The Postulates of Anaxagoras

Graham, Daniel W.

doi:10.1515/apeiron.1994.27.2.77

Cited by 23 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some authors have also suggested using tools of Mandelbrot's fractal geometry (Mandelbrot 1983) and topology as a means by which we might arrive at an adequate model of the Anaxagorean universe (see, e.g. Graham 1994, 109, Graham 2006, 213 and Drozdek 2005. Probably the most elaborate of such attempts can be found in the works of Petar Grujić (Grujić 2001(Grujić , 2002(Grujić , 2006.…”

Section: Interlude: Classical Scholarship Meets Analytic Philosophy *mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Typically-and we are somewhat simplifying things here for the sake of exposition-they emphasise the fragment B 4b wherein Anaxagoras is reported to have said that, in the original mixture, nothing 5 See, e.g. Guthrie (1965), Peck (1926), Barnes (1979), Mourelatos (1986), Furth (1991), Graham (1994). 6 See, e.g.…”

Section: The Universe As a Gunkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…203 a 19-33) and the entire doxographical tradition unanimously ascribe some kind of "homoemerism" to Anaxagoras and repeat it (ad nauseam) as a defining feature of his theory, many modern authors deny that there can be "Anaxagorean homoeomerism". These include, among others, Peck (1926), Guthrie (1965), Furley (1967), Graham (1994), Mathewson (1958) and Curd (2007). Others, such as Barnes (1979) and Teodorsson (1982), just deny it the role of a fundamental principle of Anaxagoras' physics.…”

Section: Diagrammentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Anaxagoras, the thoroughgoing infinitist

Arsenijević

Popović

Vuletić

2019

EuJAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the analysis of Anaxagoras’ physics in view of the relation between his teachings on multitude and heterogeneity, two central questions emerge: 1) How can the structure of the universe considered purely mereo-topologically help us explain that at the first cosmic stage no qualitative difference is manifest in spite of the fact that the entire qualitative heterogeneity is supposedly already present there? 2) How can heterogeneity become manifest at the second stage, resulting from the noûs intervention, if according to fragment B 6 such a possibility requires the existence of “the smallest”, while according to the general principle stated in fragment B 3 there is not “the smallest” but always only “a smaller”? This paper showcases the perplexity of these two questions but deals only with the former. The answer follows from Anaxagoras’ being a thoroughgoing infinitist in the way in which no Greek physicist was: the principle of space isotropy operative in geometry is extended to physics as well. So any two parts of the original mixture are similar to each other not only in view of the smaller-larger relation but also because each contains everything that the other one contains. This in effect means that at the stage of maximal possible heterogeneity each part of any part contains infinitely many heterogeneous parts of any kind whatsoever. So, neither can there be homogeneous parts in view of any qualitative property, nor can there be predominance in quantity of parts of any kind that would make some property manifest.

show abstract

Section: Interlude: Classical Scholarship Meets Analytic Philosophy *mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Universe As a Gunkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Diagrammentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Anaxagoras, the thoroughgoing infinitist

Arsenijević

Popović

Vuletić

2019

EuJAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…31 31 See Furley, ‘Anaxagoras, Plato, and the Naming of Parts’, 121 and Graham, ‘The Postulates of Anaxagoras’, 106. Ultimately, Graham suggests that, while homoeomereity creates difficulties for Anaxagoras’ system, the difficulties might not be insurmountable and it is possible that Anaxagoras accepts homoeomereity. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Anaxagoras on Matter, Motion, and Multiple Worlds

Sisko

2010

Philosophy Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, both Anaxagoras' theory of multiple worlds and the principles of his theory of matter are examined. It is argued that the five principles, which are set out explicitly in the extant fragments, (No Becoming, Indefinite Types, Universal Mixture, Predominance, and Infinite Divisibility) form a consistent set. Further, it is argued that the principle of Homoeomereity, which Anaxagoras attributes to Anaxagoras, is consistent with Anaxagoras' other principles and is likely to be a genuine principle of Anaxagoras' physics.

show abstract

Parmenides and after: Unity and Plurality

Curd

2012

A Companion to Ancient Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Postulates of Anaxagoras

Cited by 23 publications

References 11 publications

Anaxagoras, the thoroughgoing infinitist

Anaxagoras, the thoroughgoing infinitist

Anaxagoras on Matter, Motion, and Multiple Worlds

Parmenides and after: Unity and Plurality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About