 Among the pre-Socratic philosophers, there was one which the German philosopher Edward Zeller would name superior to all earlier and contemporary philosophers in wealth of knowledge and to most in acuteness and logical correctness of thinking. Join me in discovering the laughing philosopher, Democritus. Something we should keep in mind throughout this video is that, like Heraclitus, we only know him through the writings of others, most abundantly those of Aristotle. Another point that should be known is that throughout the various fragments that have been passed down to us, it is difficult to separate Democritus from his teacher, Lucipus, as they are often mentioned together. Some, including Epicurus, would even deny the existence of Lucipus altogether. Democritus was born sometime around 460 BCE in the northern Greek territory of Thrace. As a young man, he would take to exploring the ancient world, eventually coming to Athens. Initially, the enlightened scholars of Athens would ignore his philosophy, but around 420, his philosophic prestige would reach its maturity and all the ancient world would come to know him. 70 works were to be attributed to our philosopher, ranging in topic from philosophy to painting and even to farming. But of the myriad works accredited to the atomists, the tortoise forest, which most would come to remember them by, is the atomic theory of matter. Here in this theory, the atomists thought that all aspects of life could be represented, including ethics and morals. The founding of the atomist school apparently came about as a way to reconcile the antagonistic ideas of monism and pluralism proposed by Parmenides and Empedocles. A pitfall that we should endeavor to avoid is that of labeling the atomist as anything but uncompromising determinist. He would deny the possibility of chance in his worldview. Lucipus is known to have said, not happens for nothing, but everything from a ground and of necessity. Let us move forward and explore this atomic theory of theirs. The basic proposition was that there were two things that our universe was composed of, atoms and the void. Atoms as they understood them were eternal and penetrable and incompressible matter too small for the human eye to perceive. They come in various shapes and move about in continuous motion, eventually coming into contact with each other. If the shapes are compatible, they are able to interlock and form vortices. From these vortices come the myriad phenomena that populate the universe. This includes our world, our body and even our soul. The phenomena are not eternal. As they change and rearrange, it is only the atoms and cells which remain eternal. The atoms must have something to move around in. This is what the atomists would refer to as the infinite void. This void should not be mistakenly taken as the negation of what is, but instead should be seen as something real, space through which the atoms perpetually move around in. There is neither up nor down within the void. Democrates would compare it to the motes floating in a sunbeam when there is no wind. All sensation is but the interaction of external atoms with the atoms present within our sensory organs, by convention sweet, by convention bitter, by convention hot, by convention cold, by convention color, but in reality, atoms in the void. Aristotle would have one issue with the atomic theory. If all phenomena occur as the direct result of their antecedents, then how do we account for the initial motions of the atoms? Well, something distinct among the atomists was their interest in explaining the world without the notion of purpose or final cause. They thought that purpose was only applicable within reality, not to reality as a whole. Bertrand Russell and the history of Western philosophy said all causal explanations, therefore, must have an arbitrary beginning. This is why it is no defect in the theory of the atomists to have left the original movements of the atoms unaccounted for. In the atomist view, the universe has always existed, and it continues on without direction or mindful purpose. Democracies would reject popular religion and thought that the gods were put away for the masses to explain and find comfort in the inexplicable. The ethic of democracies. The aim of one's life, democracies thought should be to pursue pleasure and cheerfulness. Like the later Epicurus, he thought it should be sought with moderation. In fact, Epicurus would take much of his influence from democracies and the atomists. We should seek freedom from fear and superstition. This would allow for the utmost tranquility in one's life. This pursuit of equanimity would also see democracies reject anything having to do with violence or abject passion. He thought sex, while it is certainly pleasurable, overwhelms an individual's consciousness and therefore should be avoided. Friendship provides much more value through his eyes. One can appreciate the astounding feat of reason that this was for the time. Here were mechanistic questions and mechanistic answers, the likes of which wouldn't be seen again until the splendor that was the Italian Renaissance. While the work of the atomists was nothing short of astounding, it was no more empirical than any other theory propounded during antiquity. Despite this, their influence was no less profound. From Aristotle and Epicurus to Montaigne and Spinoza, all warmed themselves by the embers which the atomists left behind. If you would like to learn more about Eastern and Western philosophy, consider subscribing to the channel and exploring some of the other videos in my library. As always, thank you for taking the time to talk philosophy with me. Until next time.