Golitsis (2023) – Anaximandro, primeiro pensar sobre o tempo

(Golitsis2023)

The first person to think about time philosophically, i. e. in a more or less abstract way and searching to grasp the causality of time, was probably Anaximander. In positing ‘the Unlimited’ (together with its motion) as the only “ageless” element of the universe, this early Greek philosopher posited time (χρόνος), which, unlike the unlimited principle of all things, is generated, as that which determines the generation and corruption of beings.¹ Anaximander’s notion of time was obviously linked to the common understanding of time as that in virtue of which living beings, once born, go through various stages of life, grow old, wither, and eventually pass away.² Every living being was thought to have its ‘ages’,³ i. e. its life periods, the sum of which was coextensive with and, therefore, somehow regulative of the duration of its life. Such ‘ages’ were measured by ‘time’, for instance by the yearly cycle of the seasons or the year itself. The later philosophical concept of time as a ‘number’ (ἀριθμός) determinative of some thing’s existence, a concept conspicuous in Greek philosophy since Plato,⁴ originates from this archaic intuition about time.

 

1. Cf. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, I, 6.1 – 8 (= 12 A 11 DK): “[Anaximander] said that the principle of beings is some kind of existing unlimitedness, from which the heavens and the worlds that are within them are generated, while it itself is eternal and ageless, and that it contains all the worlds. He says that it contains also time, since both the generation and the corruption of beings is delimited. So, Anaximander says that the principle and the element of beings is the unlimited and was the first to use the name ‘principle’. In addition to the unlimited, [he says that] motion is eternal, in which, he says, the heavens happen to be generated.” (Oὗτος ἀρχὴν ἔφη τῶν ὄντων φύσιν τινὰ τοῦ ἀπείρου, ἐξ ἧς γίνεσθαι τοὺς οὐρανοὺς καὶ τοὺς ἐν αὐτοῖς κόσμους· ταύτην δὲ ἀίδιον εἶναι καὶ ἀγήρω, ἣν καὶ πάντας περιέχειν τοὺς κόσμους. λέγει δὲ 〈καὶ〉 χρόνον [sc. περιέχειν], ὡς ὡρισμένης καὶ τῆς γενέσεως τοῖς οὖσι καὶ τῆς φθορᾶς. οὗτος μὲν οὖν ἀρχὴν καὶ στοιχεῖον εἴρηκεν τῶν ὄντων τὸ ἄπειρον, πρῶτος τοὔνομα καλέσας τῆς ἀρχῆς· πρὸς δὲ τούτῳ κίνησιν ἀίδιον εἶναι, ἐν ᾗ συμβαίνει〈ν〉 γίνεσθαι τοὺς οὐρανούς.) It is interesting to notice that, according to the Orphic theogony of Hieronymus and/or Hellanicus, it is Time itself, i. e. the third principle born from Water and Earth, which is qualified as “ageless” (Χρόνος ἀγήραος); cf. Damascius, On the First Principles, III, 160.17 – 161.8.[↩]
2. Cf. Aristotle, Phys., IV 13, 222b 16 – 25: “All things come into being and pass away in time […]. It is clear then that time will be in itself cause of destruction rather than of coming into being […]. A sufficient evidence of this is that nothing comes into being without itself moving somehow and acting, but a thing can be destroyed even if it does not move at all. And this is what we are accustomed to mean by a thing’s being destroyed by time.” (Ἐν δὲ τῷ χρόνῳ πάντα γίγνεται καὶ φθείρεται […]. δῆλον οὖν ὅτι φθορᾶς μᾶλλον ἔσται καθ’ αὑτὸν αἴτιος ἢ γενέσεως […]. σημεῖον δὲ ἱκανὸν ὅτι γίγνεται μὲν οὐδὲν ἄνευ τοῦ κινεῖσθαί πως αὐτὸ καὶ πράττειν, φθείρεται δὲ καὶ μηδὲν κινούμενον. καὶ ταύτην μάλιστα λέγειν εἰώθαμεν ὑπὸ τοῦ χρόνου φθοράν. Translation by Hardie, slightly modified.) In chapter 13 of book IV of the Physics, Aristotle reviews common notions about time.[↩]
3. See, for instance, the Hippocratic medical text Hebdomads, in which the human lifespan is divided into seven seven-year periods. See further Singer (2022: 35 – 66).[↩]
4. Plato says in the Timaeus that “god”, i. e. the Demiurge who contemplates the intelligible Living Being, “kindled a light which now we call the Sun, to the end that it might shine, so far as possible, throughout the whole Heaven, and that all the living creatures entitled thereto might participate in number.” (Timaeus, 39b 4 – 7: […| φῶς ὁ θεὸς ἀνῆψεν ἐν τῇ πρὸς γῆν δευτέρᾳ τῶν περιόδων, ὃ δὴ νῦν κεκλήκαμεν ἥλιον, ἵνα ὅτι μάλιστα εἰς ἅπαντα φαίνοι τὸν οὐρανὸν μετάσχοι τε ἀριθμοῦ τὰ ζῷα ὅσοις ἦν προσῆκον. Translation by Lamb.) In his commentary on Plato’s Timaeus, the late Platonist Proclus speaks of “the essential time (οὐσιώδης χρόνος, i. e. time not as pertaining to something else but as an essence or substance) in virtue of which all things are numbered by the greater or smaller numbers that determine their lifespan; so, for instance, an ox lives this long but a man that long, while the Sun or the Moon return to the start of the cycles in such and such a time, and Saturn and the other planets complete their own cycles in accordance with other measures.” (In Timaeum, III, 19.28 – 32: […] τοῦ οὐσιώδους χρόνου, δι’ ὃν πάντα ἀριθμεῖται μείζοσι καὶ ἐλάσσοσι τῆς ἑαυτῶν ζωῆς ἀριθμοῖς, ὡς βοῦν μὲν τοσόνδε ζῆν χρόνον, ἄνθρωπον δὲ τοσόνδε, ἥλιον δὲ ἐν τοσῷδε ἀποκαθίστασθαι καὶ σελήνην καὶ Φαίνοντα καὶ ἄλλους κατ’ ἄλλα μέτρα ποιεῖσθαι τὰς ἑαυτῶν περιόδους. Translation by Baltzly, slightly modified.) Thus, ‘number’ is formative. It is not an abstract entity or a predicate of plurality, as in modern thought, but has an “active power” (δύναμις δραστήριος), as the late Platonist Iamblichus said before Proclus (see Chapter 1, n. 36). On the essential time and its causal power in Proclus see Vargas (2021). On Iamblichus see Hoffmann (1980).[↩]