First published in pamphlet format in Toronto; September 1993. (pp.306-313)
Continuing With: 

      Many bourgeois commentators on philosophical history basically are in agreement with this assessment,  such as for instance Bertrand Russell:
      In fact, it was Thales and the philosophical school of Milesia who distinguished, in the history of intellectual thought, an external reality distinct from man's own existence:     The period in which the Milesian School worked out their philosophy was very close in time to the origins of the separation of the tribal identity from the state of primitive communism towards the evolving City State era. This temporal closeness allowed the Milesians to recognise some essential truths despite the
changes in society that had taken place.
  The Three postulates that had their origin in man's close link to nature were :


    Engels had already pointed out the role of Kant in asserting the same implicatiosn of universal eveolution.
Kant had pointed to the likely changeability of the world, as Engesl said in Anti-Duhring : 2. " ALL THINGS ARE IN CONTINUAL MOTION "
Said the Milesians, as shown by Thomson , p.161.

    Once more Engels affirms that this position is the one that science (as we currently understand it) later itself arrived at also :


Was a third feature of the Miletian school, says Thomson, (p.161) Ibid.

This is perhaps the most difficult of concepts for many people to accept because of its apparent paradox. However it also has been incorporated into much of 19th and 20 the century thinking. The system of world thinking that the Milesians developed was summarised by Engels in the passage below. With Marx, Engels developed the residual fragments of dialectics, into the system now understood as dialectical

    These philosophers were followed by different schools that were naturally further in time away from the break up of Primitive Communism. Indeed so far that they were formed in the crucible of the money states, which relied on slavery for their prosperity. So much did money enter now into the relations of men and women that it dissolved the links between them. This entered into mythology as the tale of Midas whose touch turned all into gold. However its' curse ensured that he would starve for this very same ability :

          " Money wins friendship, honour, place and power,
          And sets man next to the proud tyrant's throne.
          All trodden paths and paths untrod before
          Are scaled by nimble riches, where the poor
          Can never hope to win the heart's desire.
          A man ill-formed by nature and ill- spoken,
          Money shall make him fair to eye and ear;
          Money shall earn him health and happiness,
          And only money can cloak iniquity."
          Cited by Thomson, Ibid pp.195-6, 244.

    The tensions unleashed by the social disruptions that had taken place lead some to outspoken imagery evocative of change being a constant force :

    This was a new and powerful voice, Heraclitus, who recognised the new phenomenon of slavery, and the ever present possibility of the poorest Attic peasant being turned from freeman into slave. It is clear that in recognising the central nature of change, Heraclitus agreed with the Milesian philosophers.
    However he differed in a signifcant way, that he now saw a timeless and self regulating universe whose only laws are of eternal change and interpenetration of opposites :     He has also a more abstract and remote reasoning reflecting the increasing separation of theory and practice, and the increasing force which commodity production (ie production for money instead of for direct barter exchange) is exerting on society :     The influence of trade (and thus money) meant a new vigorous social force arose. Under its' influence occurred the dispossession of the hitherto communal lands of the peasant.

    In the dissolution of tribal bonds and loyalties, many were sold into slavery ..The tribal solidarity was replaced with individual loyalties and battles. This ferment and change, dissolving links of family-neighbours-tribes - forced an insight into the nature of atoms. But it also allowed the development of the concepts of the soul. These were elaborated by the cults around the mythical figure of Orpheus, -
the Orphic Cults - which were the :

    Many of the doctrines of the Orphic doctrines offered the prospect of a better life in a different world. Philosophy itself as either a pastime or occupation, had only become possible by virtue of the existence of a leisured class of individual. Such a class meant the existence of surplus produce. This surplus was produced by slaves, which had become the foundation of the society. Slaves were extensively used in mines, plantations and homes. Their misery was described by Diodoros, who in the First century B.C witnessed their use in silver mines in the Greek colonies.     This uncompromising, and brutal existence lead to the elaboration of ever more complicated theologies. These theologies dissolved in both form and content, all the previous nexus between man and nature - that had existed.

    Now Plato was to explain all these horrors, and to describe the new reality as a consequence of Judgement. In his Platonic Cave :

    Plato was the culmination of the Orphic strands of thought. And these stood in opposition to the materialist school based on Milesia :     Plato praised Parmenides of the Eleatic School, whose philosophical postulates attacked Heraklitus. Thus, in contrast to the Miletians, Parmenides believed in a world that was static.

    It was therefore essential for him to attack the notion of interpenetration of opposites :

    Parmenides now counsels against the evidence of the senses.
He called the world of the senses, the Way Of Seeming. Opposed to this is the world of the Way of Truth. But the Way of Truth can only found by the mind, reason (logos):     In this statement is contained a clear denial of any of the Three Postulates of the Milesian School.
    By now it should not surprise us that this "Parmenidean One" was vigorously challenged. As Russell says :     The challenge to the "Parmenidean One", utilised a dialectical concept that counted on "many". This came from the school of Atomists who started with Lukippos of Miletos. He argued :     These notions were further elaborated by Democritus who effectively anticipated the later Atomic theories of particulate matter:     But where did these ideas come from? either they were prescient or they were acute observers of the world around them. Since no one has yet proven cases of "future seers" - what was in the world around them that could inspire such views? It is no accident that at this time there was a major social distintegration going on. They were led to this type of conclusion by observation of:     From now on, it was possible to deny the unity of man and nature. So also it became pssible to deny the unity of Mind and Matter.     Plato now was able to develop this separation of Parmenides, between the World of seeming, and the World of being.
    He called these two worlds:     Plato accepted that there could a unity of opposites, but only in thought not in being. He therefore became the first philosopher to take the step of proclaiming the priority of the Mind Over Matter. This would become and has remained, the cnetral debate in philosophy since:     In this others, such as Russell concur:     Plato worked out his theory of ideas in conscious opposition to materialism. In the Sophist he wrote :     As Thomson notes, by the "Gods" Plato means the Idealists including himself, while the Giants are the materialists.
    The direct relevance of any of this to nature, politics and legislation is clearly revealed in the following passage - posed as a rather one-sided dialogue-monologue:     But a dilemma arose for Plato. that is that his version of the Ideal and Just  ly run society was at such stark variance with the reality of most peoples lives, why would accept his "truth"? Or better, How could they be made to "accept" his "Truth", in his "Republic"?
    Plato therefore recommended that the young instead of being told unpalatable truths be fed "lies" as Thomson calls them, or as we term it: "propaganda". Plato in fact, was the inventor of Goebels speak:
    To his young student who points out that:     And what was the "Supreme Lie" that Plato suggested, was key to the republic? So much of a lie that even Plato was "ashamed" and paraded a reluctnace to tell his pupil! The lie was that all education is and upbringing is "nothing but a dream"... and that in reality all were somehow "beneath the earth ... being shaped and nursed... until the earth released them all complete into the light of day". This allows there to be a totally and unchangeable world where people can be fooled into believing in a Destiny such that are some who are simply born to be slaves , some born to be rulers:     All this mendacious explanation is given to the seeker of "truth" for "Laws" of the "Republic".
    After this famous passage, Plato formally became the god-head of all future reactionaries to this very day, proclaiming that the Men of Iron were destined always to be so, and that their rulers were the Men Of Gold - and all in perpetuity.
This rather extensive excursion into Greece, does have a subsidiary role in Our overall history of Genetics. Understandably, Plato and Neo-Platonism, became the undoubted Patron Saints of those following the inviolable genome!
                    Long Live the Men And Women of Iron!



ML Review     |     Alliance ML     |   WB Bland Archive    |    Albania Society