"He who says that all things happen of necessity can hardly find fault with one who denies that all happens by necessity; for on his own theory this very argument is voiced by necessity."
That was Epicurus. He and the Epicureans in general believed in an atomistic picture of the world they had picked up from Democritus, but they also believed that atoms sometimes "swerve," that is, change course randomly.
I don't know what is the Greek for "swerve" but later Latin authors used the term "clinamen."
The French philosopher Gilles Deleuze (above) revived use of "clinamen" as a philosophical term of art inthe late 20th century.
But of course, he HAD to do that....
The opening quotation from Epicurus begs the question, in the proper sense of that term: its premise assumes its conclusion. The quotation assumes that his own theory is true ("for on his own theory"), and concludes from that that his own theory is true (his opponents' "very argument is voiced by necessity"). To refute the deniers of necessity, he must come up with an argument other than that their argument is contrary to his theory.
ReplyDeleteHenry, My understanding is that Epicurus was himself one of the deniers of necessity here, and was suggesting (although not actually making) a reductio ad absurdum argument at the expense of determinism here. The determinists he had in mind may have been the Stoics of his day, or rivals within the atomist camp.
Delete