1

For researchers on history of philosophy, taking into account, for example, the typical beliefs in societies predating Thales', which interpretation, if any, is more generally accepted in academia of

Everything is full of gods

A panpsychist or hylozoist?

I know there are only testimonies and no fragments. In the SEP he appears in the entry on panpsychism, however he can be also classified as hylozoist.

Improve this question
2
  • 2
    Hylozoism is an Early Modern concept. Having said that, Thales' fragment: "All things are full of gods. The magnet is alive; for it has the power of moving iron" as reported by Aristotle is quite vague. According to Aristotle, it seems to imply a belief in a “soul of the world,” though he is careful to mark this as no more than an inference. But we have to consider that Ancient Greek "gods" are not the God of e.g. Christian pantheism.
    – Mauro ALLEGRANZA
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 11:52
  • 2
    "Hylozoism... has traditionally been used in reference to the early Greek philosopherss, given that they spoke the most explicitly about life in all things... Of all the synonyms for panpsychism, hylozoism is perhaps most commonly and closely associated with it. But panpsychism is now the preferred term, largely because we have a better understanding of what constitutes life... there is little place for hylozoism in the present-day philosophical discourse", Skrbina, Panpsychism in the West.
    – Conifold
    Commented Feb 15, 2023 at 23:24

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
5

Both hylozism and panpsychism post-dated Thales. The former describes one of Aristotles doctrines and the latter is a 20th C doctrine.

We have far too little evidence to characterise him as either. Thales probably said and wrote a lot more about his philosophy that has come down to us.

Consider Judaism, Christianity and Islam. If we had as few fragments as Thales we would probably characterise them as the same religion. But of course they are theologically different despite the fact they are known as monotheisms. That some people do this, especially when the evidence is scanty, is mainly because people like tidy characterisations.

Improve this answer
0
1

Merging advice from the comments and my own research, it seems that both hylozoism and panpsychism are accepted by scholars as reasonable, and equivalent, speculations to describe the thought of Thales.

References:

Panpsychysm in the West (2017), from the MIT, mentioned in the comments: Hylozoism... has traditionally been used in reference to the early Greek philosopherss, given that they spoke the most explicitly about life in all things... Of all the synonyms for panpsychism, hylozoism is perhaps most commonly and closely associated with it. But panpsychism is now the preferred term, largely because we have a better understanding of what constitutes life... there is little place for hylozoism in the present-day philosophical discourse.

Presocratic Philosophers (1983) from Cambridge University, which is much older but I have found quoted many times as an authoritative work: [Thales] noticed that even certain kinds of stone could have a limited power of movement and therefore, he thought, of life-giving soul; the whole world as a whole, consequently, was somehow permeated (though probably not completely) by a life-force which might naturally, because of its extent and its persistence, be called divine.[...] The concluding word must be that the evidence for Thales' cosmology is too slight and too imprecise for any of this to be more than speculative; what has been aimed at is reasonable speculation.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.