Tag: plato

Aristotle’s Chain of Being and the “Kinds” of Genesis

God has built the desire in humans to understand and classify nature. This was one of original man’s first tasks in the Garden of Eden according to Genesis:

Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. (Genesis 2:19-20)

Yet, since the rebuilding of the earth after the Flood, this task of the classification of nature was not systematically taken up until Aristotle. Though Aristotle’s work in zoology was not without errors; in God’s Story of Grace, the great philosopher provided the grandest biological system of the time which forwarded humanity’s understanding of the great order and variety of the created world. His observations were so wide ranging to include the anatomy of marine invertebrates; the minute details the embryological development of a chick, and even the internal anatomy of snails. He went into such variety to describe the chambered stomachs of cows to the social organization of bees. Some of his observations were not confirmed until many centuries later.

As a philosopher, Aristotle is largely known for his instruction in logic, ethics and virtue. Yet, his work on the biological order of life left an enduring mark on the advancement of scientific understanding. Before Aristotle, philosophers like Heraclitus, Empedocles and Democritus focused on offering quasi-scientific explanations of the physical universe based on philosophical ideas. Aristotle largely discarded that and sought to base his views of the world on painstaking observation. What drove him to do this extremely detailed and complex work was his belief that all of nature has a logical purpose and order which could be studied and understood. This belief in a logical order and purpose of the world was grounded in his theology (belief about God). Theology, for Aristotle, was an invitation to biology. Studying living things was a way to understand the divine nature. In even in the most most humble of animals, Aristotle reasoned, there is order and beauty that reflected a divine reality.

In this article, the second on Aristotle, we will uncover the order of Aristotle’s discoveries and how his theology drove those discoveries. We will then conclude how he advanced God’s Story of Grace in the area of science.

Aristotle’s Science

Aristotle was the first to conceive of a great chain of being among all living things. He took his observations of living things and ranked them based on complexity. The greater the complexity the higher its place of the great scale of being. For example, he distinguished animals from plants, because animals have a consciousness and can move in their surroundings. Among animals he created a hierarchy based on their complexity. He separated vertebrates from invertebrates. Of the vertebrates he included five genera (a classification of common characteristics bearing similarities to the biblical “kind”). These include:

  1. mammals
  2. birds
  3. reptiles and amphibians,
  4. fish
  5. whales (which Aristotle did not realize were mammals).

The invertebrates were classified as:

  1. cephalopods (such as squid and octopus)
  2. crustaceans
  3. insects
  4. shelled animals

In total, he classified about 500 animals, vertebrae and invertebrate, into the genera listed above. As already mentioned he classified plants, as well.

What Motivated Aristotle?

Aristotle saw organisms as having an inherent structure and purpose which leads to the overall function of the organism. This structure and purpose he called “soul.” By this he did not mean an immaterial identity separate from the physical/biological structure. The soul for Aristotle is the function of the physical organism inseparable from the body. By this definition even plants have souls. Because of this he believed all living things could be classified because all living things have a purposeful function (soul). So, where did this inherent purpose come from? The answer for this monumental thinker is God.

His understanding of God was not the same as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob or the Jews. There are some similarities, but the differences are significant.

Similarities:

  • God is the highest being over all other beings.  
  • God is pure purpose, existing without matter. 
  • God is the unmoved mover, the first cause of motion in the universe. 
  • God is the source of order and purpose in the world. 
  • God is eternal.  

Differences:

  • God is not personal.
  • God does not have a plan for us.
  • God is not affected by us.

What does all of this mean?

The advancement of science is driven by faith.

Aristotle did not come to believe that the world has purpose and order because of science; rather, he believed that the world had purposeful order, so he pursued a scientific understanding. His theology drove his science. Without the prior belief, he would have had no basis or motivation to do the meticulous research he did. It was clear to him that all of nature did not function by random chance, and that there is an order to be discovered. Everything which is purposeful necessarily is based on purposeful (intelligent) action. For example, imagine two men surprisingly meeting in a clothing store who happen to know each other, and in the process of meeting they strike up a conversation leading toward a business deal. The chance occurrence was based upon their prior and purposeful choices to go to the clothing store to buy a shirt (or whatever item). Chance occurrences, as we observe them, all occur from goal oriented or purposeful action not the other way around. Spontaneity and chance come after thoughtful purpose.

Aristotle sums it up well in his work, Physics:

Spontaneity and chance, therefore, are posterior (follow) to intelligence and nature. Hence, however true it may be that the heavens are due to spontaneity, it will still be true that intelligence and nature will be prior causes of this All and of many things in it besides.

Purposeful design and unguided evolution have an ancient contrast.

It is important to realize that Aristotle’s view of the purposeful order of nature was not at all taken for granted in the intellectual climate of the Greek world he inhabited. Aristotle references, in his work, Empedocles (495–435 BC), who proposed that nature consists of a primordial state where different organs and parts of animals were accidentally and randomly combined in different configurations. Empedocles thought that these early creatures were monstrous and unfit for life, and that most died out.  He believed that the remaining creatures who survived were the result of natural selection, which removed the freakish creatures and left the ones that were best adapted to the environment. This is an early version of survival of the fittest. Those configurations which were most fitting survived, while others perished. Empedocles wrote as follows:

From it [the earth] blossomed many faces without necks,
Naked arms wandered about, bereft of shoulders,
And eyes roamed about alone, deprived of brows.
Many grew double of face and double of chest,
Races of man-prowed cattle, while others sprang up inversely,
Creatures of cattle-headed men, mixed here from men,
There creatures of women fitted with shadowy genitals.

Philosopher and theologian, Joe Carini, comments on how modern science confirms the viewpoint of Aristotle over Empedocles.

…our world is not at all like the world Empedocles imagined. Instead, we encounter a world replete with bodies that have a highly complex but ordered and functional arrangement of their parts. What is more, each of these bodies is self-reproducing, by a system that itself is highly complex but ordered and functional. Even more, these bodies exhibit engineering down to the molecular level, with parts so exquisitely ordered to a purpose that they easily surpass the best of engineering done by humans.

The advance of science confirmed revelation in scripture.

In Genesis 1 it describes a biological categorization similar to what Aristotle discovered by using the word kind. We see the designation kind used three times relation to vegetation and plant life:

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.  (Genesis 1:11-12)

Then we see the designation of kind used six times in reference to animal life:

 20And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day. 24And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so.  25God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:20-25)

The term “kind” refers to broad categories of genetically related organisms which can breed and reproduce.  This “kind” in Genesis has a nonchanging “fixity” within the design of the biological order. Kinds do not change. This means, for example, that the canine “kind” which includes the dog or dingo or wolf or jackal can reproduce together because they are members of the same canine kind. The canine kind can adapt into different species within their kind through breeding and environmental influences (e.g., chihuahua), but they do not change into another kind like a feline (cat).

Paul writes:  

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made… 

Romans 1:20

Aristotle wisely helped us to understand this.

Aristotle and the Discovery of God’s Laws of Logic

No other thinker has been so influential in laying the foundations of Western thought as Aristotle. Aristotle was born in 384 B.C. in Stargis, a city in Northern Greece. Aristotle’s father, Nicomachus, was a court physician to King Amyntas II of Macedon.  He was raised in an environment which was rich with opportunities to learn and think scientifically. Both his mother and father died when he was young. Around the age of 13, Aristotle was raised by his guardian, Proxenus, who may have been an uncle. By age 17, he travelled to Plato’s Academy. The young thinker was driven by an insatiable desire for knowledge. At the Academy, Plato became a major influence on Aristotle. He spent 20 years there. He explored the fundamental questions of meaning and existence. Overtime, though, Aristotle began to see the world differently from his revered mentor. Plato saw the ideal world of the unseen as primary basis of knowledge, Aristotle argued from the primacy of the visible world. This presented a great departure between the two philosophers.

Plato died in 347 B.C. and Aristotle left Athens. By 345 B.C. he married Pythias. In 343 B.C. he received an invitation by Philip of Macedon to tutor his 13 year old son, Alexander. This adolescent would grow into Alexander the Great. Even from Alexander’s young age, Aristotle was to train him to rule a vast empire. Aristotle did this for approximately three years until Alexander turned 16, and it was determined he would take on more responsibilities for the throne. In 335 B.C. Aristotle established the Lyceum, just outside of Athens. The Lyceum was an academy to train men in philosophy (love of wisdom) for a virtuous life. It was well funded due to the patronage of Alexander. After Alexander’s death (323 B.C.), Aristotle fell out of favor with the Athenians. Rather than being executed, to be spared the fate of Socrates, he was exiled from Athens to Chalcis, a town about 40 miles north of Athens and died in 322 B.C.

Aristotle established the foundations of Western culture in three areas: logic, science and ethics. In this article and the following two, we will look at how Aristotle advanced God’s Story of Grace in each of these areas. As his thinking matured, it is largely thought that he first developed his teaching in the areas of logic (the way we discern truth), then science (the way we understand the world) and finally ethics (the way we live). We will begin by exploring his ideas on logic.

What is Logic? 

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) famously claimed that Aristotle had discovered all that there was to discover about logic. This was historically short sighted as later insights would be realized, yet it calls attention to the immense importance of Aristotle on this point. What drove Aristotle in this regard was his belief that every person has a desire to understand the world; in order to aid that understanding, he focused on laws of reason which helped people to better work out the truth or falsehood of an argument. These laws reflected general patterns of truth that are valid no matter what. Aristotle defined these rules in his work titled  the Organon (Greek for organ, tool, instrument). To simplify his thinking we will focus on the the three laws of logic and the key tool in which these laws could be utilized–the syllogism.

The Three Laws of Logic

When looking at Aristotle’s laws, they sound almost like a math equation. In some sense they are in so far as they represent absolute and changeless laws. These are laid out as follows:

  • The law of identity: P is P.
  • The law of noncontradiction: P is not non-P.
  • The law of the excluded middle: either P or non-P.

The law of identity says P is P. This means that everything is itself and not something else. For example, we can look at a tree and observe that it is 20 feet tall and has a lightning burn. (P) In this case, the fact that this tree is 20 feet tall and has a lightning scar is not relevant to this law. It may have a lightning scar as well as letters carved (“Eileen love Al forever”) 5 feet from the base on its east side. What is important is that this particular tree is its own being and not something else. Though this seems obvious, we should not take for granted that without this law reasoning would be impossible because there would be no clear distinctions.

The law of noncontradiction says that P is not non-P. To illustrate, if we observe this same 20 foot tall tree as referred to above, it cannot both have a lightning scar and not have a lightning scar at the same time. That would violate the law of contradiction. Now It can have a lightning scar today whereas a year ago it did not because it was hit with lightning only 2 weeks ago. But it cannot have both a lightning scar and not have a lightning scar at the same time.

The law of the excluded middle says that either P or non-P. Using the idea of the same 20 foot tree, it either has a lightning scar or is does not. There is no other alternative. It cannot both have and not have a lightning scar at the same time. Though this seems way too obvious, it is a fact that many cultures, as we will see, have not viewed reality through these laws.

The Syllogism

A syllogism is a form of reasoning based on logical deduction. Deduction is where you start with known facts (called premises) and use them to reach a certain conclusion. If the premises are true then the conclusion must also be true. For example:

  • Premise 1: All pine trees are conifers.
  • Premise 2: Conifers have needle-like leaves.
  • Conclusion: Therefore, all pine trees have needle-like leaves.

Or…

  • Premise 1: God loves and has a purpose for all humans.
  • Premise 2: Bernardo is a human.
  • Conclusion: Therefore, God loves and has a purpose for Bernardo.

The key points about logical deduction are as follows:

  • Start with established facts or statements.
  • Follow a logical path of deduction for the statements. 
  • The conclusion from this path has a certain accuracy. 

The accuracy of a syllogism is based on the premises being true. If the premises are false, then the conclusion will be false, as well. Here is an example of a wrong conclusion due to false premises.

  • Premise 1: God can do everything.
  • Premise 2: Sin is a part of everything.
  • Conclusion: Therefore, God can sin.

The problem with this syllogism is with premise 1: God can do everything. That statement is incorrect. It should be greatly modified to read: God can do everything he wants to do. With that modification the statement should read as follows:

  • Premise 1: God can do everything he wants to do.
  • Premise 2: God does not want to sin.
  • Conclusion: Therefore, God cannot sin.

Logic and God’s Story of Grace

Understanding the LOGOS. Aristotle’s discovery of logic was important for a greater understanding of the LOGOS–Jesus as the Word (logic) of God (John 1:1). The laws of logic are neither inventions of God nor rules that exist outside God’s being. From the perspective of God’s Story of Grace, Aristotle didn’t invent the laws of logic; he discovered them. These laws are embedded in the very eternal being of God, himself. Because these laws are based in the very being of God they are more enduring than the physical laws (e.g. thermodynamics, gravity) which are created. God can alter the laws of nature (e.g., suspend gravity, override entropy), but he cannot in any way alter or override the laws of logic. To do so would require God altering, at an essential level, himself. In Malachi 3:6, God declares: “I the Lord do not change.”  

  • God reflects the law of identity. God cannot exist and not exist at the same time. God says, “I am who I am” (Exodus 3:14). 
  • God reflects the law of non-contradiction. All truth is in God (Colossians 2:3) and God cannot deny himself (2 Timothy 2:13). Because of this law, truth will never contradict truth. 
  • God reflects the law of the excluded middle. Because God exists and does not contradict himself, this means there are no other alternatives to truth.

Quite often God acts in ways we do not understand, but that in no way means that God behaves illogically. So, these laws exist in God’s very being. Had Aristotle nor anyone else never articulated them, they would still exists. Nonetheless, in God’s Story of Grace, Aristotle methodically expressed them.

Understanding Western Civilization. Aristotle’s laws of logic reinforced an irreconcilable difference between the Western (based in Christianity) and the Eastern civilizations. Christianity holds that God (as a distinct identity) created the universe (as a distinct identity) with the earth (as a distinct identity) and all that is in the earth (as distinct identities). This reflects the law of identity: P is P, and the law of non-contradiction: p is not non-p. There is no alternative to this understanding which is the law of the excluded middle: either P or non-P. This is in sharp distinction from the Eastern religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism which are pantheistic. Pantheism holds that everything is ONE. They deny any distinctions which are communicated in Aristotle’s laws of logic. This has created very different outcomes with the Western and Eastern worlds. More about this in forthcoming articles.

Socrates: Bringing Heaven to Earth

depiction of Socrates

Even among world historical figures, Socrates would be uncommon. His life was marked by an irony which brought together opposing qualities. He rarely travelled beyond Athens, yet his influence has been felt throughout the world. Though he was often invited to lavish dinner parties, he lived on a very simple diet. Possessing a towering intellectual capacity, he was more at home with everyday people. Though he wrote down none of his teachings, we possess about 35 of his dialogs. Some aspects of his life remain unclear, but what doesn’t is that his influence is impossible to overestimate. His crowning achievement in advancing God’s Story of Grace is that he took philosophy (the pursuit of wisdom) and brought it into reach for everyday people and everyday life to improve the quality of how they–even we–live. He did this because it was, as he believed, his calling from God. In so doing, he made the well-lived life something which was more possible for everyone to attain.

In this article, we will look at Socrates impact at the time he lived and how his influence moved the world further in God’s plan.

Who Was Socrates?

His Life

He lived from 469–399 B.C. He lived his whole life in Athens, other than when he travelled in the military. At its height his native city had a population of around 180,000 is 430 B.C. By his death it was reduced to about 100,000 due, in part, to ongoing war with Sparta. As a man of Athens he fought bravely in the wars with the Spartans. His friend Alcibiades said that Socrates saved his life when he was wounded by standing over him and warding off enemy attack. He was reported to be fierce in battle. There is, also, some evidence he may have been a stone mason since his father was. But his primary calling and life’s work was that he became a prophet to the Athenian people. He founded no academy like his pupil Plato. He never sought out a public platform, but instead he chose to live very simply with few clothes, meager food and basic shelter–even rejecting the gift of land which was offered to him. He felt the call of God (as he understood God) to call men to examine the meaning and purpose of their lives. Historian Paul Johnson states that he “compared himself to a gadfly, stinging the Athenian horse of state…out of its complacency and comatose inertia.” He engaged in discussions with all kinds of people concerning topics like friendship, justice, courage, citizenship, etc. He believed his most important contribution to Athenian society was to call people to virtue for only with virtuous people can a society flourish.

His Death

Overtime he became a well-known public figure. This increasing attention was not always positive. The playwright Aristophanes made a satirical and mocking drama titled The Clouds which portrayed Socrates as a money greedy corruptor of youth. This play had a negative impact on his reputation with some of the Athenian public. He remained unangered, responding: “If the criticism is just, I must try to reform myself. If it is untrue, it doesn’t matter.” Eventually jealous political forces had him arrested and convicted of presenting “different gods” and “corrupting the youth.” After being tried in a kangaroo court he was sentenced to be executed. He is famously remembered for his calm and magnanimous embrace of death, speaking to his friends about the virtuous and good life until his very last day.

What Set Socrates Apart?

He was led by God. He rejected the myth centered polytheism (belief in many gods) of his day. Like Heraclitus, he did not really criticize or show contempt for the traditional gods of the Greek world, but he did not reverence or follow them; further he called people to think beyond them. He appears to have been a monotheist who believed there is only one God. For this Athenian teacher, belief in God was not an abstract idea but a strongly felt reality. He once said, “Athenians, I cherish and you. But I shall obey God rather than you.” On another occasion he professed, “To practice philosophy has been indicated to me by God…” He felt this through such means as dreams, prophecies and other means.

His belief in divinity was also in sharp distinction to one of his sharpest debating partners, Protagoras, who gave the famous adage: “Man is the measure of all things.” As a materialist, Protagoras taught materialism which is the belief that there is nothing more than physical reality. Socrates rejected this because of his own experience as well as his belief that our deeper moral commitments require a deeper resource or basis than merely ourselves.

He believed all humans possessed an immaterial soul. He taught that the body needed to be guided by the soul. The idea of the soul was not new, but after Socrates’ the concept of the soul would be forever changed. Before the great thinker, the soul had been viewed as a ghostlike and shadowy substance which eventually gets banished to a murky existence of hades after the death of the body. After Socrates the soul was seen as the core of human intelligence, meaning and morality. With a proper philosophical understanding and training in wisdom the soul can guide one’s life to virtue and a well-lived existence. With his examination of the soul and the inner life of man, he would open the way eventually to the study of psychology.

He held to and promoted moral absolutes. For example, it was exceptional that he advocated that retaliation or revenge is always wrong. He instructed an early version of “turn the other cheek.” In Greece it was largely thought that a just man is one who does good to his friends and harm to his enemies. Socrates would have none of this. In Plato’s Republic, Socrates is quoted saying: “A just man is one who does good to his friends, certainly, but also does good to those who have harmed him, thereby seeking to convert an enemy into friend.”

He lived among the common men. At this time, Athenian Greece was singular in the world because a craftsman might become a general, a wrestler a philosopher, a poet could found a colony. Though there was an aristocracy, the man of common means could still excel. Paul Johnson asserted that just as Winston Churchill perfectly reflected the spirit of Great Britain, Socrates perfectly reflected the democratic spirit of ancient Athens. He got along with all kinds of people from different classes and backgrounds, highest to lowest. He had a genuine curiosity in people. This interest he showed made people feel important, and it helped to strengthen the democratic character of the city.

Socrates Advance of God’s Story

depiction of Paul at the Aereogapus

Socrates brought the LOGOS (WORD) closer to men. In Acts 17, some 450 years after Socrates, Paul stood at the Areogapus (meeting place for political councils in Athens), the very place Socrates often deliberated. It was there that Greek philosophers wanted Paul to make a public case for his “strange ideas” (Acts 17:20) for which he was advocating. Paul, then, gives a masterclass in building a missional communication bridge with a different culture. In his introduction, one can see hints of his drawing upon Socrates’ influence as he references “an unknown god.”

22 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “People of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. 23 For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: to an unknown god. So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship—and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.

Acts 17:22-23

Athens worshiped many gods, but Socrates did not. Athenians accepted their religious traditions, often without question. Socrates did not. He advocated a god that was not known. Perhaps it was this “unknown god” of Acts 17 Paul proclaims. Perhaps this is the LOGOS which was first proclaimed by Heraclitus, nearly 100 years before Socrates, and would eventually be declared by the apostle John, when he declared Jesus to be the Word (LOGOS) in John 1:1. As I wrote in a previous article:

LOGOS, which means Word or Speech, communicates the idea that we see indirectly an intelligible rationality behind the universe. It does so in the fact that words, whether heard through the ear (speech) or seen through the eye (writing), shows the evidence of an intentional and intelligible presence, even when we do not see a person present. This evidence of intentionality and intelligence, logically, points to a personal being behind all of this–God. Though this creative and personal being is not directly seen, his speech is. In the midst of the chaos of the world, there is behind all of it an ordered logic (e.g., math and science) and appearance of a creative purpose (e.g., love and justice). The Bible affirms this in both the Old and New Testaments.

This is seen in the Old Testament.

1 The heavens declare the glory of God;
    the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
2 Day after day they pour forth speech;
    night after night they reveal knowledge.
3 They have no speech, they use no words;
    no sound is heard from them. (Psalm 19:1-3)

Of those outside the Hebrew world, Socrates appeared to grasp this better than anyone before him and made this reality more accessible to the Greek and gentile world.

Socrates made a life of purposeful moral living more accessible to the common man. He is famous for saying, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” The ancient philosopher modeled how everyday men could think through moral questions and issues to live a more wise and virtuous life. Perhaps the Roman statemen Cicero best summed up the great sage’s contribution to the world historical development best:

“Socrates was the first to call philosophy down from the heavens and to place it in cities, and even to introduce it into homes and compel it to inquire about
life and standards and goods and evils.”

Cicero

For this, we can have much gratitude to Socrates for bringing the truths given by heaven more closely to us on the earth.