Intellectual History, Liberal Arts, Metaphysics, Natural Theology, Philosophy, Philosophy of Science

Lucretius: A Conversation Between Science and Philosophy, Part One

by Dave Seng

This will be the first post of three regarding the Roman poet Lucretius (99 BC – 55 BC) and his philosophical poem, The Way Things Are. When one comes to Lucretius, his poem is often interpreted in terms of atomism, materialism, or strict philosophical naturalism. There is much truth to this interpretation. In this series, however, I want to make a larger metaphysical analysis and discuss the intersection of science and philosophy that was articulated by the poet. I thought it would be helpful to use Aristotle’s ideas to augment, clarify, and critique parts of Lucretius. Along the way we will bring Descartes and A. N. Whitehead for reflection. I hope you find the discussion helpful.

What we learn from the Roman Epicurean poet Lucretius is that when we explore questions about the nature of Being, including its properties, nature, and development, there is always a philosophical and scientific aspect to them. In The Way Things Are, Lucretius investigates the nature of reality poetically as he examines the physical world and draws philosophical implications about it. His approach is not necessarily new among the classical authors, but his insight that what we learn from physical reality has a philosophical dimension, is significant. Most ancient philosophers, including Plato and Aristotle held to this dual aspect of inquiry into the nature and development of the cosmos. Aristotle, more than Plato, took physical reality seriously and begins his philosophical and scientific investigations empirically and inductively drawing from the facts of the natural world around him. Aristotle was careful to articulate that his logical abstractions and conclusions corresponded to reality (much of his logical reasoning was drawn from external reality and conducted to show how nature works. After all, the laws of logic are simple properties of being). Lucretius, too, was very interested in the workings of the world around him and wrote The Way Things Are as an attempt to describe the properties and principles of natural science. Lucretius’s poem is a fascinating examination of a number of very important questions related to the intersection of philosophy and science. In other words, whenever the nature and character of Being is explored, philosophical and scientific questions are always involved.

Throughout his poem, Lucretius poetically describes the nature of Being (all of reality), the importance of induction, the scientific principles of uniformity and conservation, the law of causality, and the nature of explanation. Lucretius, is not the only important author who has articulated and explored these questions. The conversation Lucretius engaged in about science and philosophy is also augmented and developed by such thinkers as Aristotle, Descartes, A. N. Whitehead, among others.

In a broad interpretation, then, Lucretius’s poem can be read as a conversation between science and philosophy. Here, science is defined as the knowledge of our physical world which is discovered through testable and reproducible empirical experimentation, and is quantifiable and objective. Simply put, science is knowledge of the world obtained by the five senses and verified through repeatable inductive processes. Philosophy, or how one thinks rationally and critically about the natural world, is concerned—in this context—about how scientific knowledge corresponds, or is in agreement with metaphysical first principles, and how philosophical concepts relate to physical reality. Lucretius helps us to understand that a philosophy of science is important when examining both the philosophical and empirical implications of science. In this case, philosophy of science is not only interested in how empirical scientific results correspond to logical analysis, but is also interested in discovering the relationship and interaction between metaphysical first principles and scientific knowledge. Such philosophical concepts as being and becoming, the law of noncontradiction and other laws of logic which are the foundations for mathematics and critical reasoning, along with the principle of causality (which, we will see below is a logical extension of the law of noncontradiction), and the principle of the uniformity of nature are important philosophical aspects of reality that are assumed in the scientific process and must be held in order for science to function coherently. To summarize, science is descriptive, inductive, and empirical while philosophy, and particularly, metaphysics, seeks to understand the first principles of reality which are not empirical, and seeks to interpret scientific conclusions through the right use of reason and logic and to learn how both science and metaphysics provide insight into reality or Being. Lucretius wanted us to explore the philosophical and scientific foundations for Being, causation, and the nature of change.

First, however, it is important to examine Lucretius’s scientific postulations. Scientifically, Lucretius is an “atomist,” meaning he holds that all physical reality can be reduced to atoms and tiny indestructible material objects.1 Among other places, the poet tells us,

Seeds of things, firstlings, atoms, and in

them lies

The sum of all created things. (7)

Furthermore, Lucretius seeks to investigate the physical world “by insight into nature” and “systematic contemplation” (3). It is clear throughout his poem that his process is empirical and inductive. Interestingly, Lucretius had some sophisticated ideas about science and nature, itself, which still resonate with philosophers of science today. These ideas are centered around scientific concepts of the uniformity of nature and the conservation of energy. Lucretius’s inductive methodology laid the foundation for his scientific conceptual scheme. Induction is the logical process of coming to general conclusions drawn from particular instances. For example, one can correctly reason that since Socrates is mortal, Aristotle is mortal, and Ralph is mortal that all humans are mortal. (It is not necessary to examine every single individual to know that humans are mortal.) As a methodology, induction itself rests upon important metaphysical concepts. A. N. Whitehead, for example, explains this point,

Induction presupposes metaphysics. In other words, it rests upon an antecedent rationalism. You cannot have a rational justification for your appeal to history until your metaphysics has assured you that there is a history to appeal to; and likewise your conjectures as to the future presuppose some basis of knowledge that there is a future already subjected to some determinations. (A. N. Whitehead, Vol. 55, 156)

Whitehead explains what Lucretius understands intuitively and poetically. Induction, the process of generating generalized conclusions from particular instances, rests upon the idea that there is an order and unity to events in the world, and that past events can be understood in light of the present and applied to the future based on the principle of uniformity. Induction is one of the basic properties of Being. Lucretius showed that order, unity, and induction rely on prior philosophical postulates. The scientific method, which is based on induction and repeatable events, rests on metaphysical assumptions. This is one reason why questions about the physical universe always involve both empirical and philosophical concepts.

Works cited:

Lucretius. The Way Things Are. Great Books of the Western World. Vol. 11. Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1999.

Whitehead, Alfred North. Science and the Modern World. Great Books of the Western World. Vol. 55. Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1999.

1Lucretius was not the first to hold such a view. The pre-Socratic philosopher Democritus was also an atomist. Ancient atomists believed atoms were indestructible. It is now known, however, that atoms are destructible, but in general, Lucretius seems to have been on the right track. In addition, it is unclear how strict an atomist Lucretius was. For example, he referred to the goddess Venus as the “creatress” in the first page of the poem and referres to her throughout the work.

Metaphysics, Natural Theology, Philosophy, Philosophy of Science

The Deniable Darwin, David Berlinski

by Dave Seng

I’m not competent enough to dive into evolutionary biology and speak to it with any certainty. Nonetheless, as a metaphysician, I am very interested in the principles that set up the entire framework of existence and make reality possible in the first place. To that end, I believe David Berlinski, writer, philosopher, and mathematician has some interesting things to say about why traditional Darwinism can no longer account for the development of biological life on this planet.

Metaphysically, let us keep this in mind. The world is in fact made up of diverse things. Diverse things do not come together unless ordered. The world has an ordered unity and, therefore, there must be one Orderer of the world.

In Aristotelian and Thomist language, diversity is only an accident of unity. (Which is why earlier posts regarding the one and the many are important.) In this sense, an accident is that which exists not in itself but only in some substance as its property or attribute. In metaphysics, an accident is a feature or characteristic which does not belong necessarily to the nature of a thing. In the video, the puzzle that life moves significantly towards an end even in the face of the second law of thermodynamics (things move towards entropy) is brought up. I would offer that as diversity (the many) is an accident of the one (unity), entropy itself is an accident of the prior goodness and teleology of Being itself.

Interestingly enough, Berlinski, an agnostic, believes there are good reasons for Christian theism. Enjoy.

Metaphysics, Philosophy, Philosophy of Science

Newton’s Constant and The Plague

by Dave Seng

The more I investigate metaphysics the more I become interested in the philosophy of science. As I write this, my university is closed although instruction has moved online.

Nonetheless, I came across this interesting post from MIT mathematician Cal Newport. By way of introduction, it is important to think about how we can apply ourselves to innovative thinking during these difficult times resulting from our own experience with the COVID-19 outbreak.

As it turns out, Isaac Newton did just that. In 1666, due to the Black Plague, Newton found himself self-quarantined in one of his family estates because Cambridge closed down for about eighteen months. (I sure hope our present situation does not last that long!)

Anyway, here’s how James Trefil, author of Reading the Mind of God: In Search of the Principle of Universality describes the situation and how Newton discovered the principle of universal gravity and what has become known as Newton’s constant:

It is hard to say when this notion of separateness of the earth and the heavens began to break down. In his later years, Newton claimed that the incident of the apple took place in 1666, when Cambridge University was closed because of the plague and he was spending eighteen months in isolation on the family estates. His findings were published in final form in 1687, in his monumental three-volume Principia Mathematica. Somewhere between these two dates, then, the separation of earth and sky, which had ruled men’s minds for a millenium and a half, finally disappeared. (Trefil, 9)

The end result of Newton’s formulation (along with developing an advanced form of calculus) is that the older Greek cosmologies were overturned. Newton discovered the principle of universal gravity which laid the foundation for the principle of uniformity now considered a foundational and indispensable postulate of science. We now understand that objects in space do not conform to different scientific laws than the earth, as the Greek cosmologists believed.

And all of this came because Cambridge was closed due to the plague. I wonder if any of our students today, bored at home, will come up with a similar innovation? I certainly hope so.

For some excellent quarantine reading, I highly recommend James Trefil’s book entitled Reading the Mind of God: In Search of the Principle of Universality.

And here is Cal Newport’s post. Enjoy!