He was called a Riddler that believed in
the power of fire. His message was that all are one. He was Heraclitus of Ephesus The last Ionian presocratic philosopher in our series is the enigmatic Heraclitus. He was born in the 6 century B.C., and like his presocratic predecessors, only fragments of his writings survived. Because of how legends can arise to fill in gaps of a biography, researchers had to be careful to omit as many tall tales as possible. In The Presocratic Philosophers by Kirk and Raven, they provided a limited sketch of Heraclitus. For example, Heraclitus renounced his claim to the hereditary kingship, which Antisthenes, the ancient historian, used as an example of arrogance. From the remaining fragments we have by Heraclitus, and those who wrote about him, there certainly are patterns of contempt for those who could not understand him. Later critics called him "obscurus" in Latin, or called him a "riddler." Heraclitus asked... His contempt for the mob was shown by his bias for excellence, as he saw it. Heraclitus didn't measure the value of a person in the typical measurements of how successful or wealthy one was. He measured them based on their grasp of the Logos. Like Thales's water, Anaximander's air, and Anaximenes's earth, Heraclitus's Logos, was used like a theory of everything to explain movement and change in the universe, including our experience. Of course, anything simple that tries to explain away the complexity of the universe, is not really that simple. One area that the Logos uncovered for Heraclitus was how interdependent everything was. Being stuck in "private understanding" meant that, as cause effect was being ignored in experience, it was easy for people to lose grasp of constant movement, and to be surprised by change. While we stop and think, cause and effect doesn't pause. Because of how little attention people pay to cause and effect, the sense of things being One quickly moves into Other and opposites. Yet for Heraclitus, this provides an opportunity. Even with clear distinctions between opposites, where most people fall into preferences, hatred, ignorance, and phobias, Heraclitus could still see an abundance of Oneness. The conflict of opposites for many people can be traumatic, but for Heraclitus there was a treasure trove of insight to be gleaned. Like Xenophanes's insight on how our perception shifts as we discover more specimens to compare, Heraclitus focused on finding connections in the comparisons. This unity can even include violence and destruction. This last fragment hints at how our shadow, which is what we don't understand or are not good at, has lessons we can learn that are valuable. That is how our striving pertains to our lives. If there were no clashing of differences in our perceptions, would we be able to perceive anything? In the example of war, we may find a value in our interdependence with warriors because they protect our lives and property. What seems evil in one sense, may appear positive if we can connect something positive to the evil. For example, a doctor may have to increase pain in the short-term with painful procedures in order to alleviate a mortal illness. Here Heraclitus's Oneness begins to upend the human perception of good and evil. All of us have to be cautious with this Oneness, and it doesn't mean that we can't discern what is good and bad in Oneness, but that we take it less personally so we can continue to learn. Even with dangers in the world, Heraclitus maintained his perception. Our environment and our bodies are in constant flux. Our minds solidify short-term memories of objects, giving the illusion of permanent solidity. Yet what is more solid in practical life, is simply vibrating at a slower speed. Heraclitus maintains that sense of granularity of particles touching each other, while at the same time connecting one and all, because what I'm touching is also touching what's adjacent to it. I'm touching particles that are touching adjacent particles endlessly, while this oneness maintains variety. He even applies this to the sky. This simultaneous separation and connection also applies to our bodies. These perceptions flatten distinctions by focusing on how things connect. Heraclitus uses an example of a circle. It helps the reader to understand maxims like: Some of the confusion people have with differences has to do with our preferences. When looking at other objects, and especially animals, or humans, we have to accept that they have different preferences too, and there may be a hidden harmony that's not readily apparent. Taking an elemental approach, as his predecessors did, Heraclitus posited this energy of movement, cause and effect, Logos, as fire. Without modern scientific measurements, one is left with one's senses, but that is what Heraclitus favored. Even with religion, Heraclitus criticized conceptual religious beliefs that disconnected from objective reality. Through Heraclitus's observational method, one can finally see his form of thinking. Yet we have to navigate contradictions and update our views when we solve them. In other words, we have to let go of habitual thinking so we can learn from new insights. Unfortunately, it's easy to learn something new, but due to comfortable habits, one can rest on an old understanding, and behaviour remains the same. Heraclitus also hints at why people lose their sense of awareness. It's the need to feed. Heraclitus wants the wisdom to improve our ability to judge. By watching transformations, one one can learn more from the Logos. Because Heraclitus didn't have access to microscopes, or didn't have knowledge of chemical reactions, he was limited to an energetic transactional awareness. Ultimately... For Heraclitus, he is able to find peace in this violent movement. Without movement, the universe would have no meaning. Yet we must stay vigilant with the unpredictability of certain changes. This Heraclitus found especially in opposites. In the realm of human ethics, Logos can be found there as well. How we are able to discern the good and the bad in our environment is through comparison. As Xenophanes said about perception, "If god had not created yellow honey, they would say that figs are far sweeter," Heraclitus went further with more valent comparisons to pull us out of our habitual thinking. By comparing experiences, we can now know more of what we want, and more of what we don't want. A more relatable example would be exploring the world as a youth and then settling down years later, when one can recognize favourite experiences to repeat, and hated experiences to avoid. Kirk and Raven read Heraclitus as believing that... This thinking style of Heraclitus goes deep into our sense of a soul, and how it thrives when it is in divine harmony with the Logos. If humanity can harmonize their aspirations with their surroundings, and the divine law, then we can see a healthy form of dualism that can co-exist with oneness. It doesn't have to be either/or, which relieves the fear of hypocrisy, and allows us to adjust our responses according to the circumstances. Yet if we lose our way, it's because we are fighting for a lost cause, and Heraclitus pulls back in these situations from being a warmonger. If we have less skills than those we criticize, our revolutions will fail because the replacement systems have less logos. Kirk and Raven see Heraclitus as the presocratic that weaves ethics into his physical theories. Like in the natural world, everything offsets everything else to create a fluxing balance. That balance appears in recognizable limitations where empires are toppled and revolutions agitate. Too much, or too little, of one thing or another, unbalances the system in the physical world and in the human world. Humans have unending desires and naturally they bump into each other when they fight over what cannot be shared. German philosopher Martin Heidegger analyzed presocratic philosophers to trace how thinking started in the west and developed to the modern age. One of the early discussions with the presocratics as well as later Greek philosophers was the answer to "What is truth?" But Heidegger wants to include a mood to this type of recognition of the presence of phenomena. Dasein, or being-there, is a human presence that is not a static noun. It's a verb. We have moods and purposes.
For Heidegger, the action of Legein has a mood of "gathering for safekeeping." Typical of the problem of language, concepts only point to the experience, but aren't the experience itself, and this is why Heidegger is hard to read and requires a lot of interpretation which can lead to differences of opinion with readers. We see what's interesting and try to keep it safe in our moods, kind of like a feeling of cuteness and appreciation when we approach what is good, or concern if it's threatening. His studies of Aristotle showed that this type of thinking was more multilayered, but was eventually forgotten and Aristotle's categorization of how things show themselves to us, took over, leading to a utilitarian mentality. The safekeeping of good qualities is a very important part of life and should not be downplayed, but there's always an element of truth that is hidden from us. This presencing in logos doesn't show a complete truth. Heraclitus said "nature loves to hide." As we examine what is present before us, there's always more detail that is hidden. What is hidden from us also exists, or IS. This to Heidegger is Heraclitus's strife. It's part of the reason why we can be fooled by a superficial presence that leaves out hidden detail. We can also discount the knowledge of others because of how alien and threatening they are perceived by us. The hidden detail can make all the difference to our perceived truth, for good or ill. Our sense of oneness must admit ignorance to truth that is hidden, including within ourselves. We are allowed to enjoy mystery. Heidegger also asks the question... Why are we saying something about something? It has to do with our needs and our search for usefulness. Heidegger tries to define a healthy kind of usefulness so we don't devolve into a narrow interpretation of contemporary exploitation. Of course this is an ideal we can aim at, like reforesting a depleted mine, but humans have to feed and consume. For Heidegger, at perception it's enough to note "it is useful" in the sense for humans that they can find a place to stay and feel welcome. He quotes Hölderlin's poem The Ister River: From an ethical standpoint our oneness with the planet is contingent on our ability to stay and feel welcome as we continue to develop our different cultures away from war, and towards a proper harvesting of the planet that allows for as much renewal as technically possible. Like a maybe we go to a hot dog stand, because unless we don't want to be hypocritical, we can't feed on air! Yet much of the park we can enjoy without consuming all of it. We don't have to chop down all the trees and make buildings out of them. We can enjoy the potentials of the flora and fauna and let be. And what we eat, like a farmer, we have to be able to regenerate, exchange with others, or our sense of welcome and staying will change to conflict and over-exploitation. Like a meditation, a lot of our thinking is superfluous, draining, and distracting from what IS. Stressful, hungry, defense mechanism thinking covers over positive forms of thinking. As we peel back the complaints "what do I get out of this? What's the point? I wish this problem would go away..." we can just sit with the tree in the park. As the mind quiets down, fond memories may arise of other trees from childhood, and eventually you begin fusing with the lovely tree. An absence of conditioned-verbal-diarrhea covering up the experience. The newness and freshness of childhood returns, and it's not just a memory. Here the mind may spoil it further, but Heidegger looks at thinking, or thanking, in a different way. Thanking happens on its own just with the attention being placed on an object using the non-intention of letting be and appreciation. It's not mandatory doing. We can also scan our body to try to find that ruminating part of the mind and find only vibrations. The is-ness of vibrations of the environment, and oneself, commingle to a one-ness of vibratory experience. The particles that are adjacent to each other, connecting the universe, also include you and what you feel is "inside." Instead of me, over here, feeling wonder over why a beautiful tree is over there, there's instead a wonder and a thanks that both myself and the park exist at all. We are not comparing something extraordinary over here to something mundane over there. We are comparing something to nothing. That means our existence is also a gift along with the existences of other beings. There are potential exchanges in this oneness, whether we call it "fire" or "energy" that can be mutually beneficial, or destructive. The gift allows us to make our contribution towards a healthy oneness.
