Anaximander - Arche, Apeiron and Analysis/Critique of Thales' cosmogony and cosmology

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
Post Reply
User avatar
ertan
New Trial Member
Posts: 1
Joined: November 15th, 2020, 6:48 am

Anaximander - Arche, Apeiron and Analysis/Critique of Thales' cosmogony and cosmology

Post by ertan » November 15th, 2020, 6:53 am

Hi everyone, can you help me with this question?

Anaximander states that the arche, the source of everything, should be the apeiron, the unlimited, the indefinite. After explaining how he comes to that conclusion, evaluate the significance of Anaximander’s contribution to philosophical activity in terms of his analysis and critique of Thales’ cosmogony and cosmology.

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4481
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Anaximander - Arche, Apeiron and Analysis/Critique of Thales' cosmogony and cosmology

Post by Terrapin Station » November 15th, 2020, 10:33 am

This is one of those "Please do my homework for me for free" questions. But if you didn't do the work to be able to answer it for yourself, how would you know that anyone here is giving an answer that your professor would accept?

User avatar
thrasymachus
Posts: 112
Joined: March 7th, 2020, 11:21 am

Re: Anaximander - Arche, Apeiron and Analysis/Critique of Thales' cosmogony and cosmology

Post by thrasymachus » November 15th, 2020, 2:12 pm

ertan wrote
Hi everyone, can you help me with this question?

Anaximander states that the arche, the source of everything, should be the apeiron, the unlimited, the indefinite. After explaining how he comes to that conclusion, evaluate the significance of Anaximander’s contribution to philosophical activity in terms of his analysis and critique of Thales’ cosmogony and cosmology.
No problem, ertan.

First it has to be understood that the arche is most accessible part of a broader system of eclectically grounded grammar. It is at the center of this that an important but nuanced ambiguity takes center stage: Never, and this is crucial, must the apeironic arche be conflated with the more limited dialogs of Parmenides. This later is exactly why the "unlimitedness" (an awkward transliteration, I admit) that lies within the essence of Thales' epistemological foundation has to be offset from the arche altogether, notwithstanding the disputatious theses put forth by Michaels (1984) and Periquin (2000). You will find, and this may be an interpretatively, dialectically STRONG claim that your prof will take issue with (Just look it up. No space here for a comprehensive propaedeutic) Anaximander's key claim lies here: It is cosmogony, and NOT the Cosmo centric liturgical barometrical pan arche form that brings Thales' conclusion to an untenable terminus. NOT AT ALL! Critical point here, for the scholarly consensus is rather definitive in that fracking causes nose bleeds and silly people like you actually read and do their own thinking, not because the Thalean protosphere is awash with phethoantical blotsnatches! No: the reality is far more insidious, more heinous, more wretched that previously thought by Sindar the Great. Oh Lordy ertan, or shall I call thee Lord Meglatrax!!! Think I didn't know who you were all along?! Did you honestly believe your Biogandic defenses could prevent my Omini octo pan Ocluean (TM) Responder to see what you were doing? I invented the Biogandic algorithmic Observatron that makes Thales' hedonic calculous an Omnate wonder of the world!!! Why I should crush your diminutive cranium into pulvanerous scrum!

It's ok to copy this word for word on your assignment. I won't mind.

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 4481
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Anaximander - Arche, Apeiron and Analysis/Critique of Thales' cosmogony and cosmology

Post by Terrapin Station » November 15th, 2020, 3:08 pm

Haha--can't wait to see the results of turning that one in.

User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Posts: 1213
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Anaximander - Arche, Apeiron and Analysis/Critique of Thales' cosmogony and cosmology

Post by Pattern-chaser » November 16th, 2020, 12:08 pm

ertan wrote:
November 15th, 2020, 6:53 am
Hi everyone, can you help me with this question?
Yes. You need to achieve some understanding of the source material, so that you can describe it in your own words, thus demonstrating to your teacher that you have understood what they have been trying to teach you. Good luck!
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Post Reply