The Attitude Of Demythology Against Anaximander Edialism In Natural Philosophy

Hello all steemit users? ...
At this time, I will write about the attitude of society to the thinking that becomes a theory. Then came a name called philosophy. So the theory relates to nature. Greece is a country based on scientific thought. That's where many philosophers are born. Estimated in the 6th century AD. The thinkers of Greece are generally rational.

In that century many rational philosophers contradicted myths. Because their desire to do something to be accepted by reason. So a thought that can be accepted by society can be regarded as a demythology.

Attitudes of Demythology In Natural Philosophy

In the study of philosophy is related to the mindset of nature, human, and God. Curiosity about an object can be said as a thought. Be it thinking about nature and so forth. At that time roughly in the 6th century BC.

Thales is recognized for breaking from the use of mythology to explain the world and the universe. [source]

Thales's most famous statement, He claims the essence of everything is from water. but the statement is not purely rational. Thales's opinion is oriented and influenced by belief in Greek myth. The philosophy of nature was a hallmark of Greek philosophy, because philosophers think about nature. This according to what is observed or object of study in nature. But then it can not be separated from belief. So the level of the philosopher is irrational. Then rise philosophers to think and analyze how the real objects of nature? ...

However, one of theory that contradicts Anaximander is thales, a natural philosopher of greece and very famous. In the context of source substances everything happens.

Thales explained them by hypothesizing that the Earth floats on water and that earthquakes occur when the Earth is rocked by waves. [Theories source]

From the above quotation. can be understood Thales rationally. All comes from water substances and all return to their origin. Thus rationally Anaximanders thought, He did not mean to oppose his teachers thinking. But his thinking is different, he explains how the understanding of nature in spite of opposites:

Anaximander's realization that the Earth floats free without falling and does not need to be resting on something has been indicated by many as the first cosmological revolution and the starting point of scientific thinking. [Cosmology Source}

From the above quote, it can be concluded the principle of Anaximander, that the base of nature does not come from objects that exist in nature. as Thales thought. But in principle, nature comes from a substance that can not be judged, intangible, and infinite. Then called apeiron.

For Anaximander, the principle of things, the constituent of all substances, is nothing determined and not an element such as water in Thales' view. Neither is it something halfway between air and water, or between air and fire, thicker than air and fire, or more subtle than water and earth. [Apieron Source]

With the quotation above, that apieron is a substance can not be equated with anything. Because the apieron is infinite, can not be assessed, can not be touched, intangible, can not be handheld, and there is no similarity. So it can not be seen with the five senses. So it is not logical that nature comes from water. Because no one can prove accurately and convincingly, that nature comes from water, the people today can only analyze it. Then no one can be guaranteed this natural origin from the water.

According to my thinking the nature of a creation. Therefore, all the forms that exist in this world are creation. But the process is different from one to another.

The policy of thinkers in acceptance and denial of opinion - is a matter in life

If the question arises:
who is created nature? ... I rationally reply that the apieron referred to by Anaximander is probably God.

When not accepting an opinion of the existence of God, then we are not cornering with a question to the philosopher. But we must judge, what do we understand right or wrong with rational?. if we have judged for ourselves. Then we think of others, what is being said, and what do we think? reasonable or not opinion of others? If that does not make sense to us. then that is not a question we make, to corner others, but we provide proof that our opinion is true. Thus, we are wise and responsible thinkers.

"In accordance with the above description, that accepting the rational means thinking and judging rationally. if not accept the thoughts of others, while according to them rational. then we have to give an argument and prove that our opinion is true in accordance with the facts."

"Before we can prove our opinion is true. then we are unethical to reject the opinions of others. then if we as a thinker do not accept one other opinion. for example "Apieron" is the opinion of Anaximandes. while many others accepted the opinion. this we need to realize, that whether we are people who think wisely or not. this is a problem among thinkers who want to justify that they are the most correct. but unable to prove that their opinions are facts, it just makes sense.

With the above problems, philosophizing not only the focus of thought on the rational and human,, but also God according to their beliefs.

Human

However, when reviewing Anaximander's opinion above, then I say how understanding the element in humans:

1. Fluid : the fluid present in the human body, then humans can not live without water. means water as a human element.
2. Breath: the breath is the wind that always comes out and enters the human body.
3. Emotions and passions : Emotion and passions as human element like the fire
4. Flesh: a human flesh comes from the soil. look at one of the evidence when someone dies,then buried, 1 month later when the cemetery was dug, see only the bones and human flesh integrates with the soil.

Although Anaximander has not yet discuss a problem the issue of the human psyche. But humans can not live without the wind, human can not live without lust (like as appetite and more), and human can not live without a foothold. If the four elements are absent, then the human being dies.

Conclusion

The result of philosophical thought is a philosophy of nature. The philosopher of his thought leads to the observed object.the object observed in the life of the philosopher is the universe and its contents. The Demythology attitude acceptance of philosopher's thought, which is rational in human life. All based on rationality. And erase the mythological mindset

---

Thales of Miletus in "Theories" Source

Anaximande In "Cosmology" Source

Anaximander in "Apieron" Source

---

Thank you for visiting my blog and best regards @sward

---

---