the Ionian tradition for the general shape of his cosmos, and contradicts the central axiom of the Eleatics
by asserting that Non-being (empty space) exists just as much as Being. But he reduces matter to minute
particles which resemble the Eleatic One in being indivisible (atotna), indestructible, and qualitatively
neutral; they differ from one another only in shape and orientation. Different rearrangements of them
produce the effect of changeable qualities such as colour, heat, hardness, etc. There is no guiding
intelligence, just the blind mechanical interplay of flying and colliding atoms.
The atomist system was appropriated by the prolific writer Democritus, perhaps to serve as the
background to his account of the origin and development of civilization. This became a popular subject
of theorizing in the mid fifth century. It quickly came to be common ground that primitive man was
merely an animal, sheltering in caves and eating whatever grew wild, until gradually he developed his
skills, built houses and cities, tamed animals, invented language, and so on. Socrates' teacher Archelaus
gave an account (prefaced by a cosmology on Anaxagorean lines) designed to bring out the conventional
nature of law and justice. The most influential of these reconstructions of prehistory may have been due
to Protagoras, whose several visits to Athens (like Democritus, he was a native of Abdera) attracted
much attention. Protagoras stands at the head of that series of intellectuals whose discourses on a range
of philosophical and technical subjects seemed so instructive that they were able to charge attendance
fees, and who are called Sophists. They offered, among other things, stimulating reflections on the
theme of nature versus custom, the bases of morality, the power of education; scientific treatment of
subjects like grammar, metre, music; not least, displays of the adaptability of argument to support any
conclusion, or either of two opposite conclusions. At this point we can no longer take it for granted that
what appears to be a philosophical argument is meant seriously. Gorgias, an orator and essayist from
Sicily notorious for his euphuistic style, published a lengthy proof that nothing exists. He was, no doubt,
simply enjoying himself, as when he devoted another work to the defence of the infamous Helen of
Troy, describing it as 'an encomium for Helen and amusement for me'. Socrates had some of this
playfulness.
The early philosophers were aware that they were seeking answers to questions that lay beyond the
bounds of possible human knowledge. 'No one has ever known or ever will know for sure,' says
Xenophanes, 'for even if what he says is exactly right, he does not know it is - it is all a matter of
opinion.' It was something of a commonplace that our senses are weak and easily misled, but that we
must extrapolate from the observed to the unobservable. The Greeks were not as quick as they might
have been to draw the inference that an accumulation of systematic scientific observation is desirable,
though we do see something of the sort in the fifth century in the field of medicine. Some real ground
was gained, though gradually, by astronomy. About 500 B.C. it was realized that the moon shines by
reflected light, while by 400 the view that the earth is spherical was gaining adherents, and the planets
had perhaps all been identified. In other areas unverifiability precluded consolidation. Atomism
remained one theory among many. There was no agreement on which facts to extrapolate from. One
seized on one physical phenomenon or logical formula as the key to the universe, another on another.
What provokes admiration is the mental vigour and independence with which these people sought after
coherent systems and did not shrink from following their lines of thought to astonishing conclusions. It
may well be that contact with oriental cosmology and theology helped to liberate their imagination; it
certainly gave them many suggestive ideas. But they taught themselves to reason. Philosophy as we