of it. Also, I have never been accustomed to think that I deserve to suffer any harm. If I had money I might have suggested a fine that I could afford, because that would not have done me any harm. But I cannot, because I have none; unless of course you like to fix the penalty at what I could pay. Well, perhaps I could afford a hundred drachmae. I suggest a fine of that amount. One moment gentlemen, Plato, Crito, Critobulus, and Apollodorus, my friends here, want me to propose three thousand drachmae on their security. Very well, I agree to this sum, and you can rely upon these gentlemen for its payment.
------------------------------------------------------
Speech 3:

After The Trial.
To the Jury who condemned himWell, gentlemen, for the sake of a very small gain in time you are going to earn the reputation- and the blame from those who wish to disparage our city- of having put Socrates to death, ‘a wise man’- for they will call me wise, even though I am not wise, these people who want to find fault with you. If you had waited a little while, your desire would have been fulfilled in the course of nature. For I am far advanced in years, as you may perceive, and not far from death. I am speaking now not to all of you, but only to those who have condemned me to death.
No doubt you think gentlemen, that I have been condemned for lack of the arguments which I could have used if I had thought it right to leave nothing unsaid or undone to secure my acquittal. But that is very far from the truth. It is not lack of arguments that has caused my condemnation; but I had not the boldness or impudence or inclination to address you as you would have liked me to do, weeping and wailing and lamenting, and saying and doing many things which you have been accustomed to hear from others, and which, as I maintain, are unworthy of me. I thought at the time that I ought not to do anything common or mean when in danger: nor do I now repent of the style of my defence; I would rather die having spoken after my manner, than speak in your manner and live.
In a court of law, just as in warfare, neither I nor any other ought to use his wits to escape death by any means. In battle it is obvious that if a man will throw away his arms, and fall on his knees before his pursuers, he may escape death; and in other dangers there are other ways of escaping death, if a man is willing to say and do anything. But I suggest, gentlemen, that the difficulty is not so much to escape death; the real difficulty is to escape from doing wrong, which is far more fleet of foot. In this present instance I, the slow old man, have been overtaken by the slower of the two, but my accusers, who are clever and quick, have been overtaken by the faster runner, who is unrighteousness. When I leave this court I shall go away condemned by you to death, but they will go away convicted by Truth herself of depravity and wickedness. And they accept their sentence even as I accept mine. No doubt it was bound to be so, and I think that the result is fair enough.
And now, O men who have condemned me, I would fain prophesy to you; for I am about to die, and in the hour of death men are gifted with prophetic power. And I prophesy to you, my executioners, that as soon as I am dead, vengeance shall fall upon you with a punishment far more painful than your killing of me. You have brought about my death because you wanted to escape the accuser, and not to give an account of your lives. But that will not be as you suppose: far otherwise. For I say that there will be more accusers of you than there are now; accusers whom hitherto I have restrained: and as they are younger they will be harsher to you, and will cause you more annoyance. If you think that by killing men you can prevent some one from censuring your evil lives, you are mistaken. This a way of escape is neither possible nor honourable; the easiest and the noblest way is not to stop the mouths of others, but by improving yourselves. This is the last message to you who voted for my condemnation.
To the jury who acquitted himFriends, who voted for my acquittal, I should very much like to say a few words to reconcile you to the result, while the magistrates are busy, and before I go to the place at which I must die. Stay then a little, for we may as well talk with one another while there is time. You are my friends, and I should like to show you the meaning of this event which has happened to me. O my judges--for you I may truly call judges--I should like to tell you of a wonderful circumstance. Hitherto the divine faculty of which the internal oracle is the source has constantly been in the habit of opposing me even about trifles, if I was going to make a slip or error in any matter; and now as you see there has come upon me that which may be thought, and is generally believed to be, the last and worst evil. But the oracle made no sign of opposition, either when I was leaving my house in the morning, or when I was on my way to the court, or while I was speaking, at anything which I was going to say; and yet I have often been stopped in the middle of a speech, but now in nothing I either said or did touching the matter in hand has the oracle opposed me. What do I take to be the explanation of this silence? I will tell you. It is an intimation that what has happened to me is a good, and that those of us who think that death is an evil are in error. For the customary sign would surely have opposed me had I been going to evil and not to good.We should reflect that there is much reason to hope for a good result on other grounds as well. Death is one of two things. Either death is annihilation, and the dead have no consciousness of anything; or, as we are told, it is really a change: a migration of the soul from this place to another. Now if there is no consciousness, but only a dreamless sleep, death must be a marvellous gain. If, on the other hand, death is a removal from here to some other place, and if what we are told is true, that all the dead are there, what greater blessing could there be than this, gentlemen? Put it this way: how much would one of you give to converse with Orpheus, Musaeus, Hesiod and Homer? Nay, if this be true, let me die again and again. It would be a specially interesting experience for me to join them there, to meet Palamedes, and Ajax the son of Telamon, and any other ancient hero who met their death through an unfair trial, and to compare my fortunes with theirs. Above all, I shall then be able to continue my search into true and false knowledge; as in this world, so also in the next; and I shall find out who is wise, and who pretends to be wise, and is not. What infinite delight would there be in conversing with them and asking them questions! In another world they do not put a man to death for asking questions: assuredly not. For besides being happier than we are, they will be immortal, if what is said is true.
You too, gentlemen of the jury, must look forward to death with confidence, and fix your minds on this one belief, which is certain: that nothing can harm a good man either in life or after death, and his fortunes are not a matter of indifference to the gods. This present experience of mine has not come about mechanically; I am quite clear that the time had come when it was better for me to die and be released from my distractions. That is why my sign never turned me back. For my own part I bear no grudge at all against those who condemned and accused me, although it was not with this kind intention that they did so, but because they thought that they were hurting me; and that is culpable of them. However I ask them to grant me one favour. When my sons grow up, gentlemen, if you think that they are putting money or anything else before goodness, take your revenge by plaguing them as I plagued you; and if they fancy themselves for no reason, you must scold them just as I scolded you, for neglecting the important things and thinking they are good for something when they are good for nothing. If you do this, I shall have had justice at your hands, both I myself and my children. Now it is time that we were going, I to die and you to live; but which of us has the happier prospect is unknown to anyone but God.
------------------------------------------------------

Socrates Quotes

The philosopher Socrates never wrote anything down (that we have knowledge of). We learn of the philosophy (and character) of Socrates through his friend Plato who wrote many philosophical dialogues.
Well, my art of midwifery is in most respects like theirs; but differs, in that I attend men and not women; and look after their souls when they are in labour, and not after their bodies: and the triumph of my art is in thoroughly examining whether the thought which the mind of the young man brings forth is a false idol or a noble and true birth. And like the mid-wives, I am barren, and the reproach which is often made against me, that I ask questions of others and have not the wit to answer them myself, is very just-the reason is, that the god compels-me to be a midwife, but does not allow me to bring forth. And therefore I am not myself at all wise, nor have I anything to show which is the invention or birth of my own soul, but those who converse with me profit. (Socrates - as written by Plato in Theaetetus)
I do not know what effect my accusers have had upon you, gentlemen, but for my own part I was almost carried away by them; their arguments were so convincing. On the other hand, scarcely a word of what they said was true. But of the many falsehoods told by them, there was one which quite amazed me; I mean when they said that you should be upon your guard and not allow yourselves to be deceived by the force of my eloquence- the implication being that I am a skillful speaker. To say this, when they were certain to be detected as soon as I opened my lips and proved myself to be anything but a great speaker, did indeed appear to me most shameless--unless by the force of eloquence they mean the force of truth; for is such is their meaning, I admit that I am eloquent. But in how different a way from theirs! (Socrates, as written by Plato in The Apology)
.. young men of the richer classes, who have not much to do, come about me of their own accord; they like to hear the pretenders examined, and they often imitate me, and proceed to examine others; there are plenty of persons, as they quickly discover, who think that they know something, but really know little or nothing; and then those who are examined by them instead of being angry with themselves are angry with me: This confounded Socrates, they say; this villainous misleader of youth! and then if somebody asks them, Why, what evil does he practice or teach? they do not know, and cannot tell; but in order that they may not appear to be at a loss, they repeat the ready-made charges which are used against all philosophers about teaching things up in the clouds and under the earth, and having no gods, and making the worse appear the better cause; for they do not like to confess that their pretence of knowledge has been detected which is the truth; and as they are numerous and ambitious and energetic, and are drawn up in battle array and have persuasive tongues, they have filled your ears with their loud and inveterate calumnies. (Socrates, as written by Plato in The Apology)
Happy indeed would be the condition of youth if they had one corrupter only, and all the rest of the world were their improvers. (Socrates, as written by Plato in The Apology)
Perhaps someone will say: And are you not ashamed, Socrates, of a course of life which puts you in danger of the death penalty? To him I may fairly answer: You are mistaken, my friend, if you think that a man who is worth for anything ought to spend his time weighing up the prospects of life and death. He has only one thing to consider in performing any action; that is, whether he is acting rightly or wrongly, like a good man or a bad one. (Socrates, as written by Plato in The Apology)
.. so long as I have life and strength I shall never cease from the practice and teaching of philosophy, exhorting you and elucidating the truth for everyone that I meet. I shall go on saying, in my usual way, “My friend, you are an Athenian and belong to a city which is the greatest and famous in the world for its wisdom and strength. Are you not ashamed that you give your attention to acquiring as much money as possible, and similarly with honour and reputation, and care so little about wisdom and truth and the greatest improvement of the soul, which you never regard or heed at all?" .. For I do nothing but go about persuading you all, old and young alike, not to take thought for your persons or your properties, but for the highest welfare of your souls, proclaiming as I go, ‘Wealth does not bring goodness, but goodness brings wealth and every other blessing, both to the individual and to the State.’ This is my teaching, and if this is the doctrine which corrupts the youth, I am a mischievous person. But if any one says that this is not my teaching, he is speaking an untruth. (Socrates, as written by Plato in The Apology)
I sought to persuade every man among you that he must look to himself, and seek virtue and wisdom before he looks to his private interests, and look to the state before he looks to the interests of the state; and that this should be the order which he observes in all his actions. (Socrates, as written by Plato in The Apology)
It is not lack of arguments that has caused my condemnation; but I had not the boldness or impudence or inclination to address you as you would have liked me to do, weeping and wailing and lamenting, and saying and doing many things which you have been accustomed to hear from others, and which, as I maintain, are unworthy of me. I thought at the time that I ought not to do anything common or mean when in danger: nor do I now repent of the style of my defence; I would rather die having spoken after my manner, than speak in your manner and live. (Socrates, as written by Plato in The Apology)
Socrates (469 - 399 B.C.)

----------------------------------------------------

Thales:

All is Water, All is One(1st Milesian ~ 585 BC)

Greek philosophy seems to begin with a preposterous fancy, with the proposition that water is the origin and mother-womb of all things. Is it really necessary to stop there and become serious? Yes, and for three reasons: firstly, because the preposition does enunciate something about the origin of things; secondly, because it does so without figure and fable; thirdly and lastly, because it contained, although only in the chrysalis state, the idea :everything is one. ..That which drove him (Thales) to this generalization was a metaphysical dogma, which had its origin in a mystic intuition and which together with the ever renewed endeavors to express it better, we find in all philosophies- the proposition: everything is one! (Nietzsche, 1890)
The philosopher tries to make the total-chord of the universe re-echo within himself and then to project it into ideas outside himself: whilst he is contemplative like the creating artist, sympathetic like the religionist, looking out for ends and causalities like the scientific man, whilst he feels himself swell up to the macrocosm, he still retains the circumspection to contemplate himself coldly as the reflex of the world (Nietzsche, 1890)
... it is true, on the one hand the only means to communicate what has been seen, but on the other hand it is a paltry means, and at the bottom a metaphorical, absolutely inexact translation into a different sphere and language. Thus Thales saw the Unity of the 'Existent,' and when he wanted to communicate this idea he talked of water. (Nietzsche, 1890, The Greeks)
Thales was a native of Miletus, in Asia Minor. He is said to have travelled in Egypt, and to have then brought to the Greeks the science of Geometry. .. Thales seemed to have discovered how to calculate the distance of a ship at sea from observations taken at two points on land, and how to estimate the height of a pyramid from the length of its shadow. According to Aristotle, Thales thought that water is the original substance, out of which all others are formed; and he maintained that the earth rests on water. Aristotle also says of him that he said the magnet has a soul in it, because it moves the iron and further, that all things are full of gods. (Russell, The Milesian School, 1946)
---------------------------------------------------
Anaximenes

All is One & Aether (600- 540 B.C.)

Anaximander held that all things come from a single primal substance, but it is not water, as Thales held, or any other of the substances that we know. It is infinite, eternal and ageless, and 'it encompassed all the worlds'- for he thought our world was only one of many. (Bertrand Russell, The History of Western Philosophy)
Into that from which things take their rise they pass away once more, as is ordained, for they make reparition and satisfaction to one another for their injustice according to the ordering of time. (Anaximander) (Bertrand Russell, The History of Western Philosophy)
The worlds were not created, as in Jewish or Christian theology, but evolved. There was evolution also in the animal kingdom. .. he thought that the earth was shaped like a round table, and that air encompasses everything: ' Just as our soul, being air, holds us together, so do breath and air encompass the whole world.' (Anaximander) It seems that the world breathes. (Bertrand Russell, The History of Western Philosophy)
Anaximander accepted the idea of the single originative material, divine and all-encircling, but called it 'the Indefinite'- implying that it was both boundless in extent and not identical with any nameable constituent of our world. At this Anaximander stayed; that is, he remained within the deep shadows which like gigantic specters were lying on the mountain range of such a world-perception. The more one wanted to approach the problem of solving how out of the Indefinite the Definite, out of the Eternal the Temporal, out of the Just the Unjust could by succession ever originate, the darker the night became. (Nietzsche, 1890, The Greeks)
Everything that has once come into existence also perishes, whether we think of human life or of water or of heat and cold; everywhere where definite qualities are to be noticed, we are allowed to prophesy the extinction of these qualities- according to the all-embracing proof of experience. Thus a being that possesses definite qualities and consists of them can never be the origin and principle of things; the veritable ens, the 'Existent,' Anaximander concluded, cannot posses any definite qualities, otherwise, like all other things, it would necessarily have originated and perished. (Nietzsche, 1890, The Greeks)
The immortality and eternity of the Primordial-being lies not in an infiniteness and inexhaustibility- as usually the expounders of Anaximander presuppose- but in this, that it lacks the definite qualities which lead to destruction, for which reason it bears also its name: The Indefinite. The thus labeled Primordial-being is superior to all Becoming and for this very reason it guarantees the eternity and unimpeded course of Becoming. This last unity is that Indefinite, the mother-womb of all things, can, it is true, be designated only negatively by man, as something to which no predicate out of the existing world of Becoming can be allotted, and might be considered a peer to the Kantian 'Thing-in-itself'. (Nietzsche, 1890, The Greeks)
Thales shows the need of simplifying the empire of plurality, and of reducing it to a mere expansion or disguise of the one single existing quality, water. Anaximander goes beyond him with two steps. Firstly he puts the question to himself: how, if there exists an eternal Unity at all, is that Plurality possible? And he takes the answer out of the contradictory, self-devouring, and denying character of this Plurality. The existence of this Plurality becomes a moral phenomenon to him; it is not justified, it expiates itself continually through destruction. But then the question occurs to him: yet why has not everything that has become perished long ago, since, indeed, quite an eternity of time has already gone by? Whence the ceaseless current of the River of Becoming? (Nietzsche, 1890, The Greeks)
In the next generation (3rd Milesian) Anaximenes reverted to the concept of a specific cosmogonical substance: air/mist (aer in Greek) or breath. .. succeeded in making material monism logically feasible for the first time..... Xenophanes put in their place a single, motionless god who 'shakes all things by the thought of his mind'. (The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy and Philosophers, 1991)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Heraclitus of Ephesus

(~ 500 B.C.)

All is Becoming, All is OppositesFurther modifications of the Milesian approach were made by Heraclitus .. stating that the unity of things was to be found in their essential structure or arrangement rather than their material. This common structure or Logos, which was not superficially apparent, was chiefly embodied in a single kinetic material, fire. It was responsible both for the regularity of natural changes and for the essential connexion of opposites - Heraclitus adopted this traditional analysis of differentiation - through balanced interaction. The regularity underlying change was for Heraclitus the significant thing ...
The Spherical In and Out Waves explains this change and opposites.
All is Becoming Firstly, Heraclitus denied the duality of two quite diverse worlds, into the assumption of which Anaximander had been pushed; he no longer distinguished a physical world from a metaphysical, a realm of definite qualities from a realm of indefinable indefiniteness. For this one world which was left to him - shielded all round by eternal, unwritten laws, floating up and down in the brazen beat of rhythm - shows nowhere persistence, indestructibility, a bulwark in the stream. Louder than Anaximander, Heraclitus exclaimed: 'I see nothing but Becoming. Be not deceived! It is the fault of your limited outlook and not the fault of the essence of things if you believe that you see firm land anywhere in the ocean of Becoming and Passing. You need names for things, just as if they had a rigid permanence, but the very river in which you bathe a second time is no longer the same one which you entered before.
This is also true, there are no continuously existing material particles, rather, the particle effect of Matter is continually appearing and disappearing as each successive In-Wave flows In and Out through its Wave-Center. Further, as Matter exists as spherical Wave Motions of Space, matter is in perpetual motion / activity / change.
Time & Becoming(On How each Spherical In-Wave (future) flows through its Wave-Center (present) and Becomes the Out-Wave (Past) (From Friedrich Nietzsche, 1890, The Greeks)Just as Heraclitus conceived time, so also for instance did Schopenhauer, who repeatedly says of it that in it every instant exists only in so far as it has annihilated the preceding one, its father, in order to be itself effaced equally quickly; that past and future are as unreal as any dream; that the present is only the dimensionless and unstable boundary between the two; that, however, like time, so space and again like the latter, so also everything that is simultaneously in space and time, has only a relative existence, only through and for the sake of a something else, of the same kind as itself, i.e., existing only under the same limitations.
This truth is in the highest degree self-evident, accessible to everyone, and just for that very reason, abstractly and rationally, it is only attained with great difficulty. Whoever has this truth before his eyes must, however, also proceed at once to the next Heraclitean consequence and say that the whole essence of actuality is in fact activity, and that for actuality there is no other kind of existence and reality, as Schopenhauer has likewise expounded (The World as Will and Idea, Vol.1, sect.4):
Only as active does it fill space and time: its action upon the immediate object determines the perception in which alone it exists: Cause and effect thus constitute the whole nature of matter; its true being is its action. The totality of everything material is therefore very appropriately called in German Wirklichkeit [actuality]- a word which is far more expressive then Realitat [reality]. That upon which actuality acts is always matter; actuality's whole 'Being' and essence therefore consist only in the orderly change, which one part of it causes in another, and is therefore wholly relative, according to a relation which is valid only within the boundary of actuality, as in the case of time and space.
The Eternal and exclusive Becoming, the total instability of all reality and actuality, which continually works and becomes and never is, as Heraclitus teaches- is an awful and appalling conception, and its effects most nearly related to that sensation by which during an earthquake one loses confidence in the firmly grounded earth.'
The Things themselves in the permanency of which the limited intellect of man and animal believes do not 'exist' at all; they are as the fierce flashing and fiery sparkling of drawn swords, as the stars of Victory rising with a radiant resplendence in the battle of the opposite qualities.
The arena and the object of this struggle is Matter - which some natural forces alternately endeavour to disintegrate and build up again at the expense of other natural forces - as also Space and Time, the union of which through causality is this very matter.
With such discontented persons also originate the numerous complaints as to the obscurity of the Heraclitean style; probably no man has ever written clearer and more illuminatingly; of course, very abruptly, and therefore naturally obscure to the racing readers.
As man among men Heraclitus was incredible; and though he was seen paying attention to the play of noisy children, even then he was reflecting upon what never man thought of on such an occasion: the play of the great world-child, Zeus. ...'I sought and investigated myself,' he said, with a word by which one designates the investigation of an oracle; as if he and no one else were the true fulfiller and achiever of the Delphic precept: Know thyself.
That which he beheld, the doctrine of the Law in the Becoming, and of the Play in the Necessity, must henceforth be beheld eternally; he has raised the curtain of this greatest stage play. (Nietzsche, 1890, The Greeks)
------------------------------------------------------
Parmenides

(440B.C.)

Change & Illusion, Oneness, Becoming, OppositesParmenides and his follower Zeno, who lived in Elea (Greek colony in southern Italy) argued that reality must be single and unchanging, and by implication that the plural sense-world is illusory.
Also counted as an Eleatic, because he accepted these views, was Milissus of Samos, who flourished ~ 440 B.C.; he amended Parmenides by arguing that Being was infinite, not finite and incorporeal. He also produced an explicit argument against sensation: we perceive plurality, yet we also perceive that things change, which on Eleatic premises is logically impossible; therefore perception is false, and if there are many they must be of the same kind as the Eleatic One.
By tearing entirely asunder the senses and the ability to think in abstractions, i.e. reason, just as if they were two thoroughly separate capacities, he demolished the intellect itself, and incited people to that wholly erroneous separation of 'mind' and 'body' which, especially since Plato, lies like a curse on philosophy. All sense perceptions, Parmenides judges, cause only illusions, and their chief illusion is their deluding us to believe that even the 'Nonexistent' exists, that even the Becoming has a 'Being'. (Russell, 1946)
This is simply the Problem of the One and the Many which is solved by understanding how Many Things (matter as spherical Wave-Motions of Space) exist and are interconnected by One Thing (Space).
OnenessAs with many of the Ancient Greek Philosophers, Parmenides believed the only true being is 'The One', which is infinite, ageless, indivisible and eternal.
... the Existent is always there and could not of itself first originate and it could not explain any Originating, any Becoming.
'Existent' is indivisible, for where is the second power, which should divide it? It is immovable, for whither should it move itself? It cannot be infinitely great nor infinitely small, for it is perfect and a perfectly given infinitude is a contradiction. Thus the 'Existent' is suspended, delimited, perfect, immovable, everywhere equally balanced and such equilibrium equally perfect at any point, like a globe, but not in a space, for otherwise this space would be a second 'Existent'. But there cannot exist several 'Existents,' for in order to separate them, something would have to exist which was not existing, an assumption which neutralizes itself. Thus there exists only the eternal Unity. (Russell, 1946)
Parmenides wrote a poem, On Nature, claiming that we can only meaningfully say of anything that 'it is'. The predicate 'is not' is literally nonsense: not-being is impossible, inexpressible, and inconceivable. Since not-being was equated at this time with empty space, there could be no movement; but Parmenides rejected change on metaphysical rather than physical grounds, since any change involved its subject in not-being what it was before. This confusion between the existential and the predicative 'is' was not cleared up until Plato. From the single premise 'it is' Parmenides proceeded to the conclusion that reality or 'being' is homogeneous, motionless, solid and indivisible. (The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy and Philosophers, 1991)
The Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Wave Structure of matter solves Parmenides dilemma. It is true that One Space is homogenous, solid and indivisible, his error is to assume that Space is Motionless (same error as Kant and indeed most philosophers). On the contrary, it is matter, as the spherical wave Motion of Space, which is the second thing that can exist within the One Thing, Space. This then explains how Many material things (Wave-Centers of Spherical Standing Waves) can exist within One Thing (Space). It is the interconnected Motions of the Wave-Centers (the Cause of the Existence and Identity of Material Objects including ourselves) that is changing and perishable. Thus the Changing Flux (wave Motion of Space) can now be related to the Unchanging Eternal Space.
On BecomingEach Spherical In-Wave (future) flows through its Wave-Center (present) and Becomes the Out-Wave (Past). The Future is like (causes) the Past. The 'Existent' (Space) does not 'Become', it eternally exists, rather it is the Waves that continuously 'Pass' and 'Become' in Space, thus explaining Parmenides' speculation;
That which is true must exist in eternal presence; about it cannot be said 'it was,' 'it will be.' The 'Existent' cannot have become; for out of what should it have become? Out of the 'Nonexistent'? But that does not exist and can produce nothing. Out of the 'Existent'? This would not produce anything but itself. The same applies to the Passing; it is just as impossible as the Becoming, as any change, any increase, any decrease.Thou canst not know what is not - that is impossible - nor utter it; for it is the same thing that can be thought and that can be.How, then, can what is to be going to be in the future? Or how could it come into being? If it came into being, it is not; nor is it if it is going to be in the future. Thus is becoming extinguished and passing away not to be heard of. (From Russell, 1946)
On Opposites The One is infinite and indivisible. It is not, as Heraclitus, a union of opposites, since there are no opposites. He apparently thought, for instance, that 'cold' means only 'not hot' and 'dark' means only 'not light'. ... He seems to think of it (the One) as material and extended, for he speaks of it as a sphere. But it cannot be divided, because of the whole of it is present everywhere. (Russell, 1946)
The Ancient Greek Philosophers were often very close to the truth, as reflected in Parmenides realisation that the One existent is material (substance), extended (Space) and a Sphere (caused by matter as Spherical Waves in Space). Further, the Wave-Center of the Spherical Waves, which causes the discrete particle effect, is not a division, but rather, a production from the One Unity, the Focal-Point of Spherical Standing Waves that determine the size of our finite spherical Universe within an Infinite Space. (Matter and universe are one and the same thing - matter is large!)
------------------------------------------------------
Democritus

LucretiusThe Atomists (440B.C.)

The ancient Greeks 'Atomic Theory of Matter' is not correct (founded on many discrete things, rather than One continuous Infinite thing) and has caused many problems for human knowledge ever since. The discrete 'particle' effect of 'Atoms' is caused by the Wave-Centers of Spherical Standing Waves in Space.
At the most fundamental level atomism is the belief that all phenomena are explicable in terms of the properties and behavior of ultimate, elementary, localized entities (or 'fundamental particles'). Thus it prescribes a strategy for the construction of scientific theories in which the behavior of complex bodies is to be explained in terms of their component parts. That strategy has led to many of the successes of modern physical science, though these do not prove that there actually are 'ultimate entities' of the type postulated by atomism.Their (the atomists) analysis goes 'behind' the appearance of minute, unchangeable and indestructible 'atoms' separated by the emptiness of 'the void'. It is the void which is said to make change and movement possible. All apparent change is simply the result of rearrangements of the atoms as a consequence of collisions between them. This seems to lead to mechanical determinism, though, in an attempt to leave room for freewill, Epicurus and Lucretius postulated that atoms might 'deviate' in their courses.The later atomists also regarded 'weight' as an intrinsic property of the atoms. Lucretius says, that the number of atoms is infinite but the variety of shapes and sizes is finite (arguing fallaciously that otherwise there could be no limit to the size of the atoms).However if 'what exists' is 'atoms', what of the 'void'? In different ways both Aristotle and Descartes denied that there could be such a thing as literally 'empty space'. Physically therefore they saw the world as a plenum. Atomism was also associated with atheism, since as Lucretius put it, 'Nothing can ever be created out of nothing, even by divine power.' Conversely no thing can ever become nothing - so the atomists proposed a strict principle of conservation of matter.
Newton, following the example of the Cambridge Platonist Henry More, justified his introduction of 'Space' as a real, infinite entity (and by implication, the existence of 'hard, massy, impenetrable, movable particles') by claiming that Absolute Space is constituted by the Omnipresence of God. Newton sought to make the action of Universal Gravitation across empty space believable by references to the power of God, but as the investigation of electricity, magnetism and chemical affinity developed in the 18th and 19th centuries attempts were made to find physical explanations for 'action-at-a-distance'. In the theories of Boscovich and Faraday the dualism of Atoms and the Void is replaced by an all-pervasive 'field of force' in which there are many mathematical centers. (This version also informs the account of gravitation in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity.)A thoroughgoing positivism will continue to hold that 'atomic theories' are simply devices for talking about observable phenomena.The attempt of the ancient atomists to solve a metaphysical problem about the nature of change resulted in a brilliantly fruitful strategy for the construction of theories in the physical sciences. However there are unanswered philosophical objections to atomism and the very successes it has stimulated suggest that 'the stuff of the world' cannot ultimately be understood in terms of atomism. (Urmson, The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy and Philosophers, 1991)
The Ancients used the phrase, 'The Void' ; Modern Physics, 'The Spatially Extended Force Field' as the Connecting Medium for the Atoms. The mathematical logic of the 'Force Field' acts as the required 'Medium' that connects and moves (accelerates) the 'Particles'. It is a tool for the mathematical physicist (Logical Positivist), but does not physically exist. As shown by the Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Wave Structure of Matter, there are many problems and paradoxes with this separate 'Particle' view of the world. It is obvious that 'Particles' cannot explain action-at-a-distance through 'empty' Space, thus require the further existence of 'Force Fields', but then how does the 'Particle generate the Force Field' - there is no necessary connection! Likewise it is obvious that One Thing must physically exist which necessarily connects the Many Things, and there is only one thing that is common to all things, Space.
---------------------------------------------------

Plato

(427 - 347B.C.)

On Truth and Reality, Illusion, the Mind, Importance of PhilosophyPlato is an astute and important philosopher, who writes beautifully and with great power and elegance on Truth and Reality. His work is still profoundly important in today's Post-modern world, and can be easily understood due to its simplicity of language and engaging style of dialogue. The following quotes are taken from Plato's great work 'The Republic', and speak grandly for themselves, thus I largely leave them as they are, with little commentary or analysis.
Plato on the Understanding of New Ideas'We are like people looking for something they have in their hands all the time; we're looking in all directions except at the thing we want, which is probably why we haven't found it.'
'That is the story. Do you think there is any way of making them believe it?'
'Not in the first generation', he said, 'but you might succeed with the second and later generations.'
'We will ask the critics to be serious for once, and remind them that it was not so long ago that the Greeks thought - as most of the barbarians still think - that it was shocking and ridiculous for men to be seen naked. When the Cretans, and later the Spartans, first began to take exercise naked, wasn't there plenty of material for the wit of the comedians of the day?'
'There was indeed'
'But when experience showed them that it was better to strip than wrap themselves up, what reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye. Which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.'
Plato on Truth and Reality 'And isn't it a bad thing to be deceived about the truth, and a good thing to know what the truth is? For I assume that by knowing the truth you mean knowing things as they really are.'
'The philosopher is in love with truth, that is, not with the changing world of sensation, which is the object of opinion, but with the unchanging reality which is the object of knowledge.'
'Truthfulness. He will never willingly tolerate an untruth, but will hate it as much as he loves truth .. And is there anything more closely connected with wisdom than truth?'
'Then may we not fairly plead in reply that our true lover of knowledge naturally strives for truth, and is not content with common opinion, but soars with undimmed and unwearied passion till he grasps the essential nature of things with the mental faculty fitted to do so, that is, with the faculty which is akin to reality, and which approaches and unites with it, and begets intelligence and truth as children, and is only released from travail when it has thus reached knowledge and true life and satisfaction?'
'What is at issue is the conversion of the mind from the twilight of error to the truth, that climb up into the real world which we shall call true philosophy.'
'The object of knowledge is what exists and its function to know about reality.'
'And those whose hearts are fixed on Reality itself deserve the title of Philosophers.'
'When the mind's eye rests on objects illuminated by truth and reality, it understands and comprehends them, and functions intelligently; but when it turns to the twilight world of change and decay, it can only form opinions, its vision is confused and its beliefs shifting, and it seems to lack intelligence.'
'But surely 'blind' is just how you would describe men who have no true knowledge of reality, and no clear standard in their mind to refer to, as a painter refers to his model, and which they can study closely before they start laying down rules about what is fair or right or good where they are needed, or maintaining, as Guardians, any rules that already exist.'
'Yes, blind is just about what they are'
'One trait in the philosopher's character we can assume is his love of the knowledge that reveals eternal reality, the realm unaffected by change and decay. He is in love with the whole of that reality, and will not willingly be deprived even of the most insignificant fragment of it - just like the lovers and men of ambition we described earlier on.'
Plato On Education'...for the object of education is to teach us to love beauty.'
'And once we have given our community a good start,' I pointed out, ' the process will be cumulative. By maintaining a sound system of education you produce citizens of good character, and citizens of sound character, with the advantage of a good education, produce in turn children better than themselves and better able to produce still better children in their turn, as can be seen with animals.'
'... It is in education that bad discipline can most easily creep in unobserved,' he replied.
'Yes,' I agreed, ' because people don't treat it seriously there, and think no harm can come of it.'
'It only does harm,' he said, 'because it makes itself at home and gradually undermines morals and manners; from them it invades business dealings generally, and then spreads into the laws and constitution without any restraint, until it has made complete havoc of private and public life.''
''And when men who aren't fit to be educated get an education they don't deserve, are not the thoughts and opinions they produce fairly called sophistry, without a legitimate idea or any trace of true wisdom among them?'
'Certainly'.
'The first thing our artist must do,' I replied, ' - and it's not easy - is to take human society and human habits and wipe them clean out, to give himself a clean canvas. For our philosophic artist differs from all others in being unwilling to start work on an individual or a city, or draw out laws, until he is given, or has made himself, a clean canvas.'
'Because a free man ought not to learn anything under duress. Compulsory physical exercise does no harm to the body, but compulsory learning never sticks to the mind.'
'True'
'Then don't use compulsion,' I said to him, ' but let your children's lessons take the form of play. You will learn more about their natural abilities that way.'
Plato on The Mind'Do we learn with one part of us, feel angry with another, and desire the pleasures of eating and sex with another? Or do we employ our mind as a whole when our energies are employed in any of these ways?'
'We can call the reflective element in the mind the reason, and the element with which it feels hunger and thirst, and the agitations of sex and other desires, the irrational appetite - an element closely connected with pleasure and satisfaction.'
'So the reason ought to rule, having the ability and foresight to act for the whole, and the spirit ought to obey and support it. And this concord between them is effected, as we said, by a combination of intellectual and physical training, which tunes up the reason by intellectual training and tones down the crudeness of natural high spirits by harmony and rhythm.'
'Certainly'
'When these two elements have been brought up and trained to their proper function, they must be put in charge of appetite, which forms the greater part of each man's make-up and is naturally insatiable. They must prevent taking its fill of the so-called physical pleasures, for otherwise it will get too large and strong to mind its own business and will try to subject and control the other elements, which it has no right to do, and so wreck life entirely.'
'Then let us be content with the terms we used earlier on for the four divisions of our line - knowledge, reason, belief and illusion. The last two we class together as opinion, the first two as intelligence, opinion being concerned with the world of becoming, knowledge with the world of reality. Knowledge stands to opinion as the world of reality does to that of becoming, and intelligence stands to belief and reason to illusion as knowledge stands to opinion.'
Plato on IllusionIn the analogy of The Cave, Plato shows the ascent of the mind from illusion to truth and pure philosophy, and the difficulties which accompany its progress.
'Then think what would happen to them if they were released from their bonds and cured of their delusions. Suppose one of them were let loose, and suddenly compelled to stand up and turn his head and look and walk towards the fire; all actions would be painful and he would be too dazzled to see properly the objects of which he used to see the shadows. So if he was told that what he used to see was mere illusion and that he was now nearer reality and seeing more correctly, because he was turned towards objects that were more real, and if on top of that he were compelled to say what each of the passing objects was when it was pointed out to him, don't you think he would be at a loss, and think that what he used to see was more real than the objects now being pointed out to him?'
'Because he would need to grow accustomed to the light before he could see things in the world outside the cave. First he would find it easiest to look at shadows, next at the reflections of men and other objects in water, and later on at the objects themselves. After that he would find it easier to observe the heavenly bodies and the sky at night than by day, and to look at the light of the moon and stars, rather than at the sun and its light.'
'But anyone with any sense,' I said, 'will remember that the eyes may be unsighted in two ways, by a transition either from light to darkness or from darkness to light, and that the same distinction applies to the mind. So when he sees a mind confused and unable to see clearly he will not laugh without thinking, but will ask himself whether it has come from a cleaner world and is confused by the unaccustomed darkness, or whether it is dazzled by the stronger light of the clearer world to which it has escaped from its previous ignorance.'
'If this is true,' I continued, ' we must reject the conception of education professed by those who say that they can put into the mind knowledge that was not there before - rather as if they could put sight into blind eyes.'
'It is a claim that is certainly made,' he said
'But our argument indicates that this is a capacity which is innate in each man's mind, and that the faculty by which he learns is like an eye that cannot be turned from darkness to light unless the whole body is turned; in the same way the mind as a whole must be turned away from the world of change until its eyes can bear to look straight at reality, and at the brightest of all realities which we call the Good. Isn't that so?'
Plato on the Importance of Philosophy 'The society we have described can never grow into a reality or see the light of day, and there will be no end to the troubles of states, or indeed, my dear Glaucon, of humanity itself, till philosophers are kings in this world, or till those we now call kings and rulers really and truly become philosophers, and political power and philosophy thus come into the same hands, while the many natures now content to follow either to the exclusion of the other are forcibly debarred from doing so. This is what I have hesitated to say so long, knowing what a paradox it would sound; for it is not easy to see that there is no other road to happiness, either for society or the individual. '
' ...there are some who are naturally fitted for philosophy and political leadership, while the rest should follow their lead and let philosophy alone.''
'But the man who is ready to taste every form of knowledge, is glad to learn and never satisfied - he's the man who deserves to be called a philosopher, isn't he? '
'Then who are the true philosophers?', he asked
'Those whose passion is to see the truth.'
'Suppose the following to be the state of affairs on board a ship or ships. The captain is larger and stronger than any of the crew, but a bit deaf and short-sighted, and doesn't know much about navigation. The crew are quarrelling with each other about how to navigate the ship, each thinking he ought to be at the helm; they know no navigation and cannot say that anyone ever taught it them, or that they spent any time studying it; indeed they say it can't be taught and are ready to murder any one who says it can. They spend all their time milling around the captain and trying to get him to give them the wheel. If one faction is more successful then another, their rivals may kill them and throw them overboard, lay out the honest captain with drugs and drink, take control of the ship, help themselves to what's on board, and behave as if they were on a drunken pleasure-cruise. Finally, they reserve their admiration for the man who knows how to lend a hand in controlling the captain by force or fraud; they praise his seamanship and navigation and knowledge of the sea and condemn everyone else as useless. They have no idea that the true navigator must study the seasons of the year, the sky, the stars, the winds and other professional subjects, if he is really fit to control a ship; and they think that it's quite impossible to acquire professional skill in navigation (quite apart from whether they want it exercised) and that there is no such thing as an art of navigation. In these circumstances aren't the sailors on any ship bound to regard the true navigator as a gossip and a star-gazer, of no use to them at all?'
'Yes, they are,' Adeimantus agreed
'I think you probably understand, without any explanation, that my illustration is intended to show the present attitude of society towards the true philosopher''
'And tell him it's quite true that the best of the philosophers are of no use to their fellows; but that he should blame, not the philosophers, but those who fail to make use of them.'
I also feel like standing and applauding when I read Plato, for he is one of the true greats. The early Greeks, as you can see, were exceedingly smart and aware, and they created the system that then led to Aristotle, and his most profound work, 'The Metaphysics'. Their knowledge lies at the very heart of the Metaphysics of Space and Motion.
------------------------------------------------------
Epicurus

(342 - 270 B.C)

When we maintain that pleasure is an end, we do not mean the pleasures of profligates and those that consists in sensuality ... but freedom from pain in the body and from trouble in the mind. For it is not continuous drinkings, nor the satisfaction of lust,.. but sober reasoning, searching out the motives for all choice and avoidance.' Pains of the mind are much more important than those of the body, which are either bearable or produce death, which is no evil. Death 'is nothing to us, since so long as we exist death is not with us, but when death comes then we no longer exist. (Epicurus, from Urmson, The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy and Philosophers, 1991, p93)

-------------------------------------------------------

Aristotle

(384 - 322 B.C.)

Philosophy - Famous Philosopher - Aristotle (384 - 322 B.C.) The Metaphysics of Space and the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) explains Aristotle's Metaphysics, Physics, Prime Mover

Aristotle MetaphysicsPhilosophy
The Metaphysics of Space and the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) explains Aristotle's Metaphysics, Physics, Prime Mover.
It is clear, then, that wisdom is knowledge having to do with certain principles and causes. But now, since it is this knowledge that we are seeking, we must consider the following point: of what kind of principles and of what kind of causes is wisdom the knowledge? (Aristotle, Metaphysics, 340BC)Metaphysics involves intuitive knowledge of unprovable starting-points (concepts and truth) and demonstrative knowledge of what follows from them.The first philosophy (Metaphysics) is universal and is exclusively concerned with primary substance. ... And here we will have the science to study that which is just as that which is, both in its essence and in the properties which, just as a thing that is, it has.The entire preoccupation of the physicist is with things that contain within themselves a principle of movement and rest. And to seek for this is to seek for the second kind of principle, that from which comes the beginning of the change.There must then be a principle of such a kind that its substance is activity.... it is impossible that the primary existent, being eternal, should be destroyed.... that among entities there must be some cause which moves and combines things...about its coming into being and its doings and about all its alterations we think that we have knowledge when we know the source of its movement. (Aristotle, Metaphysics 340BC)

Aristotle was the first philosopher to formalise the subject of Metaphysics. As Aristotle explains, Metaphysics is the study of the One Substance (and its Properties) which exists and causes all things, and is therefore the necessary foundation for all human knowledge. Aristotle (and Leibniz) were correct to realize that One Substance must have Properties that cause matter's interconnected activity and Motion. Though Aristotle did not know what existed, he explained the scientific method such that we could determine this ourselves. Thus Aristotle's ideas are very important, for within them are the clues to the solution of this most profound of all problems, 'what exists', and thus what it means to be 'human'.
Ancient Greek Philosophy, of which Aristotle was the high point, marked a fundamental turning point in the evolution of humanity and our ideas about our existence in the universe. Over the past 2,500 years Aristotle's philosophy has directly contributed to the evolution of our current science / reason based society. Thus it is unfortunate that many people imagine our post-modern society to now be so 'enlightened' that Aristotle (and other Ancient Greek Philosophers) have become irrelevant. In fact the opposite is true. As Bertrand Russell observed (History of Western Philosophy), it was the Ancient Greek Philosophers who first discovered and discussed the fundamental Principles of Philosophy,Physics and Metaphysics and most significantly, little has been added to their knowledge since. As Einstein wrote;
Somebody who only reads newspapers and at best books of contemporary authors looks to me like an extremely near-sighted person who scorns eyeglasses. He is completely dependent on the prejudices and fashions of his times, since he never gets to see or hear anything else. And what a person thinks on his own without being stimulated by the thoughts and experiences of other people is even in the best case rather paltry and monotonous. There are only a few enlightened people with a lucid mind and style and with good taste within a century. What has been preserved of their work belongs among the most precious possessions of mankind. We owe it to a few writers of antiquity (Plato, Aristotle, etc.) that the people in the Middle Ages could slowly extricate themselves from the superstitions and ignorance that had darkened life for more than half a millennium. Nothing is more needed to overcome the modernist's snobbishness. (Albert Einstein, 1954)
It is therefore both interesting and important to consider the foundations which caused the blossoming of Ancient Greek Philosophy. First and foremost was the realisation that ALL IS ONE, as Nietzsche writes;
Greek philosophy seems to begin with a preposterous fancy, with the proposition that water is the origin and mother-womb of all things. Is it really necessary to stop there and become serious? Yes, and for three reasons: firstly, because the preposition does enunciate something about the origin of things; secondly, because it does so without figure and fable; thirdly and lastly, because it contained, although only in the chrysalis state, the idea :everything is one. ... That which drove him (Thales) to this generalization was a metaphysical dogma, which had its origin in a mystic intuition and which together with the ever renewed endeavors to express it better, we find in all philosophies- the proposition: everything is one! (Friedrich Nietzsche, The Greeks)
Further, Aristotle realised that Motion (Flux / Activity / Change) was central to existence and reality, as he writes;
The first philosophy (Metaphysics) is universal and is exclusively concerned with primary substance. ... And here we will have the science to study that which is just as that which is, both in its essence and in the properties which, just as a thing that is, it has. (Aristotle, 340BC)The entire preoccupation of the physicist is with things that contain within themselves a principle of movement and rest. And to seek for this is to seek for the second kind of principle, that from which comes the beginning of the change. (Aristotle, 340BC)
Only recently (Wolff, 1986 - Haselhurst, 1997) has it been possible, with the discovery of the Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM), to unite these ideas with modern Physics, Philosophy and Metaphysics. And let me first say that it is ironic that the main problem for human knowledge also came from the Ancient Greeks, with their conception of matter as discrete Atoms (Democritus, Lucretius). Unfortunately, Physics took the path of the atomists (Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, Lorentz) and this led to the creation of 'Force Fields' (generated by particles) to explain how matter interacted with other discrete matter at-a-distance in Space. The problem is that they could never explain how these different things (space, time, matter, motion, fields) were necessarily interconnected and this has caused great confusion and conflict ever since. The solution is to describe reality from on thing, Space, and its wave motions that cause matter, time and forces / fields.
It seems that many people believe that Reality / Physics is too complex for them to possibly understand (and I suspect that Physicists enjoy this reputation as being the 'high priests' who comprehend such complex things). In fact the opposite is true - Truth is ultimately simple because Truth comes from Reality (as Plato and Aristotle correctly realised) which must be founded on One thing. And there is nothing more simple than One Thing. When you read the quotes from Aristotle you will also find his ideas to be very simple. This reflects his greatness as a philosopher, and partly explains why his work has endured for thousands of years. The Greek Philosophers were also very wise and at times quite amusing, thus well worth reading.

The first philosophy (Metaphysics) is universal and is exclusively concerned with primary substance. ... And here we will have the science to study that which is just as that which is, both in its essence and in the properties which, just as a thing that is, it has. (Aristotle, 340BC)
At the heart of Metaphysics is Substance and its Properties, which exists and causes all things, and is therefore the necessary foundation for all human knowledge. Aristotle and Leibniz were correct to realize that One Substance must have Properties that account for matter's interconnected activity and Motion.
The entire preoccupation of the physicist is with things that contain within themselves a principle of movement and rest. And to seek for this is to seek for the second kind of principle, that from which comes the beginning of the change. & There must then be a principle of such a kind that its substance is activity. (Aristotle, 340BC) I maintain also that substances, whether material or immaterial, cannot be conceived in their bare essence without any activity, activity being of the essence of substance in general. (Leibniz, 1670)
The solution is to realize that Space exists as a wave-medium and contains spherical wave-motions that cause matter and its interconnected activity/change. (Also see Kant , who clearly realized the unique importance of Space as being a priori (necessary) for us to be able to experience and sense the world around us, and that Metaphysics (and thus Physics) depend upon this a priori knowledge.)
It is clear, then, that wisdom is knowledge having to do with certain principles and causes. But now, since it is this knowledge that we are seeking, we must consider the following point: of what kind of principles and of what kind of causes is wisdom the knowledge? (Aristotle, Metaphysics)
Metaphysics involves intuitive knowledge of unprovable starting-points (concepts and truth) and demonstrative knowledge of what follows from them. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)
Demonstration is also something necessary, because a demonstration cannot go otherwise than it does, ... And the cause of this lies with the primary premises/principles. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)
For those who wish to make good progress must start well; for subsequent progress depends on the resolution of the first puzzles, and one cannot solve these without knowing the difficulty and the confusion of our minds. So we must first set out all the difficulties, both for these reasons and also because those who inquire without first setting out the difficulties are like those who do not know in which direction they should walk, and in addition do not even know whether they would recognize that which they are looking for. For the end is not clear to these, but it is for those who have begun with the puzzles. And also from the point of view of judging that man is better off who has heard, as it were, all the rival and opposed positions. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)
..it is impossible that the primary existent, being eternal, should be destroyed... that among entities there must be some cause which moves and combines things...about its coming into being and its doings and about all its alterations we think that we have knowledge when we know the source of its movement.The life of theoretical philosophy is the best and happiest a man can lead. Few men are capable of it (and then only intermittently). For the rest there is a second-best way of life, that of moral virtue and practical wisdom. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)
It is with some reverence that we dare enter this ancient human temple, this construction of the subject of Metaphysics, whose foundations were first laid 2,400 years ago by the brilliant mind of Aristotle. And so with due respect (and great pleasure) we begin with his observations on the subject of Metaphysics. Let us importantly add that while Aristotle did not know what existed, he explained to us the method so that we could work this out. Thus Aristotle's words and ideas are very important, for within them are the clues to the solution of his problem of 'what exists', as we shall endeavor to explain and solve.
Some philosophers have fallen into this opinion in the same way that they have into other paradoxes. They are confronted by an esoteric argument, find it impossible to refute and end up by giving in to it and accepting its conclusion! This explains the confusion of some, ... the basis of the cure is definition. Now a definition arises from the necessity that words have some meaning; for the definition is the account of which the word is the sign. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)Rather, they start this, displaying it to the senses, .... and go on to offer more or less rigorous demonstrations of the per se attributes of their proprietary genera. This sort of procedure is inductive and it is as plain as a pikestaff that it does not amount to a demonstration of essence or of what it is to be a thing. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)..a science must deal with a subject and its properties. (Aristotle, Metaphysics).... the science we are after is not about mathematicals either (none of them, you see, is separable). (Aristotle, Metaphysics)But also philosophy is not about perceptible substances (they, you see, are prone to destruction) (Aristotle, Metaphysics)The entire preoccupation of the physicist is with things that contain within themselves a principle of movement and rest. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)However, there is a science higher than natural science. For in truth nature is but one genus of that which is. It is a science whose subject matter is universal and which is exclusively concerned with primary substance. (Aristotle, Metaphysics) It is the principles and causes of the things that are that we are seeking, and clearly it is their principles and causes just as things that are ... It is, however, vital not to overlook the question of what it is to be a thing and the definitional account of how it is what it is. If we leave these out, scientific inquiry is mere shadow boxing ... the science of it is First Philosophy - and such a science is universal just because it is first. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)And here we will have the science to study that which is just as that which is, both in its essence and in the properties which, just as a thing that is, it has. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)

Modern Academic Summary of Aristotle's Metaphysics
This academic summary of Aristotle's Metaphysics, from The Western Philosophy and Philosophers Encyclopedia 1991, is very useful;
Metaphysics is the name given by scholars to a treatise of Aristotle. Aristotle described the subject of his treatise in a number of different ways which he regarded as equivalent. He called it the study of the first principles of things. He said it was the science of existence in general, or of 'being as such', contrasting it in this respect with the various special sciences which each studied only one part or aspect of being. He described it also as the study of 'substance', a term which occupies a central position in the work of most of the great metaphysicians who came after him. Substance he declared to be what primarily existed, and was prior to all other things in respect not only of existence, but of explanation and of knowledge as well; that is to say, the explanation of anything else involved the idea of substance; knowledge of anything else involved knowledge of substance; and the existence of everything else depended on the existence of substance. Metaphysics, then, is regarded by Aristotle as a single, comprehensive study of what is fundamental to all existence, all knowledge and all explanation. It will at once be evident that different identifications of substance, i.e. of what has this fundamental character, will yield different systems of metaphysics.
The Physics and connected works contain discussion and analysis of such concepts as nature, change, chance, time, place, continuity, infinity, growth; proofs that movement is eternal and that there is an eternal Prime Mover; and much doctrine as to the actual constitution and workings of the universe. The argument for a Prime Mover starts from Aristotle's conception of change and causation. There could not be an absolutely first (or last) change. For since change implies pre-existing matter (or potentiality) and a pre-existing efficient cause to impose form on the matter (to actualise the potentiality), there must have existed before a supposed first change something capable of being changed and something capable of causing change. But then to explain why these potentialities (for being changed and for causing change) were actualised at a certain time just priori to that time, that is, a change before the supposed first change. Change therefore, or movement, must be eternal ... This Prime Mover, eternal, changeless and containing no element of matter or unrealised potentiality, keeps the heavenly bodies moving and maintains the eternal life of the universe ... He recognized that theories must wait upon facts, and if at any future time they are ascertained, 'then credence must be given to the direct evidence of the senses more than to theories'.
The composite picture which these descriptions yield is not a very clear one. (1) Metaphysics is a comprehensive study of what is fundamental in the order of knowledge, explanation and existence; (2) it is the study of reality as opposed to mere appearance; (3) its subject is, or has been, what transcends experience; (4) it is, or ought to be, a study of the intellectual equipment and limitations of human beings; (5) its method is, or has been, a priori rather than empirical; (6) it proposes a revision of the set of ideas in terms of which we think about the world, a change in our conceptual scheme, a new way of talking.
It is certainly true that most of the great metaphysicians have proposed radically revised pictures of the world, bold, comprehensive and often startling; and that most of them have accorded a central place in the picture to some few key concepts, or to some specially favored type of entities given the title of 'substance'. It is also true that the choice of key concepts and entities, and the resultant picture of the world, have varied greatly from one metaphysician to another. Sometimes even 'substance' has been dethroned, e.g.. in favor of 'process'; and among candidates for the role of substance the choice has been wide. Besides God, the divine substance, who has a place in most systems, Descartes recognized two types of substance, matter and minds; Berkeley one only, minds or spirits; Leibniz a class of entities (monads) each of which, though non-spatial and non-temporal, was somehow a model of our entire universe. Spinoza recognized only one comprehensive substance, God or Nature, infinite and eternal, of which mind and matter were merely two aspects. Kant regarded substance as belonging to the world of our ordinary experience, yet set Reality itself, as totally unknowable, outside that world. (Western Philosophy and Philosophers, 1991)

The Metaphysics of Space and Motion
One Thing Space Exists and has the Properties of a Wave Medium
If One thing, Space, Exists, how can a second thing exist within the One thing Space that gives rise to Matter and its Motion? As Aristotle importantly and profoundly says;
... there is some other cause of the change. And to seek for this is to seek for the second kind of principle, as we would say, that from which comes the beginning of the change. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)Unless the further factor is active, there will still be no movement. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)There must then be a principle of such a kind that its substance is activity. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)
I feel quite sure that if Aristotle had known of Huygens' work on Wave-Motion, along with the work of Newton and Leibniz, (who all lived several thousand years later in human history) then Aristotle would have solved the problem of how Matter exists in this Space of our Universe. Unfortunately no formal knowledge of Wave-Motion existed then, hence there was no obvious solution (as there now is.) Thus he was confronted, along with all Philosophers, with the Problem of the One and the Many;
Now there are several ways in which the one and the many are in opposition. One of these lies in the fact that the one and the many are opposed as indivisible and divisible. What is either divided or divisible is accounted for as a kind of plurality, whereas what is indivisible or not divided is said to be a unity. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)Multiplicity cannot be derived from a necessarily single thing. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)
The solution is to realize that Space is Moving, that it is the Motion of Space which is the second thing that can Exist within the One thing. This Motion is a Wave Motion so we are simply saying that Space is Vibrating, Space is a Wave Medium and has Waves flowing through it. (So we see that Aristotle's required 'Activity' is in fact a Wave-Activity.) Thus we see how the second existent, Motion, exists within the One Fundamental Existent, Space.
If we now return to Aristotle, we also see how the Wave-Motion of Space is consistent with his Metaphysical Principles, we need simply make two additions to his sentence as underlined;
And here we will have the science to study that which is just as that which is, both in its essence (Space) and in the properties (Wave Medium/Motion) which, just as a thing that is, it has. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)
Which thus explains why:
The entire preoccupation of the physicist is with things that contain within themselves a principle of movement and rest. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)
And thus we are now led to the Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) in Space, and at last to a simple and elegant solution to the problem that the great Aristotle formalized so long ago. For Aristotle was largely correct, there is One Substance, Space, which Exists as a Wave-Medium (Aristotle's Prime Mover) and thus Space is Moving (Vibrating) due to this Wave-Motion.
Note: Space is exceedingly rigid and only allows a tiny displacement/motion, thus the velocity of waves is VERY fast (the velocity of light c) and the wavelength is very short (10-12 meters) thus Space is vibrating at something like a hundred billion billion cycles/s. As Albert Einstein wrote;
The subtlety of the concept of space was enhanced by the discovery that there exist no completely rigid bodies. All bodies are elastically deformable. (Albert Einstein)

Properties of One Substance / Space
On a Perpetual Finite Spherical Universe within an Infinite Space
It is interesting (and perhaps surprising), that 2,500 years ago Aristotle had already considered and rejected such an origin (Big Bang) for the universe;
Alternatively, suppose we were to accept the mythical genesis of the world from night or the natural philosophers' claim that 'all things were originally together.' We are still left with the same impossible consequence. How is everything to be set in motion, unless there is actually to be some cause of movement? Matter is not going to set itself in motion - its movement depends on a motive cause. (Aristotle)
The Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the WSM describes a perpetual finite system within an Infinite Eternal Space. Space has always existed, as have the Wave-Motions which flow through this Space. Creation, like the Particle and the boundary, are human constructions which do not physically exist.
I will only briefly summarize the philosophical logic of One Space here.
Space is Infinite
As only One thing, Space, exists, there can be no boundary to Space (as a boundary is between two things) thus Space is unbounded and therefore Infinite. As Blake famously wrote;
If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would be seen as it is, infinite. (William Blake)
Spinoza perfectly states the logic of One Infinite Substance;
No two or more substances can have the same attribute and it appertains to the nature of substance that it should exist. It must therefore exist finitely or infinitely. But not finitely. For it would then be limited by some other substance of the same nature which also of necessity must exist: and then two substances would be granted having the same attribute, which is absurd. It will exist, therefore, infinitely. (Spinoza)
Space is Continuous
There can be no Particles because Particles require two things - the Particle and the Space around the Particle, thus Space is a continuous medium. Or as Aristotle says;
This shows us two things: you cannot have parts of the infinite and the infinite is indivisible. (Aristotle)
Space is Ageless and Eternal
There are two separate arguments for an ageless and eternal Space which logically support one another; i) As only one thing, Space, exists, there can be no creation of Space as creation requires two things (Space, and that which is not Space but created Space) thus Space is Ageless and Eternal.
A substance cannot be produced from anything else : it will therefore be its own cause, that is, its essence necessarily involves existence, or existence appertains to the nature of it. (Spinoza, 1673)
ii) Time is a consequence of the Finite Velocity of Waves in Space, thus it takes time for a Wave to flow from place to place. Time does not exist as a thing in itself, it is, like the Particle, an effect of Waves in Space, not a cause! Thus Time only applies to Waves in Space (i.e. matter) and not to Space itself. Therefore Space was not created for this requires the concept of time (that the Space that now exists was created at some time in the past) thus Space is Ageless and Eternal. (Space simply exists.)
It need hardly be pointed out that with things that do not change there is no illusion with respect to time, given the assumption of their unchangeability. (Aristotle)
Motion is Eternal
Motion must always have been in existence, and the same can be said for time itself, since it is not even possible for there to be an earlier and a later if time does not exist. Movement, then, is also continuous in the way in which time is - indeed time is either identical to movement or is some affection of it. (There is, however, only one continuous movement, namely spatial movement, and of this only circular rotation.) (Aristotle, Metaphysics)
Aristotle was quite remarkable, and here he alludes to the fact that Time and Motion are intimately interconnected, that Time did not exist as something in itself but was caused by the Motion of Matter. This is a remarkable discovery for once we realize that Space-Motion must replace Space-Time as the fundamental Existents, then we can clearly see the error of both Physics (Einstein's Four Dimensional Space-Time Continuum) and Philosophy (Kant's Space, Time and Causation as a priori).With this new way of looking at things, with the Metaphysics of Space and Motion (rather than Space and Time) we find very obvious and simple solutions to many of the current problems of Physics Philosophy and Metaphysics.
I should also like to briefly add here that there is another form of continuous Motion than circular motion which never occurred to Aristotle, that of Spherical Standing Waves in Space, where Spherical Waves are continually flowing In and Out through the Wave-Center.
It is very important to realize how incorrect ideas can BLIND us to obvious ideas. An obvious example of this is Aristotle's error about orbits of planets (continuous movement) being perfect circles - which lasted for two thousand years! Kepler spent years trying to solve the problems of the orbits of the planets before finally realizing that they were in fact Ellipsoidal.
Kepler's discovery of elliptical orbits heralded the emergence of modern cosmology because, instead of imposing a preconceived idea about the way the heavens ought to be, he had let himself discover the way they actually were. He had allowed the data to speak for themselves. Thus the ellipse represents the triumph of empiricism over dogmatism, of commitment to mathematical accuracy over submission to ancient authority. (Wertheim, 1997)
Just like circular orbits, the conception of both the Particle and Time as fundamental existents, has blinded us to more obvious solution. Once the Wave Structure of Matter in Space is understood it becomes obvious that the Focal Point (Wave-Center) is the cause of the Point Particle Effect of Matter, and that the finite velocity of the Wave Motion of Space is the cause of Time. Only then can you fully realize how blind and feeble is our human thinking when it is constrained by incorrect concepts. (This is as true for me as it is for any other person, it simply reflects limitations in how we depend upon language for thinking.)

On the Necessary Connection of Space, Motion, Matter & Time
How is it that we can sense the Motion of Matter in Space & Time? If Matter is something different to Motion then what is the connection between Motion and Matter? As Aristotle says;
... there being two causes of which we have defined in the Physics, they seem to have a glimpse of them, that of matter and that from which the motion comes, indistinctly though, and in no way clearly. (Aristotle, Metaphysics)
Aristotle was aware that we sense the Motion of Matter in Space & Time, but he did not understand the connection between these four apparently separate things (Space, Time, Matter and Motion). Only now can we demonstrate that Matter is a particular Form (Shape) of (Wave) Motion, a Spherical Standing Wave Motion of Space, thus we really sense the Motion of Motion in Space, thereby uniting Space, Matter & Motion. And from the previous section we also realise that it is this wave Motion aspect of Matter that causes the phenomena of Time, thus solving the separation between these previously distinct things.
This is further consistent when we consider electricity and the Motion of electrons (actually the motion of the Wave-Center of the SSW), for we all know that electrical energy can be converted to Motion energy by an electric motor (and vice versa). We now see how electricity is connected to Motion, for the electrons themselves are a form of Motion, the Spherical Standing Wave Motion of Space.Though it is more complex, this is also true of our minds and how by thinking we can move matter (e.g. my mind causing my fingers to move to type these letters) because mind is also caused by (and is nothing more than) the relative (wave) motions of matter which is ultimately the relative motions of Space.As Aristotle profoundly says;
..about its coming into being and its doings and about all its alterations we think that we have knowledge when we know the source of its movement.
(Aristotle, Metaphysics)

-----------------------------------------------------

Pythagoras (fl. 530 BCE.)

Pythagoras (fl. 530 BCE) must have been one of the world's greatest men, but he wrote nothing, and it is hard to say how much of the doctrine we know as Pythagorean is due to the founder of the society and how much is later development. It is also hard to say how much of what we are told about the life of Pythagoras is trustworthy; for a mass of legend gathered around his name at an early date. Sometimes he is represented as a man of science, and sometimes as a preacher of mystic doctrines, and we might be tempted to regard one or other of those characters as alone historical. The truth is that there is no need to reject either of the traditional views. The union of mathematical genius and mysticism is common enough. Originally from Samos, Pythagoras founded at Kroton (in southern Italy) a society which was at once a religious community and a scientific school. Such a body was bound to excite jealousy and mistrust, and we hear of many struggles. Pythagoras himself had to flee from Kroton to Metapontion, where he died.
It is stated that he was a disciple of Anaximander, his astronomy was the natural development of Anaximander's. Also, the way in which the Pythagorean geometry developed also bears witness to its descent from that of Miletos. The great problem at this date was the duplication of the square, a problem which gave rise to the theorem of the square on the hypotenuse, commonly known still as the Pythagorean proposition (Euclid, I. 47). If we were right in assuming that Thales worked with the old 3:4:5 triangle, the connection is obvious.
Pythagoras argued that there are three kinds of men, just as there are three classes of strangers who come to the Olympic Games. The lowest consists of those who come to buy and sell, and next above them are those who come to compete. Best of all are those who simply come to look on. Men may be classified accordingly as lovers of wisdom, lovers of honor, and lovers of gain. That seems to imply the doctrine of the tripartite soul, which is also attributed to the early Pythagoreans on good authority, though it is common now to ascribe it to Plato. There are, however, clear references to it before his time, and it agrees much better with the general outlook of the Pythagoreans. The comparison of human life to a gathering like the Games was often repeated in later days. Pythagoras also taught the doctrine of Rebirth or transmigration, which we may have learned from the contemporary Orphics. Xenophanes made fun of him for pretending to recognize the voice of a departed friend in the howls of a beaten dog. Empedocles seems to be referring to him when he speaks of a man who could remember what happened ten or twenty generations before. It was on this that the doctrine of Recollection, which plays so great a part in Plato, was based. The things we perceive with the senses, Plato argues, remind us of things we knew when the soul was out of the body and could perceive reality directly.
There is more difficulty about the cosmology of Pythagoras. Hardly any school ever professed such reverence for its founder's authority as the Pythagoreans. 'The Master said so' was their watchword. On the other hand, few schools have shown so much capacity for progress and for adapting themselves to new conditions. Pythagoras started from the cosmical system of Anaximenes. Aristotle tells us that the Pythagoreans represented the world as inhaling 'air' form the boundless mass outside it, and this 'air' is identified with 'the unlimited'. When, however, we come to the process by which things are developed out of the 'unlimited', we observe a great change. We hear nothing more of 'separating out' or even of rarefaction and condensation. Instead of that we have the theory that what gives form to the Unlimited is the Limit. That is the great contribution of Pythagoras to philosophy, and we must try to understand it. Now the function of the Limit is usually illustrated from the arts of music and medicine, and we have seen how important these two arts were for Pythagoreans, so it is natural to infer that the key to its meaning is to be found in them.
It may be taken as certain that Pythagoras himself discovered the numerical ratios which determine the concordant intervals of the musical scale. Similar to musical intervals, in medicine there are opposites, such as the hot and the cold, the wet and the dry, and it is the business of the physician to produce a proper 'blend' of these in the human body. In a well-known passage of Plato's Phaedo (86 b) we are told by Simmias that the Pythagoreans held the body to be strung like an instrument to a certain pitch, hot and cold, wet and dry taking the place of high and low in music. Musical tuning and health are alike means arising from the application of Limit to the Unlimited. It was natural for Pythagoras to look for something of the same kind in the world at large. Briefly stated, the doctrine of Pythagoras was that all things are numbers. In certain fundamental cases, the early Pythagoreans represented numbers and explained their properties by means of dots arranged in certain 'figures' or patterns.

Pythagoras must have been one of the world's greatest men, but he wrote nothing, and it is hard to say how much of the doctrine we know as Pythagorean is due to the founder of the society and how much is later development. It is also hard to say how much of what we are told about the life of Pythagoras is trustworthy; for a mass of legend gathered around his name at an early date. Sometimes he is represented as a man of science, and sometimes as a preacher of mystic doctrines, and we might be tempted to regard one or other of those characters as alone historical. The truth is that there is no need to reject either of the traditional views. The union of mathematical genius and mysticism is common enough. Originally from Samos, Pythagoras founded at Kroton (in southern Italy) a society which was at once a religious community and a scientific school. Such a body was bound to excite jealousy and mistrust, and we hear of many struggles. Pythagoras himself had to flee from Kroton to Metapontion, where he died.
It is stated that he was a disciple of Anaximander, his astronomy was the natural development of Anaximander's. Also, the way in which the Pythagorean geometry developed also bears witness to its descent from that of Miletos. The great problem at this date was the duplication of the square, a problem which gave rise to the theorem of the square on the hypotenuse, commonly known still as the Pythagorean proposition (Euclid, I. 47). If we were right in assuming that Thales worked with the old 3:4:5 triangle, the connection is obvious.
Pythagoras argued that there are three kinds of men, just as there are three classes of strangers who come to the Olympic Games. The lowest consists of those who come to buy and sell, and next above them are those who come to compete. Best of all are those who simply come to look on. Men may be classified accordingly as lovers of wisdom, lovers of honor, and lovers of gain. That seems to imply the doctrine of the tripartite soul, which is also attributed to the early Pythagoreans on good authority, though it is common now to ascribe it to Plato. There are, however, clear references to it before his time, and it agrees much better with the general outlook of the Pythagoreans. The comparison of human life to a gathering like the Games was often repeated in later days. Pythagoras also taught the doctrine of Rebirth or transmigration, which we may have learned from the contemporary Orphics. Xenophanes made fun of him for pretending to recognize the voice of a departed friend in the howls of a beaten dog. Empedocles seems to be referring to him when he speaks of a man who could remember what happened ten or twenty generations before. It was on this that the doctrine of Recollection, which plays so great a part in Plato, was based. The things we perceive with the senses, Plato argues, remind us of things we knew when the soul was out of the body and could perceive reality directly.
There is more difficulty about the cosmology of Pythagoras. Hardly any school ever professed such reverence for its founder's authority as the Pythagoreans. 'The Master said so' was their watchword. On the other hand, few schools have shown so much capacity for progress and for adapting themselves to new conditions. Pythagoras started from the cosmical system of Anaximenes. Aristotle tells us that the Pythagoreans represented the world as inhaling 'air' form the boundless mass outside it, and this 'air' is identified with 'the unlimited'. When, however, we come to the process by which things are developed out of the 'unlimited', we observe a great change. We hear nothing more of 'separating out' or even of rarefaction and condensation. Instead of that we have the theory that what gives form to the Unlimited is the Limit. That is the great contribution of Pythagoras to philosophy, and we must try to understand it. Now the function of the Limit is usually illustrated from the arts of music and medicine, and we have seen how important these two arts were for Pythagoreans, so it is natural to infer that the key to its meaning is to be found in them.
It may be taken as certain that Pythagoras himself discovered the numerical ratios which determine the concordant intervals of the musical scale. Similar to musical intervals, in medicine there are opposites, such as the hot and the cold, the wet and the dry, and it is the business of the physician to produce a proper 'blend' of these in the human body. In a well-known passage of Plato's Phaedo (86 b) we are told by Simmias that the Pythagoreans held the body to be strung like an instrument to a certain pitch, hot and cold, wet and dry taking the place of high and low in music. Musical tuning and health are alike means arising from the application of Limit to the Unlimited. It was natural for Pythagoras to look for something of the same kind in the world at large. Briefly stated, the doctrine of Pythagoras was that all things are numbers. In certain fundamental cases, the early Pythagoreans represented numbers and explained their properties by means of dots arranged in certain 'figures' or patterns.

----------------------------------------------------

Archimedes of Syracuse (ca. 287-ca. 212 BC)

Greek mathematician who flourished in Sicily. He is generally considered to be the greatest mathematician of ancient times. Most of the facts about his life come from a biography about the Roman soldier Marcellus written by the Roman biographer Plutarch.
Archimedes performed numerous geometric proofs using the rigid geometric formalism outlined by Euclid , excelling especially at computing areas and volumes using the method of exhaustion. He was especially proud of his discovery for finding the volume of a sphere , showing that it is two thirds the volume of the smallest cylinder that can contain it. At his request, the figure of a sphere and cylinder was engraved on his tombstone. In fact, it is often said that Archimedes would have invented calculus if the Greeks had only possessed a more tractable mathematical notation. By inscribing and circuscrbing polygons on a circle, for instance, he was able to constrain the value of (pi) between 3 10/71 and 3+1/7.
Archimedes was also an outstanding engineer, formulating Archimedes' principle of buoyancy and the law of the lever. Legend has it that Archimedes discovered his principle of buoyancy, which states that the buoyancy force is equal to the weight of the liquid displaced, while taking a bath, upon which he is supposed to have run naked through the streets of Syracuse shouting "Eureka!" (I have found it). Archimedes is also purported to have invented the Archimedian screw . Some of Archimedes's geometric proofs were actually motivated by mechanical arguments which led him to the correct answer. During the Roman siege of Syracuse, he is said to have single-handedly defended the city by constructing lenses to focus the Sun's light on Roman ships and huge cranes to turn them upside down. When the Romans finally broke the siege, Archimedes was killed by a Roman soldier after snapping at him "Don't disturb my circles," a reference to a geometric figure he had outlined on the sand.

-----------------------------------------------------

Parmenides

Parmenides was born over two thousand five hundred years ago and lived in southern Italy. Nowadays he is famous as the founder of western rationalism—as the "father" of logic. Ever since the time of Plato and Aristotle his role in the seeding of western culture has been considered essential.
But Parmenides was not just a logician. And his teaching was far from reasonable. He described how he had been given all the knowledge he taught by a goddess after he traveled to meet her in another world. This is because he was a priest of Apollo who specialized in the mastery of other states of consciousness: for him, our familiar world was an illusion that he could leave behind and re-enter at will. And he was a healer—a healer who worked through ecstasy, through the inspired interpretation of dreams, through immersing himself and others for extended periods of time in utter stillness.
As for the "logic" that he introduced to the western world, this was not some dry intellectual exercise. It was nothing less than a gift from the gods which when understood right, and applied in our daily life,has the mysterious power of taking us back to the gods.

-----------------------------------------------------

Empedocles

Empedocles was born just a few years after Parmenides. He lived on the island of Sicily. He, too, is famous for the fundamental role he played in the development of the western world. Just like Parmenides he wrote his teachings in the form of poetry; and this poetry of his exerted a crucial role in creating what were soon to become known as the separate fields of philosophy, rhetoric, medicine, chemistry, biology, astronomy, cosmology and psychology.
But Empedocles was far more than the cosmologist or scientist he is now made out to be. He was also a sorcerer whose words had a magic power that, for over two thousand years, has bewitched and confused even the brightest of minds. Like Parmenides he was a healer who specialized in ecstasy and in the ability to access other states of consciousness at will. He openly announced that he had realized his immortality; had discovered his own divinity. And through his poetry he recorded techniques, which are as powerful now as they ever have been, for leading people to the direct experience of their own divine nature.
As for his amazingly intricate teachings about the details of the world around us: these were never meant just to stimulate people's curiosity and become an object of interest in themselves. On the contrary, their real purpose was to free us from the illusions that bind us and bring us to an immediate awareness of our own immortal soul.
Between them, Parmenides and Empedocles laid the most basic foundations for the world and culture we now live in. But with the passing of time we have forgotten who they were. The truth about the real nature of their work has been neglected, distorted, ignored—transformed into just another of those empty illusions that they themselves tried to set us free from.
There is nothing accidental about the fact that we in the West are starved for some real sense of meaning and crying out for something that, in spite of all our apparent sophistication and material success, we are no longer even able to name. This western civilization of ours was created for a purpose. Until we start to discover that purpose again, our lives will be meaningless. Unless we touch our roots and make contact again with the essence of our past, we can have no future.

Ability

By Ralph Waldo Emerson

AbilityBig jobs usually go to the men who prove their ability to outgrow small ones.
People with great gifts are easy to find, but symmetrical and balanced ones never.
AchievementFinish each day and be done with it. You have done what you could. Some blunders and absurdities no doubt crept in; forget them as soon as you can. Tomorrow is a new day; begin it well and serenely and with too high a spirit to be encumbered with your old nonsense.
ActionA man's action is only a picture book of his creed.
Men's actions are too strong for them. Show me a man who has acted, and who has not been the victim and slave of his action.
There is a tendency for things to right themselves.
AdversityA man is a god in ruins.
Age and AgingWe do not count a man's years until he has nothing else to count.
AmbitionWithout ambition one starts nothing. Without work one finishes nothing. The prize will not be sent to you. You have to win it. The man who knows how will always have a job. The man who also knows why will always be his boss. As to methods there may be a million and then some, but principles are few. The man who grasps principles can successfully select his own methods. The man who tries methods, ignoring principles, is sure to have trouble.
AmusementThe intellectual man requires a fine bait; the sots are easily amused. But everybody is drugged with his own frenzy, and the pageant marches at all hours, with music and banner and badge.
AngerWe boil at different degrees.
Appearance'Tis very certain that each man carries in his eye the exact indication of his rank in the immense scale of men, and we are always learning to read it. A complete man should need no auxiliaries to his personal presence.
Arts and ArtistsClassic art was the art of necessity: modern romantic art bears the stamp of caprice and chance.
Perpetual modernness is the measure of merit in every work of art.
Sculpture and painting have the effect of teaching us manners and abolishing hurry.
AttitudeTo different minds, the same world is a hell, and a heaven.
BeautyAs soon as beauty is sought not from religion and love, but for pleasure, it degrades the seeker.
We ascribe beauty to that which is simple; which has no superfluous parts; which exactly answers its end; which stands related to all things; which is the mean of many extremes.
BeliefBelief consists in accepting the affirmations of the soul; unbelief, in denying them.
Books and ReadingOur high respect for a well read person is praise enough for literature.
There is creative reading as well as creative writing.
BraggingThere is also this benefit in brag, that the speaker is unconsciously expressing his own ideal. Humor him by all means, draw it all out, and hold him to it.
CharacterDo what you know and perception is converted into character.
No change of circumstances can repair a defect of character.
CharityGive no bounties: make equal laws: secure life and prosperity and you need not give alms.
ChoiceWe are as much informed of a writer's genius by what he selects as by what he originates.
CommitmentAll great masters are chiefly distinguished by the power of adding a second, a third, and perhaps a fourth step in a continuous line. Many a man had taken the first step. With every additional step you enhance immensely the value of your first.
CompensationFor everything you have missed, you have gained something else; and for everything you gain, you lose something else.
ConflictWe are the prisoners of ideas.
ContradictionLet me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
ConversationConversation is an art in which a man has all mankind for competitors.
CourageA great part of courage is the courage of having done the thing before.
When a resolute young fellow steps up to the great bully, the world, and takes him boldly by the beard, he is often surprised to find it comes off in his hand, and that it was only tied on to scare away the timid adventurers.
CourtesyCourtesy Life be not so short but that there is always time for courtesy.
CreedsAs men's prayers are a disease of the will, so are their creeds a disease of the intellect.
Critics and CriticismCriticism should not be querulous and wasting, all knife and root-puller, but guiding, instructive, inspiring.
DangerAs soon as there is life there is danger.
DecisionsOnce you make a decision, the universe conspires to make it happen.
DestinyFate, then, is a name for facts not yet passed under the fire of thought; for causes which are unpenetrated.
DifficultiesThere are always difficulties arising that tempt you to believe your critics are right.
DisciplineSelf-command is the main discipline.
DressI have heard with admiring submission the experience of the lady who declared that the sense of being perfectly well dressed gives a feeling of inward tranquility which religion is powerless to bestow.
EducationI pay the schoolmaster, but it is the school boys who educate my son.
The secret in education lies in respecting the student.
EnergyCoal is a portable climate. It carries the heat of the tropics to Labrador and the polar circle; and it is the means of transporting itself whithersoever it is wanted. Watt and Stephenson whispered in the ear of mankind their secret, that a half-ounce of coal will draw two tons a mile, and coal carries coal, by rail and by boat, to make Canada as warm as Calcutta, and with its comfort brings its industrial power.
EnthusiasmEnthusiasm is the leaping lightning, not to be measured by the horse-power of the understanding.
ExaggerationThere is no one who does not exaggerate!
ExerciseIntellectual tasting of life will not supersede muscular activity.
Extra MileI hate the giving of the hand unless the whole man accompanies it.
FactsEvery fact is related on one side to sensation, and, on the other, to morals. The game of thought is, on the appearance of one of these two sides, to find the other; given the upper, to find the under side.
FaithOur faith comes in moments... yet there is a depth in those brief moments which constrains us to ascribe more reality to them than to all other experiences.
FameFame is proof that the people are gullible.
FateFate is nothing but the deeds committed in a prior state of existence.
FearFear defeats more people than any other one thing in the world.
FreedomFor what avail the plough or sail, Or land or life, if freedom fail?
Friends and FriendshipA friend may well be reckoned the masterpiece of nature.
Go oft to the house of thy friend, for weeds choke the unused path.
I do then with my friends as I do with my books. I would have them where I can find them, but I seldom use them.
It is one of the blessings of old friends that you can afford to be stupid with them.
GeniusAccept your genius and say what you think.
The greatest genius is the most indebted person.
To believe your own thought, to believe that what is true for you in your private heart is true for all men -- that is genius.
GoalsWe aim above the mark to hit the mark.
Good and EvilThem meaning of good and bad, of better and worse, is simply helping or hurting.
GreatnessNo great man ever complains of want of opportunity.
Not he is great who can alter matter, but he who can alter my state of mind.
The search after the great men is the dream of youth, and the most serious occupation of manhood.
HappinessTo fill the hour -- that is happiness.
HeartGreat hearts steadily send forth the secret forces that incessantly draw great events.
Heroes and HeroismEvery hero becomes a bore at last.
HonestyBe true to your own act and congratulate yourself if you have done something strange and extravagant to break the monotony of a decorous age.
HypocrisyAt the entrance of a second person, hypocrisy begins.
IdeasIdeas must work through the brains and the arms of good and brave men, or they are no better than dreams.
ImaginationWe live by our imagination, our admiration s, and our sentiments.
ImitationImitation is suicide.
IndividualityA man must consider what a rich realm he abdicates when he becomes a conformist.
InheritanceOf course, money will do after its kind, and will steadily work to unspiritualize and unchurch the people to whom it was bequeathed.
IntegrityNothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.
Intelligence and IntellectualsOne definition of man is "an intelligence served by organs."
IntuitionIf the single man plant himself indomitably on his instincts, and there abide, the huge world will come round to him.
KnowledgeI would have the studies elective. Scholarship is to be created not by compulsion, but by awakening a pure interest in knowledge. The wise instructor accomplishes this by opening to his pupils precisely the attractions the study has for himself. The marking is a system for schools, not for the college; for boys, not for men; and it is an ungracious work to put on a professor.
LanguageLanguage is a city to the building of which every human being brought a stone.
Leaders and LeadershipWe are reformers in the spring and summer, but in autumn we stand by the old. Reformers in the morning, and conservers at night.
LearningNo man ever prayed heartily without learning something.
The years teach us much the days never knew.
Lies and LyingEvery violation of truth is not only a sort of suicide in the liar, but is a stab at the health of human society.
Life and LivingLike bees, they must put their lives into the sting they give.
Nothing is beneath you if it is in the direction of your life.
LiteraturePeople do not deserve to have good writings; they are so pleased with the bad.
LoveAll mankind loves a lover.
MannersManners are the happy way of doing things; each once a stroke of genius or of love --now repeated and hardened into usage. They form at last a rich varnish, with which the routine of life is washed, and its details adorned. If they are superficial, so are the dewdrops which give such depth to the morning meadows.
MartyrdomThe martyr cannot be dishonored. Every lash inflicted is a tongue of fame; every prison a more illustrious abode.
MenMen cease to interest us when we find their limitations.
MentorsWe boast our emancipation from many superstitions; but if we have broken any idols, it is through a transfer of idolatry.
MoneyIt requires a great deal of boldness and a great deal of caution to make a great fortune, and when you have it, it requires ten times as much skill to keep it.
MotivationIf you would lift me up you must be on higher ground.
NatureEverything in Nature contains all the powers of Nature. Everything is made of hidden stuff.
Nature is an endless combination and repetition of a very few laws. She hums the old well-known air through innumerable variations.
Nature... She pardons no mistakes. Her yea is yea, and her nay, nay.
NecessityNecessity does everything well.
ObstaclesAs long as a man stands in his own way, everything seems to be in his way.
OpportunityNever lose an opportunity of seeing anything that is beautiful; for beauty is God's handwriting -- a wayside sacrament. Welcome it in every fair face, in every fair sky, in every fair flower, and thank God for it as a cup of blessing.
Parents and ParentingIs the parent better than the child into whom he has cast his ripened being? Whence, then, this worship of the past?
PeaceNothing can bring you peace but yourself; nothing, but the triumph of principles.
PerformanceIt is hard to go beyond your public. If they are satisfied with cheap performance, you will not easily arrive at better. If they know what is good, and require it. you will aspire and burn until you achieve it. But from time to time, in history, men are born a whole age too soon.
PhilanthropistsThe worst of charity is that the lives you are asked to preserve are not worth preserving.
PlanningFew people have any next, they live from hand to mouth without a plan, and are always at the end of their line.
Poetry and PoetsIt does not need that a poem should be long. Every word was once a poem. Every new relationship is a new word.
PossibilitiesOh man! There is no planet sun or star could hold you, if you but knew what you are.
PowerNature arms each man with some faculty which enables him to do easily some feat impossible to any other.
The stupidity of men always invites the insolence of power.
PraiseWhen I was praised I lost my time, for instantly I turned around to look at the work I had thought slightly of, and that day I made nothing new.
PresentFinish each day before you begin the next, and interpose a solid wall of sleep between the two. This you cannot do without temperance.
PropertyProperty is an intellectual production. The game requires coolness, right reasoning, promptness, and patience in the players.
PurposeMen achieve a certain greatness unawares, when working to another aim.
QuotationsI hate quotations. Tell me what you know.
The adventitious beauty of poetry may be felt in the greater delight with a verse given in a happy quotation than in the poem.
ReformEvery reform was once a private opinion, and when it shall be a private opinion again, it will solve the problem of the age.
RichesMan was born to be rich, or grow rich by use of his faculties, by the union of thought with nature. Property is an intellectual production. The game requires coolness, right reasoning, promptness, and patience in the players.
Self-esteemWhatever games are played with us, we must play no games with ourselves.
Self-improvementThe never-ending task of self improvement.
Self-relianceNo one can cheat you out of ultimate success but yourself.
Self-trustSelf-trust is the first secret to success.
SilenceLet us be silent that we may hear the whispers of the gods.
SincerityEvery man alone is sincere. At the entrance of a second person, hypocrisy begins.
SocietySociety everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members. The virtue in most request is conformity. Self-reliance is its aversion. It loves not realities and creators, but names and customs.
SolitudeConversation enriches the understanding; but solitude is the school of genius.
SorrowThe only thing grief as taught me is to know how shallow it is.
SoulThe soul's emphasis is always right.
Spirit and SpiritualityThe foundations of a person are not in matter but in spirit.
StrengthWe acquire the strength we have overcome.
SuccessTo laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children; to earn the appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false friends; to appreciate beauty; to find the best in others; to leave the world a bit better, whether by a healthy child, a garden patch or a redeemed social condition; to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is to have succeeded.
TalentEvery man has his own vocation, talent is the call.
Talent is commonly developed at the expense of character.
Teachers and TeachingThe man who can make hard things easy is the educator.
Thoughts and ThinkingA man's what he thinks about all day long
The key to every man is his thought. Sturdy and defying though he look, he has a helm which he obeys, which is the idea after which all his facts are classified. He can only be reformed by showing him a new idea which commands his own.
Thought makes every thing fit for use.
What your heart thinks is great, is great. The soul's emphasis is always right.
Time and Time ManagementThe surest poison is time.
Travel and TourismNo man should travel until he has learned the language of the country he visits. Otherwise he voluntarily makes himself a great baby-so helpless and so ridiculous.
TrustTrust men and they will be true to you; treat them greatly and they will show themselves great.
Trust thyself: every heart vibrates to that iron string.
TruthTruth is beautiful, without doubt; but so are lies.
UglinessThe secret of ugliness consists not in irregularity, but in being uninteresting.
ValorThere is always safety in valor.
VictoryMen talk as if victory were something fortunate. Work is victory.
VirtueThe virtue in most request is conformity.
The virtues of society are vices of the saint. The terror of reform is the discovery that we must cast away our virtues, or what we have always esteemed such, into the same pit that has consumed our grosser vices.
VoiceA man's style is his mind's voice. Wooden minds, wooden voices.
WealthWealth is in applications of mind to nature; and the art of getting rich consists not in industry, much less in saving, but in a better order, in timeliness, in being at the right spot.
WisdomRaphael paints wisdom; Handel sings it, Phidias carves it, Shakespeare writes it, Wren builds it, Columbus sails it, Luther preaches it, Washington arms it, Watt mechanizes it.
Wisdom is like electricity. There is no permanently wise man, but men capable of wisdom, who, being put into certain company, or other favorable conditions, become wise for a short time, as glasses rubbed acquire electric power for a while.
WivesA man's wife has more power over him than the state has.
WordsIt makes a great difference in the force of a sentence, whether a man be behind it or no.
WorkWork is victory.

Ralph Waldo Emerson (May 25, 1803 – April 27, 1882)

Types of petty tyrants found in people

By Carlos Castaneda
The following quote collection has been culled from the Casteneda books and represents a distillation of Don Juan's philosophy of the warrior. Regardless of what you may think of the literal veracity of these books, they were for many in our culture, including me, the first encounter with the philosophy of the warrior. Don Juan's teachings about the Warrior stance have the perfection of a Samurai sword or arrows shot by a master Zen archer. Their concise, penetrating power is unequaled, and they pierce ego illusions like diamond bullets. Taken together they amount to a Toltec Warrior Manifesto. Someone once defined stories as "equipment for living." Don Juan's warrior teachings are also equipment for living, something never to leave behind, like a blade of impervious metal, a powerful ally to accompany you into any sort of wilderness.
I am already given to the power that rules my fate. And I cling to nothing, so I will havenothing to defend.I have no thoughts, so I will see.I fear nothing, so I will remember myself.
Detached and at ease, I will dart past the Eagle to be free.
Warriors have an ulterior purpose for their acts which has nothing to do with personal gain. The average man acts only if there is a chance for profit. Warriors act not for profit, but for the spirit.
For the average man, the world is weird because if he's not bored with it, he's at odds with it. For a warrior, the world is weird because it is stupendous, awesome, mysterious, unfathomable. A warrior must assume responsibility for being here, in this marvelous world, in this marvelous time.
Impeccability begins with a single act that has to be deliberate, precise and sustained. If that act is repeated long enough, one acquires a sense of unbending intent which can be applied to anything else. If that is accomplished the road is clear. One thing will lead to another until the warrior realizes his full potential.
Any movement of the assemblage point means a movement away from an excessive concern with the individual self. Shamans believe it is the position of the assemblage point which makes modern man a homicidal egoist, a being totally involved with his self-image. Having lost hope of ever returning to the source of everything, the average man seeks solace in his selfishness.
A warrior must cultivate the feeling that he has everything needed for the extravagant journey that is his life. What counts for a warrior is being alive. Life in itself is sufficient, self-explanatory and complete.Therefore, one may say without being presumptuous that the experience of experiences is being alive.
A warrior must focus his attention on the link between himself and his death. Without remorse or sadness or worrying, he must focus his attention on the fact that he does not have time and let his acts flow accordingly. He must let each of his acts be his last battle on earth. Only under those conditions will his acts have their rightful power. Otherwise they will be, for as long as he lives, the acts of a fool.
Note—Although the quotes use the default masculine pronoun "he," it is not assumed that warriors must be males. Many of the most powerful warriors in the Casteneda books are female.
Warriors compress time; this is the sixth principle of the art of stalking. Even an instant counts. In a battle for your life, a second is an eternity, an eternity that may decide the outcome. Warriors aim at succeeding, therefore they compress time. Warriors don't waste an instant.
A warrior acknowledges his pain but he doesn't indulge in it. The mood of the warrior who enters into the unknown is not one of sadness; on the contrary, he's joyful because he feels humbled by his great fortune, confident that his spirit is impeccable, and above all, fully aware of his efficiency. A warrior's joyfulness comes from having accepted his fate, and from having truthfully assessed what lies ahead of him.
The basic difference between an ordinary man and a warrior is that a warrior takes everything as a challenge, while an ordinary man takes everything as a blessing or as a curse.
The self-confidence of the warrior is not the self-confidence of the average man. The average man seeks certainty in the eyes of the onlooker and calls that self-confidence. The warrior seeks impeccability in his own eyes and calls that humbleness. The average man is hooked to his fellow men, while the warrior is hooked only to infinity.
It is much easier for warriors to fare well under conditions of maximum stress than to be impeccable under normal circumstances.
What seems natural is to think that a warrior who can hold his own in the face of the unknown can certainly face petty tyrants with impunity. But that's not necessarily so. What destroyed the superb warriors of ancient times was to rely on that assumption. Nothing can temper the spirit of a warrior as much as the challenge of dealing with impossible people in positions of power. Only under those conditions can warriors acquire the sobriety and serenity to withstand the pressure of the unknowable.
Knowledge comes to a warrior, floating, like specks of gold dust, the same dust that covers the wings of moths. So for a warrior, knowledge is like taking a shower, or being rained on b specks of dark gold dust.
A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him, no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive and he survives in the best of all possible fashions.
Acts have power. Especially when the warrior acting knows that those acts are his last battle. There is a strange consuming happiness in acting with the full knowledge that whatever he is doing may very well be his last act on earth.
If a warrior is to succeed in anything, the success must come gently, with a great deal of effort but with no stress or obsession.
Our fellow men are black magicians. And whoever is with them is a black magician on the spot. Think for a moment, can you deviate from the path that your fellow men have lined up for you? And if you remain with them, your thoughts and your actions are fixed forever in their terms. That is slavery. The warrior, on the other hand, is free from all that. Freedom is expensive, but the price is not impossible to pay. So, fear your captors, your masters. Don't waste your time and your power fearing freedom.
A warrior is never under siege. To be under siege implies that one has personal possessions that could be blockaded. A warrior has nothing in the world except his impeccability, and impeccability cannot be threatened.
To discard everything that is unnecessary is the second principle of the art of stalking. A warrior doesn't complicate things. He aims at being simple. He applies all the concentration he has to decide whether or not to enter into battle, for any battle is a battle for his life. This is the third principle of the art of stalking. A warrior must be willing and ready to make his last stand here and now. But not in a helter-skelter way.
The flaw with words is that they always make us feel enlightened, but when we turn around to face the world they always fail us and we end up facing the world as we always have, without enlightenment. For this reason, a warrior seeks to act rather than to talk, and to this effect, he gets a new description of the world—a new description where talking is not that important, and where new acts have new reflections.
Applying these principles brings about three results. The first is that stalkers learn never to take themselves seriously; they learn to laugh at themselves. If they are not afraid of being a fool, they can fool anyone. The second is that stalkers learn to have endless patience. Stalkers are never in a hurry; they never fret. And the third is that stalkers learn to have an endless capacity to improvise.
Only as a warrior can one withstand the path of knowledge. A warrior cannot complain or regret anything. His life is an endless challenge, and challenges cannot possibly be good or bad. Challenges are simple challenges.
The recommendation for warriors is not to have any material things on which to focus their power, but to focus it on the spirit, on the true flight into the unknown, not on trivialities.Everyone who wants to follow the warrior's path has to rid himself of the compulsion to possess and hold onto things.
Self-importance is man's greatest enemy. What weakens him is feeling offended by the deeds and misdeeds of his fellow men. Self-importance requires that one spend most of one's life offended by something or someone.
The hardest thing in the world is to assume the mood of a warrior. It is of no use to be sad and complain and feel justified in doing so, believing that someone is always doing something to us. Nobody is doing anything to anybody, much less to a warrior.
A warrior takes his lot, whatever it amy be, and accepts it in ultimate humbleness. He accepts in humbleness what he is, not as grounds for regret but as a living challenge.
By the way, Casteneda, just before he died, published an entire book of Don Juan quotations entitled The Arrow of Time.
When nothing is for sure we remain alert, perennially on our toes. It is more exciting not to know which bush the rabbit is hiding behind than to behave as though we knew everything.
As long as a man feels that he is the most important thing in the world, he cannot really appreciate the world around him. He is like a horse with blinders; all he sees is himself, apart from everything else.
There is no completeness without sadness and longing, for without them there is no sobriety, no kindness. Wisdom without kindness and knowledge without sobriety are useless.
Everything that warriors do is done as a consequence of a movement of their assemblage points, and such movements are ruled by the amount of energy warriors have at their command.
Power always makes a cubic centimeter of chance available to a warrior. The warrior's art is to be perennially fluid in order to pluck it.
The worst that could happen to us is that we have to die, and since that is already our unalterable fate, we are free; those who have lost everything no longer have anything to fear.
What we need to do to allow magic to get hold of us is to banish doubts from our minds. Once doubts are banished anything is possible.
A warrior must learn to make every act count, since he is going to be here in this world for only a short while, in fact, too short for witnessing all the marvels of it.
Feeling important makes one heavy, clumsy and vain. To be a warrior one needs to be light and fluid.
Dwelling upon the self too much produces a terrible fatigue. A man in that position is deaf and blind to everything else. The fatigue itself makes him cease to see the marvels all around him.
When one has nothing to lose, one becomes courageous. We are timid only when there is something we can still cling to.
For a seer, the truth is that all living beings are struggling to die. What stops death is awareness.
The only freedom warriors have is to behave impeccably. Not only is impeccability freedom; it is the only way to straighten out the human form.

In the tradition of the sorcerers to which don Juan belongs, it is maintained that the universe is predatorial in nature. For sorcerers, this is not a matter of speculation or of metaphorical predilection - they know for a fact that it is predatorial. Throughout the ages they have described the condition of man, which is about the bleakest description we know. As time goes by, this description gains more and more ground. Sorcerers say that just as we keep chickens, or gallinas in Spanish, in a coop, or a gallinero, some entities that come from a universe of awareness keep us in human coops. Sorcerers make a joke and say that those entities, which they call flyers, or voladores, keep us human beings, or seres humanos, cooped up in humaneros. The flyers of the sorcerers' tradition are black shadows that we sometimes detect and explain away as floaters in the retina. Sorcerers know for a fact, by means of their capacity to see energy directly, that those shadows are predatorial and that they keep us alive in order to devour our awareness. Sorcerers say that our awareness is like a sheen around our total field of energy that looks to them like a luminous ball. To them, this sheen of awareness is like a plastic cover that would make the luminous ball shine even more if it were not for the fact that it has been eaten away down to the level of our heels.
Here is where the sorcerers description gets very disturbing to us; sorcerers say that the only sheen of awareness left in us by our eaters is the awareness of self-reflection. Therefore, all we are left with is the concern with me, myself and I. In our personal lives we have corroborated that the only force left in the immediate world around us is the force of self-importance, which comes disguised in the form of humility, compassion, altruism, kindness, you name it.
This sorcerer's description is of course our ultimate nemesis; we don't want to believe that we are being raised for food. In this sense, naturally, the sorcerers' tradition is at total variance with any other kind of spiritual tradition. Sorcerers say, and believe me, not out of cynicism, that every ideal we deal with in terms of spiritual traditions, religions, etc, is a device concocted by the flyers to keep us in a lull. Imagine our disquietude upon examining, weighing and pondering this proposition.
through recapitulating we can acquire a hard discipline which is the only means by which we can make ourselves unpalatable to the flyers. Sorcerers assert that the only awareness which cannot be eaten is the awareness produced by iron-handed discipline. The recapitulation seems to create a condition of fluidity and determination which is the discipline that sorcerers talk about, not the discipline of compulsive, routinary behavior.

'We are perceivers,' he proceeded. 'The world that we perceive, though, is an illusion. It was created by a description that was told to us since the moment we were born. 'We, the luminous beings, are born with two rings of power, but we use only one to create the world. That ring, which is hooked very soon after we are born, is reason, and its companion is talking. Between the two they concoct and maintain the world. 'So, in essence, the world that your reason wants to sustain is ' the world created by a description and its dogmatic and inviolable rules, which the reason learns to accept and defend.
'The secret of the luminous beings is that they have another ring of power which is never used, the will. The trick of the sorcerer is the same trick of the average man. Both have a description; one, the average man, upholds it with his reason; the other, the sorcerer, upholds it with his will. Both descriptions have their rules and the rules are perceivable, but the advantage of the sorcerer is that will is more engulfing than reason
The diagram in the ashes had two epicentres; one he called 'reason', the other, 'will'. 'Reason' was interconnected directly with a point he called 'talking'. Through 'talking', 'reason' was indirectly connected to three other points, 'feeling', 'dreaming' and 'seeing'. The other epicentre, 'will', was directly connected to 'feeling', 'dreaming' and 'seeing'; but only indirectly to 'reason' and 'talking'.I remarked that the diagram was different from the one I had recorded years before.'The outer form is of no importance,' he said. 'These points represent a human being and can be drawn in any way you want.''Do they represent the body of a human being?' I asked.'Don't call it the body,' he said. 'These are eight points on the fibres of a luminous being. A sorcerer says, as you can see in the diagram, that a human being is, first of all, will, because will is directly connected to three points, feeling, dreaming and seeing; then next, a human being is reason. This is properly a centre that is smaller than will; it is connected only with talking.'"What are the other two points, don Juan?'.....'We may say that every one of us brings to the world eight points. Two of them, reason and talking, are known by everyone. Feeling is always vague but somehow familiar. But only in the world of sorcerers does one get fully acquainted with dreaming, seeing and will. And finally, at the outer edge of that world one encounters the other two. The eight points make the totality of oneself.'
He showed me in the diagram that in essence all the points could be made to connect with one another indirectly.I asked him again about the two mysterious remaining points. He showed me that they were connected only to 'will' and that they were removed from 'feeling', 'dreaming* and 'seeing", and much more distant from 'talking' and 'reason'. He pointed with his finger to show that they were isolated from the rest and from each other.'Those two points will never yield to talking or to reason,' he said. 'Only will can handle them. Reason is so removed from them that it is utterly useless to try figuring them out.
He touched my head and said that that was the centre off 'reason' and 'talking'. The tip of my sternum was the centre of I 'feeling'. The area below the navel was 'will'. 'Dreaming' was on the right side against the ribs. 'Seeing' on the left. He said that sometimes in some warriors 'seeing' and 'dreaming' were on the right side.
We are perceivers. We are an awareness; we are not objects; we have no solidity. We are boundless. The world of objects and solidity is a way of making our passage on earth convenient. It is only a description that was created to help us. We, or rather our reason, forget that the description is only a description and thus we entrap the totality of ourselves in a vicious circle from which we rarely emerge in our lifetime.

Carlos Castaneda (25 December 1925 – 27 April 1998)

Image

By Alan Wilson Watts
A myth is an image in terms of which we try to make sense of the world. And although our bodies are bounded with skin, and we can differentiate between outside and inside, they cannot exist except in a certain kind of natural environment. And the attitude of faith is the very opposite of clinging to belief, of holding on. And the image of the world in the book of Genesis is that the world is an artifact. It is made, as a potter takes clay and forms pots out of it, or as a carpenter takes wood and makes tables and chairs out of it. And the more you become aware of the unknown self - if you become aware of it - the more you realize that it is inseparably connected with everything else that is. Buddhism has in it no idea of there being a moral law laid down by somekind of cosmic lawgiver. Buddhism is not saying that the Self, the great atman, or whatnot, it isn't denying that the experience which corresponds to these words is realizable. But at any rate, the point is that God is what nobody admits to being, and everybody really is. But I'll tell you what hermits realize. If you go off into a far, far forest and get very quiet, you'll come to understand that you're connected with everything. But of course in Oriental cultures, they don't think of God as an autocrat. God is the fundamental energy of the world which performs all this world without having to think about it. But the attitude of faith is to let go, and become open to truth, whatever it might turn out to be. But the point is this: when you're feeling blue and bored, it's not a good idea to have a drink, because you may become dependant on alcohol whenever you feel unhappy. But to me nothing - the negative, the empty - is exceedingly powerful. But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us. Faith is a state of openness or trust. I find that the sensation of myself as an ego inside a bag of skin is really a hallucination. If you awaken from this illusion, and you understand that black implies white, self implies other, life implies death - or shall I say, death implies life - you can conceive yourself. If you study the writings of the mystics, you will always find things in them that appear to be paradoxes, as in Zen, particularly. In known history, nobody has had such capacity for altering the universe than the people of the United States of America. And nobody has gone about it in such an aggressive way. In other words, a person who is fanatic in matters of religion, and clings to certain ideas about the nature of God and the universe, becomes a person who has no faith at all. My metaphysics, let me be perfectly frank with you, are that there the central self, you can call it God, you can call it anything you like, and it's all of us. Obviously a body requires air, and the air must be within a certain temperature range. Omnipotence is not knowing how everything is done; it's just doing it. People today think being a hermit is a very unhealthy thing to do. Very antisocial, doesn't contribute anything to everybody else - because everybody else is busy contributing like blazes, and a few people have to run off and get out of the way. Religion is not a department of life; it is something that enters into the whole of it. See, Buddhism is not essentially moralistic. So the bodhisattva saves all beings, not by preaching sermons to them, but by showing them that they are delivered, they are liberated, by the act of not being able to stop changing. So the relationship between the environment and the organism is transactional. So then, in Buddhism, change is emphasized. So then, the relationship of self to other is the complete realization that loving yourself is impossible without loving everything defined as other than yourself. So to describe myself in a scientific way, I must also describe my surroundings, which is a clumsy way getting around to the realization that you are the entire universe. So what I think we could aim for in the way of human civilization and culture would be a system in which we are all highly aware of our existing interconnection and unity with the whole domain of nature, and therefore do not have to go to all sorts of wild extremes to find that union. So what is discord at one level of your being is harmony at another level. So, the trouble is, that we have one-sided minds, and we notice the wave of life when it is at its peak or crest. Somehow the idea of God we get from the holy scriptures doesn't seem to fit the world around us, just as you wouldn't ascribe a composition by Stravinsky to Bach. The difficulty for most of us in the modern world is that the old-fashioned idea of God has become incredible or implausible. The Earth is geological, yes, but this geological entity grows people, and our existence on the Earth is a symptom of this other system, and its balances, as much as the solar system in turn is a symptom of our galaxy, and our galaxy in its turn is a symptom of a whole company of other galaxies. The ego is nothing other than the focus of conscious attention. The idea of anatman, of non-self, is applied in Buddhism not only to the individual ego, but also to the notion that there is a self of the universe, a kind of impersonal or personal god, and so it is generally supposed that Buddhism is generally atheistic. The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile. The myths underlying our culture and underlying our common sense have not taught us to feel identical with the universe, but only parts of it, only in it, only confronting it - aliens. The style of God venerated in the church, mosque, or synagogue seems completely different from the style of the natural universe. The whole idea of there being only space, and nothing else at all is not only inconceivable but perfectly meaningless, because we always know what we mean by contrast. There's no point in going on living unless we make the assumption that the situation of life is optimal. To have faith is to trust yourself to the water. When you swim you don't grab hold of the water, because if you do you will sink and drown. Instead you relax, and float. Underneath the superficial self, which pays attention to this and that, there is another self more really us than I. Wars based on principle are far more destructive... the attacker will not destroy that which he is after. We identify in our exerience a differentiation between what we do and what happens to us. Well actually, when you look out there and see all these people and things sitting around, that's how it feels inside your head. What the devil is the point of surviving, going on living, when it's a drag? But you see, that's what people do. What we really are is, first of all, the whole of our body. You all suffer because you cling to the world, and you don't recognize that the world is anitya and anatman. You and I are all as much continuous with the physical universe as a wave is continuous with the ocean. You are a function of this total galaxy, bounded by the Milky Way, and this galaxy is a function of all other galaxies. You are that vast thing that you see far, far off with great telescopes. You are the eternal thing that comes and goes that appears - now as John Jones, now as Mary Smith, now as Betty Brown - and so it goes, forever and ever and ever. You don't look out there for God, something in the sky, you look in you. You must understand as one of the fundamental points of Buddhism, the idea of the world as being in flux.

Alan Wilson Watts (January 6, 1915 – November 16, 1973)

Knowledge

By Osho (1931 - 1990)

Absolute
Never use the word 'absolute', avoid it as much as possible, because it is the word 'absolute' that creates fanatics. Nobody has the absolute truth. Truth is so vast! All truths are bound to be relative. It is the word 'absolute' that has dragged the whole of humanity into misery. The Mohammedan thinks the absolute truth is in the Koran. The Christian thinks the absolute truth is in the Bible. The Hundi thins the absolute truth is in the Gita, and so on and so forth. And how can there be so many absoulte truths? Hence the conflicts, quarrels, wars, religious crusades, jihads: 'Kill those who are claiming that their truth is absolute - our truth is absolute!' Down the ages, more murders, more rapes and more lootings have been commited in the name of religion than in the name of anything else. And the reason? The reason is in the word 'absoulte'.
Always remember: all that we can ever know is bound to be relative.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Celebration of Existence
Existence is abundant - millions and millions of flowers, millions of birds, millions of animals - everything in abundance. Nature is not ascetic, it is dancing everywhere - in the ocean, in the trees. It is singing everywhere - in the wind passing through the pine trees, in the birds….What is the need of millions of galaxies, of each galaxy having millions of stars? There seems to be no need, except that abundance is the very nature of existence; that richness is the very core. Existence does not believe in poverty.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tomorrow
You don't have much time. Don't postpone anything. Don't say 'tomorrow' - tomorrow is a mirage. The moment is now. Be alert now, be awake now, this moment, and there is serenity and there is calmness. And suddenly you are relaxed. The source is contacted and you have arrived home. This is the home for which you have been searching for so many lives. But your methodology has been wrong. You have made it a goal. And it is not a goal, it is the source.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Time
In Sanskrit we have the same word for both 'time' and 'death' ; kal. Sanskrit may be the only language in the whole world that has the same word for time and death. That's why it can be said truthfully that it is the only language transformed by the insight of the seers. In the last 10,000 years thousands of people in the East have become enlightened and they have changed the very structure of the Sanskrit language. They have given it the colour of their enlightenment, they have made words luminous, they have given them new meanings which cannot be given by unenlightened persons.
Now to call time and death the same name is a great insight. It is not a question of knowing linguistics, it is a question of experiencing something tremendously valuable.
Time and death are the same; to live in time means to live in death. And the moment time disappears, death disappears. So when you are utterly silent, when no thought moves in your mind, time disappears. You cannot have any idea what time it is. And the moment time disappears and the clock of your mind stops, suddenly you enter the world of the timeless, the eternal world, the world of the absolute.
In an incident that is not reported in the New Testament but it is part of the Sufi tradition, a seeker asks Jesus: 'What will be the most significant thing in your Kingdom of God?' And the answer is amazing. Jesus says: 'Their shall be time no longer.' There will be no past, no future; there will be only the present.
And let me tell you that the present is not part of time. Of course in the schools, collages and the universities you have been taught again and again that time has three tenses - past, present and future. That is absolutely wrong according to those who know. Past and future are time, but the present is not time. The present belongs to eternity. Past and future belong to this world of the relative, this world of change. Between the two penetrates the beyond, the transcendental, and that is the present. Now is part of eternity.
If you live in time, death is bound to happen. In fact, to say 'bound to happen' is not right - it is already happening. The moment a child is born he starts dying. It may take 70, 80 years, that's another matter. But however long it takes, the child dies - slowly, miserly, in installments, a little bit everyday, every hour - and goes on dying, dying, dying until the process is complete. When you say that somebody has died today, don't be misguided by your statement. He has been dying for 80 years. Today the process is complete, that's all.
The source if time and death is the mind. The mind is time, the mind is death. One aspect of the mind is time, another aspect of the mind is death. But through meditation, through watching the mind, you can leave death behind.
The Upanishads call this process neti neti, neither this nor that. It is a process of elimination: 'I am not this - this body, this mind. Then who am I?' Eliminate the non-essential, put it aside and go on eliminating the non-essential until on the essential is left. And that is the essential? How will you decide that only the essential is left?
When there is nothing left to be denied, nothing left to be eliminated. Go on emptying your house; throw all the furniture out. When there is nothing left to be thrown out, then a great revelation happens: You gain immortality; the absolute arises in you in all its beauty and splendour, in all its ecstasy.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Calculation
Life can be lived in two ways, either as calculation or as poetry. We have two sides to our inner being: the calculating side, which creates science, business, politics, and the non-calculating side, which creates poetry, sculpture, music. These two sides have not yet been bridged, they have separate existences. Because of this we are immensely impoverished, we remain unnecessarily lopsided.
In scientific language it is said that your brain has two hemispheres. The left hemisphere calculates, is mathematical, is prose, and the right hemisphere is poetry, is love, is song. One side logic, the other side is love. One side is syllogism, the other side is song. And they are not really bridged, hence we live in a kind of split.
My effort is to bridge these two hemispheres. We should be as scientific as possible as far as the objective world is concerned and as musical as possible as far as the world of relationships is concerned.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Boredom
Boredom simply means that the way you are living is wrong. Why do you feel bored? You feel bored because you have been living in accordance with dead patterns given to you by others. Renounce those patterns! Start living on you own …
The Whole of humanity is bored because the person who would have been a mystic is a mathematician, the person who would have been a mathematician is a politician, the person who would have been a poet is a businessman.
Nobody is in the right place; everybody is somewhere else. So when you are bored with yourself it is because you have not been sincere with yourself, you have not been honest with yourself, you have not been respectful to your own being. You have to take risks. Boredom can disappear in a single moment if you are ready to take risks …
---------------------------------------------------------------
At Home
There is no home, unless we find it in ourselves.
You come into this world absolutely like a plain, unwritten, open book.
You have to write your fate; there is nobody who is writing your fate. And who will write your fate? And how? And for what?
You come into the world just an open potentiality, a multi-dimensional potentiality.
You have to write your fate, you have to create your destiny. You have to become yourself.
You are not born with a ready-made self. You are born only as a seed-and you can die also only as a seed, but you can become a flower, can become a tree.
---------------------------------------------------------------
No-Mind
If the mind wants to comprehend reality, it will have to go beyond the past and the future. But if it goes beyond the past and the future, it is no longer the mind at all. Hence the insistence of all the great masters of the world that the door to reality is no-mind.
Slip out of the mind and you will know what it is.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Love
You will be surprised to know that the English word love comes from a Sanskrit word lobha; lobha means greed. It may have been just a coincidence that the English word love grew out of a Sanskrit word that means greed, but my feeling is that it cannot be just coincidence. There must be something more mysterious behind it, there must be some alchemical reason behind it. In fact, greed digested becomes love. It is greed, lobha, digested well, which becomes love.
Love is sharing; greed is hoarding. Greed only wants and never gives, and love knows only giving and never asks for anything in return; it is unconditional sharing. There may be some alchemical reason that lobha has become love in the English language. Lobha becomes love as far as inner alchemy is concerned.
Begin with one of the most profound teaching of Gatama the Buddha. Love yourself.
Just the opposite has been taught to you by all the traditions of the world - all the civilizations, all the cultures, all the churches. They say: Love others, don't love yourself. And there is a certain cunning strategy behing their teaching.
Love is nourishment for the soul. Just as food is to the body, so love is to the soul. Without food the body is weak, without love the soul is weak. And no state, no church, no vested interest has ever wanted people to have strong souls, because a person with spiritual energy is bound to be rebellious.
Love makes you rebellious, revolutionary. Love gives you wings to soar high. Love gives you insight into things, so that nobody can deceive you, exploit you, oppress you.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Conscience
Society has put its own ideas inside you and they function as your conscience. They don't allow your real conscience to surface; they don't allow your own consciousness to come and take charge of your life.
Society is very political. Outside it has posted the policeman and the magistrate; inside it has posted the conscience, the inner policeman, the inner magistrate. And it is not even satisfied with this arrangement - above, it has posted a god, the super-policeman, the chief constable. He is up there looking down on you; even in your bathroom he is watching you. Somebody is following you continuously, you are never left alone just to be yourself.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Individuality
You may not be aware that the word 'personality' comes from the Greek. It means 'a mask'. In Greek drama, in the ancient days, every actor used to have on a mask. Persona means 'mask', and from persona has come the word 'personality'. Unless you drop your personality you will not be able to find your individuality.
Individuality is given by existence; personality is imposed by society. Personality is a social convenience. Society cannot tolerate individuality, because individuality will not follow like a sheep. Individuality has the quality of the lion; the lion moves alone.
Sheep are always in a crowd, hoping that being in the crowd will feel cozy. Being in a crowd you feel more protected, secure. If somebody attacks, their is every possibility of saving yourself in the crowd, but alone? Only the lions move alone.
And every one of you is born a lion, but society goes on conditioning you, programming your mind to be a sheep. It gives you a personality, a cozy personality - very nice, very convenient, very obedient. But it is not individuality.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Nothingness
Nothingness can either be just emptiness or it can be a tremendous fullness. It can be negative or it can be positive. If it is negative, it is like death, darkness. Religions have called it hell. It is hell because there is no joy in it, no song in it, their is no heartbeat, no dance. Nothing flowers, nothing opens. It is simply empty.
This empty nothingness has created great fear in people. That's why in the West particularly, God has never been called nothingness except by a few mystics like Dionysius, Eckhart, Boehme; but they are not the main current of Western thinking. The West has always conceived nothingness is negative terms, hence it has created a tremendous fear of it. And they go on saying to people that the empty mind is the Devil's workshop.
The East has known the positive aspect of nothingness too; it is one of the greatest contributions to human consciousness. Buddha would laugh at the statement that an empty mind is the Devil's workshop. He would say, 'Only in emptiness, only in nothingness, does godliness happen.' But he would be talking about the positive phenomenon.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Alchemy
Meditate on something negative and you will be surprised: slowly sadness turns to joy, anger to compassion, greed to sharing, and so on, so forth. This is the science of inner alchemy: how to change the negative into the positive, how to change the base metal into gold.
Remember, never start with the positive, because you don't know anything about the positive. Ignore the positive thinkers'. They don't know anything about the inner alchemy. You don't begin with gold. If you already have gold, then what's is the point of beginning at all? You don't need alchemy. So you have to begin with the base metal and the base metal is what you have, is what you are. Hell is what you are; it has to be transformed into heaven. Poison has to be transformed into nectar. Base metal has to be transformed into gold, Start with the negative.
And once you start with the negative, you don't need to think about the positive at all. If you meditate on the negative, if you go deeply into it, to the deepest root of it, suddenly there is an explosion: the negative disappears and the positive appears. In fact the positive has always been there, hidden behind the negative. The negative was a shelter. It was needed because you were not yet wothy enough to recieve the positive.

Osho (1931 - 1990)

Eating and Drinking

By Kahlil Gibran

Then an old man, a keeper of an inn, said, 'Speak to us of Eating and Drinking.'
And he said:
Would that you could live on the fragerance of the earth, and like an air plant be sustained by the light.
But since you must kill to eat, and rob the young of its mother's milk to quench your thirst, let it then be an act of worship,
And let your board stand an altar on which the pure and the innocent of forest and plain are sacrificed for that which is purer and still more innocent in many.
When you kill a beast say to him in your heart,
'By the same power that slays you, I to am slain; and I too shall be consumed. For the law that delivered you into my hand shall deliver me into a mightier hand.
Your blood and my blood is naught but the sap that feeds the tree of heaven.'
And when you crush an apple with your teeth, say to it in your heart,
'Your seeds shall live in my body,
And the buds of your tomorrow shall blossom in my heart,
And your fragrance shall be my breath,
And together we shall rejoice through all the seasons.'
And in the autumn, when you gather the grapes of your vineyard for the winepress, say in you heart,
'I too am a vineyard, and my fruit shall be gathered for the winepress,
And like new wine I shall be kept in eternal vessels.'
And in winter, when you draw the wine, let there be in your heart a song for each cup;
And let there be in the song a remembrance for the autumn days, and for the vineyard, and for the winepress.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Talking And then a scholar said, 'Speak of Talking.'
And he answered, saying:
You talk when you cease to be at peace with your thoughts;
And when you can no longer dwell in the solitude of your heart you live in your lips, and sound is a diversion and a pastime.
And in much of your talking, thinking is half murdered.
For thought is a bird of space, that in a cage of words many indeed unfold its wings but cannot fly.
There are those among you who seek the talkative through fear of being alone.
The silence of aloneness reveals to their eyes their naked selves and they would escape.
And there are those who talk, and without knowledge or forethought reveal a truth which they themselves do not understand.
And there are those who have the truth within them, but they tell it not in words.
In the bosom of such as these the spirit dwells in rhythmic silence.
When you meet your friend on the roadside or in the market place, let the spirit in you move your lips and direct your tongue.
Let the voice within your voice speak to the ear of his ear;
For his soul will keep the truth of your heart as the taste of the wine is remembered
When the color is forgotten and the vessel is no more.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Beauty is life when life unveils her holy face. But you are life and you are the veil. Beauty is eternity gazing at itself in a mirror. But you are eternity and you are the mirror.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Self-Knowledge And a man said, 'Speak to us of Self-Knowledge.'
And he answered, saying:
Your hearts know in silence the secrets of the days and the nights.
But your ears thirst for the sound of your heart's knowledge.
You would know in words that which you have always know in thought.
You would touch with your fingers the naked body of your dreams.
And it is well you should.
The hidden well-spring of your soul must needs rise and run murmuring to the sea;
And the treasure of your infinite depths would be revealed to your eyes.
But let there be no scales to weigh your unknown treasure;
And seek not the depths of your knowledge with staff or sounding line.
For self is a sea boundless and measureless.
Say not, 'I have found the truth,' but rather, 'I have found a truth.'
Say not, 'I have found the path of the soul.' Say rather, 'I have met the soul walking upon my path.'
For the soul walks upon all paths.
The soul walks not upon a line, neither does it grow like a reed.
The soul unfolds itself, like a lotus of countless petals.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Joy and Sorrow Then a woman said, 'Speak to us of Joy and Sorrow.'
And he answered: Your joy is your sorrow unmasked. And the selfsame well from which your laughter rises was oftentimes filled with your tears. And how else can it be? The deeper that sorrow carves into your being, the more joy youcan contain. Is not the cup that hold your wine the very cup that was burned in the potter's oven? And is not the lute that soothes your spirit, the very wood that was hollowed with knives? When you are joyous, look deep into your heart and you shall find it is only that which has given you sorrow that is giving you joy. When you are sorrowful look again in your heart, and you shall see that in truth you are weeping for that which has been your delight. Some of you say, 'Joy is greater than sorrow,' and others say, 'Nay, sorrow is the greater.' But I say unto you, they are inseparable. Together they come, and when one sits alone with you at your board, remember that the other is asleep upon your bed. Verily you are suspended like scales between your sorrow and your joy. Only when you are empty are you at standstill and balanced. When the treasure-keeper lifts you to weigh his gold and his silver, needs must your joy or your sorrow rise or fall.

Kahlil Gibran (1883-1931)

Questions and Answers

Friday, July 28, 2006
by Dr. Michio Kaku

Question:
As the universe expands, will the constants change? For example will e, pi, c, and h all change due to the expansion? If so, at what degree of change will life become impossible due to the change in physical processes?

Response:
At the present time, there is some speculation among physicists that these constants may change with time. Mathematical constants, such as e and pi, will not change, but G (Newton's constant), h (Planck's constant), and c (the speed of light) might. Years ago, the Nobel laureate Paul Dirac speculated that G might change over cosmological time periods. And more recently, there has been some data (hotly debated) that c might be changing with time, which in turn has created a small cottage industry of papers trying to modify Einstein's special theory of relativity. I personally remain cautious. So far, there is no solid experimental evidence that the fundamental constants are changing with time. And theoretically, string theory (the leading "theory of everything") predicts that these constants will not change at a fundamental level. Although I am skeptical of changing the fundamental constants, physicists should always remain open to "crazy" ideas, because one day one of them might be right.
If some basic constants were to change, however, life as we know it might be impossible. A slight change in G and the nuclear force, for example, might make stars burn out much too quickly for planets and life to form, or else nuclei might be unstable, and hence the atoms of our body may disintegrate. This is the anthropic principle, the fact that the fundamental constants seem to be finely tuned to allow for life. Changing them even slightly makes life impossible.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Question:
What exactly do scientists agree on what the physical form of a black hole is? I've seen many models, and they all show a flat plane, with the black hole sinking down into what looks like an odd-shaped hole in a flat plane. This confuses me because I know that space isn't a flat plane. Is a black hole more like a singular point in space that everything is sucked into, almost in the shape of a ball? Or do scientists perceive these models as portals into other dimension.

Response:
You are correct that the popular depiction of a black holea flat plane with a sinking hole in the centeris incorrect. Moviemakers forget that this funnel-like black hole is only a teaching device that we physicists use to describe curved space, which is difficult to illustrate.
For a nonrotating black hole, the most realistic description might be a black sphere. The sphere represents the event horizon, or the point of no return. Inside the sphere there is presumably a tiny dot, the black hole itself. For a rotating black hole, the black hole itself is probably a ring of spinning neutrons, which does not collapse because of centrifugal forces. The ring is then enclosed by the event horizon.
The debate occurs concerning what happens if you pass through the ring. Since gravity is finite inside the ring, mathematically you will fall outside our universe through a wormhole into a parallel universe. In fact, each time you pass through the ring, you enter a new parallel universe. However, there is a debate as to whether you can actually make it through the ring. Some physicists believe that the wormhole may close up as you enter it, or that you might be killed by radiation effects. This is still an open question.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Question:
What is exactly hyperspace, and how exactly does one access it? Can you overview the quantum "space foam" for me also?

Response:
Hyperspace, simply put, is higher dimensional space-time beyond the familiar three dimensions of space and one of time. So far, there is absolutely no proof of the existence of hyperspace, although hyperspace gives us the most compelling method by which to unify the forces of nature. At present, several physics labs around the world are doing experiments to prove or disprove the existence of these higher dimensions.
Theoretically speaking, in something called M-theory, the universe can be considered to be a "membrane" floating in 11-dimensional hyperspace. This means there could be other membrane universes out there, also drifting in 11-dimensional hyperspace.
Space-time foam is simply the grainy structure of space-time at very small distances, the Planck distance, or 10 to the minus 33 centimeters. At these very tiny distances, we believe that space-time becomes foamy, with tiny little bubbles and holes emerging. These bubbles are "baby universes," and the holes are wormholes connecting our universe with another parallel universe. So far, our instruments are too primitive to probe these very tiny distances. Some believe that an advanced civilization might be able to grab one of these holes in the foam and stretch it, giving us a wormhole that may connect two points in space and time, although this is still speculative.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Question:
If I were to enter a parallel universe, would the atoms in my body then turn into energy since I would be out of phase?

Response:
It is not clear if we can ever enter a parallel universe. However, if we could, the dynamics depend on precisely how we enter it. For example, if this parallel universe opened up via the "false vacuum" of inflationary theory, then the new universe would be based on a different vacuum, with potentially dangerous properties; that is, the protons and neutrons of our body might not be stable, and the atoms of our body would dissolve. Or, if we entered the parallel universe via a Kerr black hole, then it's not clear if we would be destroyed upon entering the wormhole. On the other hand, it might be possible to find false vacuums very similar to ours, or to build sufficient shielding to make possible a voyage through the Einstein-Rosen bridge. These, and many other fascinating properties of parallel universes, are discussed in my latest book, Parallel Worlds (Doubleday) which hit the bookstores in January. In that book, I speculate that any advanced civilization facing the ultimate Big Freeze that will destroy the universe will necessarily have to exploit the unified field theory and open up a gateway to a warmer, neighboring parallel universe.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Question:
How can a nanobot be created that is smaller than an atom? Wouldn't the nanobot be made of atoms? Even if it were possible, how can you shrink DNA, which is molecular? I smell random speculation!

Response:
Nanobots, of course, cannot be smaller than an atom. However, if a single sophisticated atomic nanobot could make it through a wormhole, then the rest of the information necessary to reconstruct our DNA need not be molecular at all. For example, a Type III civilization could send information (in the form of gamma-ray pulses or subatomic particles) across the wormhole, giving detailed instructions to the nanobot on the other side concerning how to reconstruct the DNA necessary to resurrect an entire civilization. Since information can be carried by subatomic particles and photons, then DNA molecules themselves need not be transmitted through the wormhole. All of this is sheer speculation, of course, but there is nothing in the laws of physics forbidding this, as far as we know.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Question:
The article "How to Survive the End of the Universe" describing negative matter was interesting. This compound has been known since the 1960s. Anyone who watched Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoons will know it as upsidaisium.

Response:
Negative matter has been featured in many science fiction stories (since it has antigravity properties) and even cartoons. Anything that "falls up" qualifies as negative matter. Unfortunately, in the realm of real physics, no one has yet found any negative matter (indeed, it would have been ejected by Earth billions of years ago), but the stakes are high. Anyone who finds negative matter will surely win the Nobel Prize. Also, remember that negative matter is the basic ingredient for time machines.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Question:
In "Seeing the Unseen" (December) E. L. Doctorow discusses the wall between science and the unfathomable. Later, in "How to Survive the End of the Universe" Michio Kaku discusses the theory of infinite parallel universes. The question is: Is the concept of infinity belong in the realm of science or in the realm of the unfathomable? That is to say, on which side of the wall does it lie?

Response:
You raise some difficult theological and epistemological questions! In my personal point of view, everything is, in principle, knowable. We cannot know all the truths about the universe, but we can, with enough time, come arbitrarily close. For example, some infinities we see in physics are actually an illusion, created by our faulty mathematics and physics. The quantum theory of the relativistic electron, for example, was once thought to be hopelessly riddled with infinities, but Feynman, Schwinger, and Tomonaga won the Nobel Prize for showing how to banish the infinities of quantum-field theories. Similarly, the singularities we find in general relativity, such as black holes and big bangs, are actually due to the failure of Einstein's theory at these extreme points, signaling the necessity of a higher theory, such as string theory. Other infinities, such as the infinite number of universes in a multiverse, are perhaps real and physical and cannot be banished using clever mathematics. Of course, we can never know everything about the infinite number of these universes (it's hard enough knowing the truths about just our universe!), but personally I feel that if the theory is correct and we have enough time, we may come close to knowing about them as well. To sum up: I think, with enough time and patience, we will come arbitrarily close to knowing everything physical about the so-called unfathomable.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Question:
In your December 2004 issue Michio Kaku advocates sending a probe through a black hole. Here are some comments on this project. I believe that the nearest known black hole is near the center of our galaxy, about 50,000 light-years from here. If we build a probe that can accelerate to 70 percent of light speed (very expensive), it could make the trip in about 71,000 years. A signal could get back after another 50,000 to 121,000 years after launch. Can we build a machine that will work after 71,000 years in space, including millennia of intense ionizing radiation? Would anyone be listening? Will the human race even exist, considering its tendency to collective insanity (war)?

Response:
Stellar black holes have been found in our vicinity, so we need not journey 25,000 light-years or so to the galactic center (where there is a monstrous black hole weighing about 3 million solar masses). But you correctly conclude that communicating with a probe sent to a black hole (by a Type 0 civilization like ours) would be impractical. My point is that a Type III civilization, perhaps 100,000 to a million years more advanced than ours, would have already mapped out most of the galaxy. Given these vast timescales, they would have enough time to send trillions of self-replicating robotic probes throughout the galaxy (exponentially growing like a swarm of viruses), to locate all the neighboring black holes, even traveling at sublight speed. Moreover, a Type III civilization may, by definition, have the ability to manipulate the Planck energy (10 to the 19 billion electron volts), so it is conceivable that they may be able to create wormholes to visit distant parts of the galaxy. In conclusion, what is impossible for a Type 0 civilization like ours may seem like child's play to a Type III civilization.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Question:
I read the December article on escaping an ending universe, and one small detail caught me for its omission. Actually it wasn't truly omitted, just possibly overlooked for importance. The seventh option for escaping the universeusing nanobotstalked about re-creating everything on another side, basically sending information through the wormhole via machine. Perhaps it is naive of me to assume, but isn't information all that our and any Type III civilization need to escape? The big concern, it seems, is the unknown of whether information can survive a wormhole trip. If somehow it can, perhaps one of those methods described would be enough; for example, just send raw data through and allow it to recombine at the other end. Perhaps a Type III would not need machines or devices to facilitate information dissemination. Perhaps the true power of the Type III civilization is to make all of history and time a singularity in itself that it could send where it wanted.
The other notion that occurred to me is that a Type III might not experience time as we do and could possibly experience all time as a moment. Wouldn't the ultimate harnessing of power allow a civilization to advance its understanding of dimensions and possibly transcend far beyond our current abilities? I tend to believe that the nature of a Type III civilization and its power-generating capabilities create possibilities way beyond the scope of our existence. Even a Type 1 civilization will have powers unimaginable to us today. This tends to lead me to the currently unimaginable conclusion that the members of a Type III civilization may become extracorporeal, no longer needing physical bodies to define them.
If that becomes the case, doesn't that radically change the need to escape our universe? Perhaps being as powerful as to exist on a higher plane beyond the constraints of our physical universe would mean such a civilization already regularly "jumps" from universe to universe at willthey are no longer bound by any sort of rules that we are. "Escape" might be a term that's only useful for us and our comparatively limited abilities of perception.
Nevertheless, we are only at the dawn of the first iteration of a Type I civilization. A lot of it seems to rest in the potential of chips, computing and entry-level quantum mechanics. Tasty stuff, but a meal so large we will be lucky to see the second course.

Response:
You are correct that the important point is that information be sent through a wormhole to a neighboring parallel universe. However, information must come in a practical, sturdy, self-replicating form. For example, simply sending computer tape or digital code through the wormhole will not succeed. What is necessary is to send a probe that is self-replicating, which can create trillions of copies of itself, containing enough information to reclone their entire civilization. In other words, we need the hardware in addition to the software.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Question:
I thoroughly enjoyed your article on "How to Survive the End of the Universe." However, I recently attended a lecture on supermassive black holes and I've found what appears to be a contradiction in one theory that makes traveling through such a place impossible. As the theory goes, if I could enter into the event horizon, then measure the circumference of space at a fixed point, by dividing by 2pi I should get the radius to the singularity. If I then move closer and make a similar measurement, I should get a radius that, when added to the distance I traveled from the first point, should equal the first radius. But the theory states that the sum of the two measurements would be greater than geometrically possible because the black hole stretches space. So here's the contradiction: If the singularity, which by definition is mass without volume, stretches space, then the closer I get to it the more space is stretched. So a geometric inch could be a mile, and the next inch inward could be 10 miles, and so on. This means that the closer I get to the black hole, the more space is stretched, to the effect that the closer I get to it the further away it becomes. The conclusion is that I could never reach the black hole itself because space becomes stretched infinitely at the singularity. This also makes the black hole a mini universe or a place where the universe is turned inside out. Do you have any comments on this apparent problem?

Response:
Yes, as you approach a black hole, severe distortions of space and time take place, but they are visible mainly to someone far away observing you fall into the black hole. If you are unfortunate to fall into a stellar black hole, you will pass the event horizon and probably crash into the black hole itself in a blink of an eye. From your vantage point, death is mercifully swift. However, to an observer watching the event, he will see something quite different. Because light is stretched and redshifted as it reaches the observer, it appears as if you are slowing down in time. It appears as if you are moving in slow motion as you are being ripped apart. It seems to take thousands of years before you inevitably reach the vicinity of the event horizon.

Dr. Michio Kaku

By Carl Edward Sagan

A millennium before Europeans were willing to divest themselves of the Biblical idea that the world was a few thousand years old, the Mayans were thinking of millions and the Hindus billions. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Common scientific aphorism All civilizations become either spacefaring or extinct. All of the books in the world contain no more information than is broadcast as video in a single large American city in a single year. Not all bits have equal value. Anything else you're interested in is not going to happen if you can't breathe the air and drink the water. Don't sit this one out. Do something. Arguments from authority simply do not count; too many authorities have been mistaken too often. possibly from Broca's Brain (1974) At the heart of science is an essential tension between two seemingly contradictory attitudes — an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new. This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense. 1987 Atheism is more than just the knowledge that gods do not exist, and that religion is either a mistake or a fraud. Atheism is an attitude, a frame of mind that looks at the world objectively, fearlessly, always trying to understand all things as a part of nature part of nature. For most of human history we have searched for our place in the cosmos. Who are we? What are we? We find that we inhabit an insignificant planet of a hum-drum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people. We make our world significant by the courage of our questions, and by the depth of our answers. I maintain there is much more wonder in science than in pseudoscience. And in addition, to whatever measure this term has any meaning, science has the additional virtue, and it is not an inconsiderable one, of being true. In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion. Our species needs, and deserves, a citizenry with minds wide awake and a basic understanding of how the world works. Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge. Science is a way to not fool ourselves. Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep thoughts can be winnowed from deep nonsense. Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. The Hindu religion is the only one of the world's great faiths dedicated to the idea that the Cosmos itself undergoes an immense, indeed an infinite, number of deaths and rebirths. It is the only religion in which the time scales correspond, to those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma, 8.64 billion years long. Longer than the age of the Earth or the Sun and about half the time since the Big Bang. And there are much longer time scales still. The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. The Universe forces those who live in it to understand it. Those creatures who find everyday experience a muddled jumble of events with no predictability, no regularity, are in grave peril. The Universe belongs to those who, at least to some degree, have figured it out. The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition. The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent. The well-meaning contention that all ideas have equal merit seems to me little different from the disastrous contention that no ideas have any merit. There are many hypotheses in science which are wrong. That's perfectly all right; they're the aperture to finding out what's right. Science is a self-correcting process. To be accepted, new ideas must survive the most rigorous standards of evidence and scrutiny. There is a place with four suns in the sky — red, white, blue, and yellow; two of them are so close together that they touch, and star-stuff flows between them. I know of a world with a million moons. I know of a sun the size of the Earth — and made of diamond....The universe is vast and awesome, and for the first time we are becoming part of it. We are a way for the Cosmos to know itself. We are like butterflies who flutter for a day and think it's forever. We have designed our civilization based on science and technology and at the same time arranged things so that almost no one understands anything at all about science and technology. This is a clear prescription for disaster. We're the kind of species that needs a frontier — for fundamental biological reasons. Every time humanity stretches itself and turns a new corner, it receives a jolt of productive vitality that can carry it for centuries. There is a new world next door. And we know how to get there. When you make the finding yourself — even if you're the last person on Earth to see the light — you never forget it. Where we have strong emotions, we're liable to fool ourselves. Comets give it and comets taketh it away
A religion old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the universe as revealed by modern science, might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths. Sooner or later, such a religion will emerge.
Since, in the long run, every planetary society will be endangered by impacts from space, every surviving civilization is obliged to become spacefaring — not because of exploratory or romantic zeal, but for the most practical reason imaginable: staying alive.
It is sometimes said that scientists are unromantic
The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate... Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand.
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives...
Human history can be viewed as a slowly dawning awareness that we are members of a larger group.
As the ancient myth makers knew, we are children equally of the earth and the sky.
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.
The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true.
We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers.

Welcome to Constantinos Grigoriadis' Art

Friday, March 13, 2009

Constantinos Grigoriadis' New Book In Greek Language

1 comment:

Total Pageviews

Mia Cara Anima

Translate

You Are Here

Rajastan Women

Thessaloniki

Asian Vilage

The Green House

Massai Fighter

Girafs

Bull

Elephant

Massai Women

Elephant

Zebras

Lion

Moroco Women

Bushman Hunder

Latin American City

Life In The Desert

Vilage House

House On The Beach

Beach

Asian City

African Woman

Camels

African Women

African City

Bull

Zebra With Baby

Rhinocheros

Elephant With Baby

Giraf

Elephant With Baby

Leopard

Jungle

Amazon River

African Road

Sahara Vilage

Savana Tree

African Road

Tiger

Berber with camel

Tropical Fall

Savana

Asian River

African Vilage

Tuareg

Cobra - Magusta

Tropical Paradise

Hunder

Working Elephant

Massai Fighter

Timeless

1000+1 Nights

Clock

Totems

Mask Totem

Hippopotamus

Rhinocheros

Elephant

Gorila

Totems

Moa

Turtle

Ivory

African Indigenous Grafity

Mask Totem

African Man

Peace

Constantinos Grigoriadis' Famely tree

Constantinos Grigoriadis' mashines production factory

PHOTOS FROM GREECE

Two Worlds

One life

A childs Eyes