- #1
jackson6612
- 334
- 1
Statement:
The ancient Greek philosopher Plato theorized that the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_element#Classical_elements_in_Greece".
I'm not a philosophy or science student, so please keep your reply plain and straightforward. Thanks.
I can understand the literal meaning of the statement. Plato is actually saying that the classical elements (water, fire, earth, air - space was said to be constituted of aether but tt was not regarded as part of the elements) which made up the Earth were composed of the solids. Just as we say every material object is made up of atoms which in turn are composed of elementary particles. Was he saying that? Was he substituting his regular solids for atoms, etc.? How could he say that fire was made up of some material thing such as those solids when it was immaterial? Obviously they had completely different notion of the world around them, and many things which today seem to be part of common sense were really hard ideas in those times. It reminds me of earlier atomic models such as pudding model which just makes me crave for pudding! I sympathize with them for their ignorance as future generations would do with us for our present ignorance...
Please correct me where I'm wrong.
Best wishes
Jack
The ancient Greek philosopher Plato theorized that the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_element#Classical_elements_in_Greece".
I'm not a philosophy or science student, so please keep your reply plain and straightforward. Thanks.
I can understand the literal meaning of the statement. Plato is actually saying that the classical elements (water, fire, earth, air - space was said to be constituted of aether but tt was not regarded as part of the elements) which made up the Earth were composed of the solids. Just as we say every material object is made up of atoms which in turn are composed of elementary particles. Was he saying that? Was he substituting his regular solids for atoms, etc.? How could he say that fire was made up of some material thing such as those solids when it was immaterial? Obviously they had completely different notion of the world around them, and many things which today seem to be part of common sense were really hard ideas in those times. It reminds me of earlier atomic models such as pudding model which just makes me crave for pudding! I sympathize with them for their ignorance as future generations would do with us for our present ignorance...
Please correct me where I'm wrong.
Best wishes
Jack
Last edited by a moderator: