Question 1: Why Socrates found the philosophy of Anaxagoras unsatisfying
Anaxagoras as a philosopher believes that the multitude sees things by their numbers and not by their value. He argues that to the majority good and value is equivalent to unity or commonness. The Socrates on the other hand, do not agree with the philosopher on the fact that the multitude associate good and value to motion and not commonness. Therefore the multitude only sees things in their motion by focusing on their achievement or future returns. Anaxagoras goes future to say that what is common is what is perceived to be achievement and hence valuable. Socrates discards this argument by stating that valuable cannot truly be what is common, because in most cases value of things has to surpass common. Socrates also find Anaxagoras argument on value unsatisfying because value has to be identified from a source in motion and therefore what he perceives to be of value by being common only assist to portray value on another thing in motion. According to Anaxagoras arguments value and common can be attained from a thing and the idea of difference does not arise. In his arguments difference is all summed up to depict indifference in the eyes of the multitude. To the Socrates the fact that the philosopher does not appreciate and agree in the existence of difference is simply an illustration that his thoughts are like those of the multitude and depicts the existing obsession of difference which is actually the indifference of things.
Question 2: Difference between Thales’ interest in mathematics and Egyptians interest in this science
The main difference between Thales’ interest mathematics and Egyptian interest in the same is the fact that Thales’ mathematics was based on proof, they highly believed on computing answers to all mathematical problems. Egyptian mathematics on the other hand was mainly focused on geometry, they provided several relationships between measurements and calculation. However, in Thales’ little geometry is seen that have existed though the deductive ideas of theorems and proofs which were major sections of pure mathematics.
Question 3: Cornford’s Ionian Era
Cornford means that it marked the beginning of efforts to completely understand how the environment and humans evolved or came about to be as they are. In a way the Ionian scientists were essentially the first to engage in sober and valid arguments always resolved through the use and application of logic. The Ionian era also marks the rise of a number of subjects such as mathematics, science, philosophy, astrology and algebra amongst others
Question 4: Xenophanes Attack
Xenophanes attacks the concept of polytheistic anthropomorphism, first by arguing that in most cases religion is accompanied by the need to believe in the abstract without any proof, a very important aspect for Xenophanes. Further, Xenophanes cites numerous contradictions as proof of flaws in the system. Xenophanes therefore, uses these as bases upon which to cast aspersions on the validity of polytheism, let alone the existence of supernatural beings
Question 5: Anaximanders Cosmogony
According to Anaximander, first what existed was unordered, unbounded mass which was not only indiscriminate, but also contained the powers of cold and heat, which are antagonistic in nature. This mass, Anaximander argues, that in addition, the mass also possessed the property of eternal motion. Due to the warring nature of these forces, the nucleus therefore, due to these warring processes took shape, with antagonistic nature of the warring forces leading to the rise of water masses and earth, as well as general differentiation. This argument that the earth formed out of contradictory and conflicting forces is quite different from the Greek mythology. The Greeks believed in diety, and the Gods, with the existence of the Earth and all that is within it being attributed to Zeus and the other Gods.
Engel Morris and Soldan Angelika. The Study of Philosophy: Rowman &Littlefield. 2007; 33-43