Cosmologists

"So, too... (fr. 67)... gods and men are... one. They live each others' life, and die each others' death. Those mortals that die the fiery death become immortal... [i.e.,] the guardians of the quick and the dead (fr. 123); and those immortals become mortal in their turn."

"The soul that has died from excess of moisture sinks down to earth; but from the earth comes water, and from water is once more exhaled a soul (fr. 68)."

"[T]he soul will be now living and now dead... it will only turn to fire or water... to recommence... its unceasing upward and downward path."

"[A]s summer and winter are one, and... reproduce one another by their "opposite tension," so do life and death... and so... youth and age (fr. 78)."

"Those who die the fiery... death, become... gods... in a different sense from that in which the one Wisdom is god. It is probable that the corrupt fragment 123 refers to this unexpected fate (fr. 122)..."

"The dry soul, that which has least moisture, is... best (fr. 74); but... preponderance of fire causes... a... different death... and wins "greater portions"... (fr. 101). ...[T]hose who fall in battle share their lot (fr. 102)."

"That is why it is... necessary... to quench wantonness (fr. 103); for whatever our heart’s desire insists on it purchases at the price of life... [i.e.,] the fire within us (fr. 105)."

"It is death... to souls to become water (fr. 68); but that is... what happens to souls which seek after pleasure... a moistening of the soul (fr. 72), as... in... the drunken man, who... has moistened his soul to... an extent that he does not know where he is going (fr. 73). Even in gentle relaxation over our cups, it is... difficult to hide folly... (fr. 108)."

"[I]n no soul are the fire and water... evenly balanced for long. One... acquires predominance, and the result... is death."

"The true Herakleitean doctrine doubtless was, that sleep was produced by the encroachment of moist, dark exhalations from the water in the body, which cause the fire to, burn low. In sleep, we lose contact with the fire in the world which is common to all, and retire to a world of our own (fr. 95). In a soul where the fire and water are evenly balanced, the equilibrium is restored in the morning by an equal advance of the bright exhalation."

"The locus classicus on this... is... Sextus Empiricus, which reproduces the account of the Herakleitean psychology given by Ainesidemos... (R. P. 41):— The natural philosopher is of opinion that what surrounds us is rational and endowed with consciousness. According to Herakleitos, when we draw in this divine reason by... respiration, we become rational. In sleep we forget, but at our waking we become conscious once more. For in sleep... the mind... is cut off from... that which surrounds us, and only our connexion... by... respiration is preserved as a... root (from which the rest may spring again); and, when... thus separated, it loses the power of memory... When we awake again... it looks out through the openings of the senses, as if through windows, and coming together with the surrounding mind, it assumes the power of reason. Just... as embers... brought near the fire, change and become red-hot, and go out when they are taken away... so does the portion of... mind... become irrational when... cut off, and... become of like nature to the whole... through the greatest number of openings. In this passage there is... a... large admixture of later... ideas. In particular... identification of "that which surrounds us" with the air... for Herakleitos can have known nothing of air, which in his day was regarded as a form of water... The reference to the pores or openings of the senses is probably foreign... for the theory of pores is due to Alkmaion. ...[T]he distinction between mind and body is far too sharply drawn. ...[T]he important rôle assigned to respiration may very well be Herakleitean; for we ... met with it ...in Anaximenes. ...[T]he striking simile of the embers which glow when ...near the fire is genuine (cf. fr. 77)."

"Man is subject to... in his "measures" of fire and water... [T]his gives rise to the alternations of sleeping and waking, life and death."

"We are just as much in perpetual flux as anything else in the world. We are and are not the same for two consecutive instants (fr. 81). The fire in us is perpetually becoming water, and the water earth; but, as the opposite process goes on simultaneously, we appear to remain the same."

"[T]he fire which animates man is subject to the "upward and downward path," just as much as the fire of the world. ..."All things are passing, both human and divine, upwards and downwards by exchanges.""

"Herakleitos... explained the world by man rather than man by the world. ...Aristotle implies that soul is identical with the dry exhalation, and this is ...confirmed by the fragments. Man is made... of... fire, water, and earth. But, just as in the macrocosm fire is... the one wisdom, so in the microcosm... fire alone is conscious. When it has left the body..., the mere earth and water, is... worthless (fr. 85)."

"Αll things are "exchanged" for fire and fire for all things (fr. 22), and this implies that for everything it takes, fire will give as much. “The sun will not exceed his measures” (fr. 29)."

"How is it that, in spite of this constant flux, things appear relatively stable? ...[I]t is owing to the observance of the "measures," in virtue of which the aggregate bulk of each form of matter in the long run remains the same, though its substance is constantly changing, Certain "measures" of the "ever-living fire" are always being kindled, while like "measures" are always going out (fr. 20)..."

"[O]ur best account of the Theophrastean of Herakleitos is the fuller of the two accounts... in Laertios Diogenes... as follows:— ...He held that Fire was the element, and that all things were an exchange for fire, produced by condensation and rarefaction. But he explains nothing clearly. All things were produced in opposition, and all things were in flux like a river. The all is finite and the world is one. It arises from fire, and is consumed again by fire alternately through all eternity in... cycles. This happens according to fate. That which leads to the becoming of the opposites is called War and Strife; that which leads to the final conflagration is Concord and Peace. He called change the upward and the downward path, and held that the world comes into being in virtue of this. When fire is condensed it becomes moist, and when compressed it turns to water; water being congealed turns to earth, and this he calls the downward path. And, again, the earth is in turn liquefied, and from it water arises, and from that everything else; for he refers almost everything to the evaporation from the sea. This is the path upwards. R. P. 36 He held, too, that exhalations arose both from the sea and the land; some bright and pure, others dark. Fire was nourished by the bright ones, and moisture by the others. He does not make it clear what is the nature of that which surrounds the world. He held, however, that there were bowls in it with the concave sides turned towards us, in which the bright exhalations were collected and produced flames. These were the heavenly bodies. The flame of the sun was the brightest and warmest; for the other heavenly bodies were more distant from the earth; and for that reason gave less light and heat. The moon, on the other hand, was nearer the earth; but it moved through an impure region. The sun moved in a bright and unmixed region, and at the same time was at just the right distance from us. That is why it gives more heat and light. The eclipses of the sun and moon were due to the turning of the bowls upwards, while the monthly phases of the moon were produced by a gradual turning of its bowl. Day and night, months and seasons and years, rains and winds, and things like these, were due to the different exhalations. The bright exhalation, when ignited in the circle of the sun, produced day, and the preponderance of the opposite exhalations produced night. The increase of warmth proceeding from the bright exhalation produced summer, and the preponderance of moisture from the dark exhalation produced winter. He assigns the causes of other things in conformity with this. As to the earth, he makes no clear statement about its nature, any more than he does about that of the bowls. These, then, were his opinions. R. P. 39 b."

"In the fragments... we find nothing about rarefaction and condensation. The expression used is "exchange" (fr. 22)... a very good name for... when fire gives out smoke and takes in fuel..."

"The Milesians held a similar view. The flux of Herakleitos was at most more unceasing and universal."

"Herakleitos held..., that any... thing, however stable in appearance, was merely a section in the stream, and... the matter composing it was never the same in any two consecutive moments... [T]he idea was not... novel, and... hardly the central point in the system of Herakleitos."

"Aristotle says the same... "All things are in motion," "nothing steadfastly is.""

"Plato... expresses the idea... clearly. "Nothing ever is, everything is becoming"; "All things are in motion like streams"; "All things are passing, and nothing abides"; "Herakleitos says somewhere that all things pass and naught abides; and, comparing things to the current of a river, he says that you cannot step twice into the same stream". (cf. fr. 41)—these are the terms in which he describes the system."

"This theory is usually summed up... "All things are flowing"... though... it cannot be proved that this is a quotation from Herakleitos."

"This necessarily brings... a certain way of looking at the change and movement of the world. ...It follows that ...reality is like an ever-flowing stream ...nothing is ever at rest ...The substance of ...things ...is in constant change."

"The quantity of fire in a flame... appears to remain the same, the flame seems to be... a "thing"... yet the substance... is continually changing. ...[P]assing away in smoke ...its place ...always being taken by fresh ...fuel that feeds it. ...If we regard the world as an "ever-living fire" (fr. 20), we can understand ...it ...always becoming all things, while all things are always returning to it."

"[T]his made it necessary for him to seek... a new primary substance... not merely... out of which the diversified world... might... be made, or from which opposites could be "separated out," but... which of its own nature would pass into everything else, while everything else would pass in turn into it. This he found in Fire..."

"This identity had been realised... by the Milesians, but they... found a difficulty in the difference. Anaximander had treated the strife of opposites as an "injustice," and... Herakleitos set himself to show... it was the highest justice (fr, 62)."

"The identity ...as consisting in difference is simply that of the primary substance in all its manifestations."

"We must be careful... not to imagine that Herakleitos thus discovered... a logical principle. The identity in and through difference... was purely physical; logic did not yet exist, and... the principle of identity had not been formulated, it would have been impossible to protest against an abstract application of it."

"[T]he differentiation of the one into many, and the integration of the many into one, are both eternal and simultaneous, and... this is the ground upon which... Herakleitos is contrasted with... Empedokles. ...[A]ccording to Plato, Herakleitos taught that reality was at once many and one."

"[In] Plato.., the Sophist (242 d), the Eleatic stranger, after explaining how the maintained that what we call many is really one, proceeds:— But certain Ionian and (at a later date) certain Sicilian Muses remarked that it was safest to unite these two things, and to say that reality is both many and one, and is kept together by Hate and Love. "For," say the more severe Muses, "in its division it is always being brought together" (cf. fr. 59); while the softer Muses relaxed the requirement that this should always be so, and said that the All was alternately one and at peace through the power of Aphrodite, and many and at war with itself because of something they called Strife. ...the Ionian Muses stand ...for Herakleitos, and the Sicilian for Empedokles."

"Anaximander had taught... the opposites were separated... from the Boundless, but passed away into it once more... paying the penalty for... unjust encroachments on one another. It is... implied... there is something wrong in the war of opposites, and... existence of the Many is a breach in the unity of the One. ...Herakleitos proclaimed ...there is no One without the Many, and no Many without the One. The world is at once one and many, and ...the "opposite tension" of the Many ...constitutes the unity of the One."

"Philo... says: "For that which is made up of both the opposites is one; and, when the one is divided, the opposites are disclosed. Is not this... what the Greeks say their great and much belauded Herakleitos put in the forefront of his philosophy as summing it all up, and boasted of as a new discovery?""

"[H]e believed himself to have attained insight into... truth... not hitherto... recognised, though... staring men in the face (fr. 93). ...[W]e must ...find out what he was thinking ...when he launched into ...denunciations of human dulness and ignorance. The answer... in ...fragments, 18 and 45 ... the many apparently independent and conflicting things we know are really one, and ...this one is also many. The "strife of opposites" is really an "attunement" ...[[Wisdom|[W]isdom]] is not a knowledge of many things, but the perception of the underlying unity of the warring opposites."

"Herakleitos looks down not only on the mass of men, but on all previous inquirers into nature."

"Most... commentators on Herakleitos... in Diogenes were Stoics, and... their paraphrases were sometimes taken for the original. ...Stoics ...sought to interpret him ...in accordance with their ...system. ...[T]hey were fond of "accommodating"... views... to their own..."

"[S]ome... fragments are far from clear, and there are probably not a few of which the meaning will never be recovered. ...[T]he doxographers... are far less instructive with... Herakleitos... [T]he two accounts of... Herakleitos... in Diogenes, which goes back to the Vetusta Placita... is... pretty full and accurate. All our other sources are... tainted."

"Theophrastos... said... the headstrong temperament of Herakleitos sometimes led him into incompleteness and inconsistencies of statement. ...[A] very different thing from studied obscurity and the disciplina arcana sometimes attributed to him; if Herakleitos does not go out of his way to make his meaning clear, neither does he hide it (fr. 11)."

"[F]ragments about the Delphic god and the Sibyl (frs. 11 and 12) seem to show... an oracular style... [I]t was the manner of the time. The stirring events of the age, and... religious revival, gave... a prophetic tone to all the leaders of thought. Pindar and Aischylos have it too. They all feel... inspired. It is also the age of... individualities... apt to be solitary and disdainful. Herakleitos... [writes] If men cared to dig for the gold they might find it (fr. 8); if not, they must be content with straw (fr. 51)."

"We do not know the title of the work of Herakleitos... We are told that it was divided into three discourses: one dealing with the universe, one political, and one theological. It is not likely that this division is due to Herakleitos... The style... is... obscure, and... later... got him the nickname... "the Dark.""

"[P]erhaps... he belonged to the ancient royal house and resigned the nominal position of in favour of his brother."

"[L]ikely he was not a disciple of any one; but... he was acquainted both with the Milesian cosmology and with the poems of Xenophanes. He... knew something of the theories taught by Pythagoras (fr. 17)."

"If neither sub-atomic particles nor organic species exemplify the 'permanent entities' of Greek metaphysics, what else in the real world does so? ...Two hundred years of historical research have had their effect. Whether we turn to social or intellectual history, evolutionary zoology, historical geology or astronomy—whether we consider explanatory theories or star-clusters, societies or cultures, languages or disciplines, organic species or the Earth itself—the verdict is not Parmenidean but Heraclitean. As we now understand it, nothing in the empirical world possesses the permanent unchanging identity which all Greek natural philosophers (the Epicureans apart) presupposed in the ultimate elements of Nature. So, if we... are to entertain metaphysical thoughts about the nature of things-in-general consistent with the rest of our late-twentieth-century ideas, we must explore the consequences of the modern, post-Darwinian or 'populational' approach, as applied not just to species, but to historical entities of all kinds. Confronted with the question, 'How do permanent entities preserve their identity through all their apparent changes?', we must simply deny the validity of the question itself. In its place, we must substitute the question, 'How do historical entities maintain their coherence and continuity, despite all the real changes they undergo?'"

"I cannot approve of Heraclitus, who, being self-taught and arrogant, said, "I have explored myself." Nor can I praise him for hiding his poem in the temple of Artemis, in order that it might be published afterwards as a mystery; and those who take an interest in such things say that Euripides the tragic poet came there and read it, and, gradually learning it by heart, carefully handed down to posterity this darkness of Heraclitus."

"The part I understand is excellent, and so too is, I dare say, the part I do not understand; but it needs a Delian diver to get to the bottom of it."

"χαλεπώτερον ἡδονῇ μάχεσθαι ἢ θυμῷ"

"If the flow is steady, the field velocity vectors and the system of streamlines remain unaffected by the progress of time. Looking at the vector field and its streamlines we do not notice any change. Yet if we could distinguish the different particles of fluid from each other, we could observe incessant change... We have here two aspects of a steady flow, one of unchanging persistence, the other of incessant change. ...Heraclitus was called the "Dark Philosopher"; his views of human affairs were sombre and his sayings obscure. ... "You cannot look twice at the same river; for fresh waters are ever flowing in." "We look and do not look at the same rivers; we are, and we are not." What is the intended meaning of these sentences? I do not venture to find out. Yet I think that the originator of these senteces came pretty close to formulating the concept "steady flow of a fluid.""

"Herakleitos, about 460 B.C., one of the boldest thinkers of ancient Greece, declared that Homer deserved to be ejected from public assemblies and flogged..."

"In other countries, too, the idea of a creation was sternly rejected, as, for instance, by Heraclitus, who declares that no god and no man made this world, but that it was always and is and will be, an eternal fire, assuming forms and destroying them. And this protest, it should be remembered, came from a man who was able to say with equal honesty that 'God is day and night, winter and summer, war and peace, satiety and hunger—and that he is called according to the pleasure of every one.'"