­­­The Sophists

The sophists are expert rhetoricians, which in exchange for money are willing to teach anyone about knowledge and the art of speaking. I can see how this is both a pro and a con. Because wisdom comes with a price for sophists, anybody with the money is able to learn what was before limited to a couple of individuals. While this creates more opportunity, it also completely excludes the opportunity for someone without money to learn. This is similar to today’s educational system, not everyone can afford college. I liked the Idea of the two mutually correct arguments that Protagoras proposes of false and truth. In contrast to the ideas of the past pre-Socratics, I liked that he was able to take an argument and be able to explain the rational between the two sides, explaining why they are both ultimately correct.  Although I generally think that there is one truth, I understand that as an expert rhetorician, Protagoras is able to explain and arrange words differently in order to make two opposing yet reasonable views, and that expertise is what I find interesting.

The Atomists

The conclusion of the Atomists that everything is made of atoms of different shapes that are infinitely small and cannot be divided is astonishing because it comes close to the idea of the modern atomic theory. What I liked about he idea of the Atomists is the idea of the void, in contrast to Parmenides' idea of the what is not, the void is not something unthinkable. For Parmenides the what is not, can't be reached and can't be pondered upon and it almost seems pointless, but the Atomists define te void as the space between atoms and a space that could be filled with atoms. This interaction makes sense because if the cosmos had no void, then space would not exist as well as what we can call relativity. Because there is room for atoms to move and interact the cosmos is ever changing due to the infinite number of atoms. It troubles me to think that the void itself is infinite because then every space between atoms is infinite. Like watching my computer screen now, there is atoms between my computer and my eyes and there is the space between those atoms which is infinite, so how is it possible that I can see through so many and possibly infinite accounts of infinity?

Empedocles

Empedocles believes the cosmos to be guided by love and strife. There is a clear distinction between him and the material monists. First of, materialism is a result and direct guidance of the force of love and strife and therefore the Arche is not material but instead, intangible things. Those two things seem to be the arche, which might be the interaction between these two elements. Every material and its derivative is the result of the tug and push between love and strife. However, I came to understand that love and strife manage the "roots" or elemets of the cosmos which therefore give rise to everything else, but how were these elements created? Did love and strife give birth to these elements? He seems to to place both the tangible and intangible things as the result of creation as to be able to explain the questions that arise from having one without the other. For if only materialism was the only reality, then many question arise as two what drives the material world. In contrast, if the intangible things are the only reality then what are the materials that we perceive to be. It makes sense to think that he puts these two forces that are infinite as a means to explain the material interactions.