During that period the Greeks founded many city-states, both in Greece itself and in the Greek colonies in Southern Italy and Asia Minor, where all manual work was done by slaves, leaving the citizens free to devote all their time to politics and culture.
In these city environments people began to think in a completely new way. Purely on his own behalf, any citizen could question the way society ought to be organized. Individuals could thus also ask philosophical questions without recourse to ancient myths.
We call this the development from a mythological mode of thought to one based on experience and reason. The aim of the early Greek philosophers was to find natural, rather than supernatural, explanations for natural processes.
Sophie left the den and wandered about in the large garden. She tried to forget what she had learned at school, especially in science classes.
If she had grown up in this garden without knowing anything at all about nature, how would she feel about the spring?
Would she try to invent some kind of explanation for why it suddenly started to rain one day? Would she work out some fantasy to explain where the snow went and why the sun rose in the morning?
Yes, she definitely would. She began to make up a story:
Winter held the land in its icy grip because the evil Muriat had imprisoned the beautiful Princess Sikita in a cold prison. But one morning the brave Prince Bravato came and rescued her. Sikita was so happy that she began to dance over the meadows, singing a song she had composed inside the dank prison. The earth and the trees were so moved that all the snow turned into tears. But then the sun came out and dried all the tears away. The birds imitated Sikita's song, and when the beautiful princess let down her golden tresses, a few locks of her hair fell onto the earth and turned into the lilies of the field ...
Sophie liked her beautiful story. If she had not known any other explanation for the changing seasons, she felt sure she would have come to believe her own story in the end.
She understood that people had always felt a need to explain the processes of nature. Perhaps they could not live without such explanations. And that they made up all those myths in the time before there was anything called science.
神话
第二天早上，苏菲没有接到任何信。一整天在学校里，她觉得如坐针毡，无聊极了。下课时，她特别小心，对乔安比平日更好。放学回家途中，她们讨论相偕露营的计划，只等树林里的地变干时便可以成行。
好不容易终于捱到了开信箱的时刻。首先她拆开一封盖着墨西哥邮戳的信，是爸爸写来的。信上说他非常想家，还有他生平第一遭在棋赛中打败了大副。除此之外，他也几乎看完了他在寒假过后带上船的一批书。之后，苏菲又看到了一个写着她名字的棕色信封。把书包和其他邮件放进屋里后，她便跑进密洞中，把信封内刚打开的信纸抽出来，开始看着：
神话的世界观
嗨，苏菲!今天要讲的东西很多，因此我们就马上开始吧。
所谓哲学，我们指的是耶稣基督降生前六百年左右，在希腊演进的一种崭新的思考方式。在那以前，人们在各种宗教中找到了他们心中问题的答案。这些宗教上的解释透过神话的形式代代流传下来。所谓神话就是有关诸神的故事，其目的在解释为何生命是这一番面貌。
数千年来，世界各地有许多企图解答哲学性问题的神话故事。
希腊哲学家则想证明这些解释是不可信赖的。
为了要了解古代哲学家的想法，我们必须先了解神话中显现的世界是何种面貌。我们可以拿一些北欧神话来做例子。
你也许曾经听过索尔(Thor)与他的铁锤的故事。在基督教传入挪威之前，人们相信索尔时常乘着一辆由两只山羊拉着的战车横越天空。他一挥动斧头便产生闪电与雷声。挪威文中的“雷”(Thor—don)字意指索尔的怒吼。在瑞典文中，“雷”字(aska)原来写成as—ah，意指神(在天上)出游。•当天空雷电交加时，便会下雨，而雨对北欧农民是很重要的。
因此，索尔又被尊为象征肥沃、富饶的神。
因此神话中对雨的解释便是：索尔挥动锤子时，就会下雨。而一旦下雨，田里的玉米便会开始发芽、茁长。
田里的植物如何能够生长并结出果实?这问题令人不解，不过显然与雨水有关。更重要的是，每一个人都相信雨水与索尔有关，因此他便成了古代北欧最重要的神祗之一。
索尔之所以受到重视另外有一个原因，而这个原因与整个世界秩序有关。
北欧人相信人类居住的这部分世界是一个岛屿，时常面临来自外界的危险。他们称此地为“米德加德”(M记gard)，就是“中央王国”的意思。在这个中央王国内，有一个地方名叫“阿斯加德”(As—gard)，乃是诸神的领地。
中央王国外面有一个叫做“乌特加德”(Utgard)的王国，是狡猾的巨人居住的地方。这些巨人运用各种诡计想要摧毁这个世界。
类似这样的邪恶怪物经常被称为“混乱之力”。事实上，不仅挪威神话，几平所有其他文化都发现善与恶这两种势力之间存在着一种不稳定的平衡。
巨人们摧毁“中央王国”的方法之一就是绑架象征肥沃、多产的女神芙瑞雅(Freyja)。如果他们得逞，田野里将无法长出作物，妇女也将生不出小孩。因此，非得有人来制住这些巨人不可。
这时就要仰赖索尔了。他的铁锤不仅能使天空下雨，也是对抗危险的混乱之力的重要武器。这支锤子几乎给了他无边的法力，他可以用它掷杀巨人，而且毋需担心把它弄丢，因为它总是会自动回到他身边，就像回力球一样。
这就是神话中对于大自然如何维持平衡、为何善与恶之间永远相互对抗等问题的解释，而哲学家们拒绝接受这种解释。
然而，这并不仅仅是解释的问题。
当干旱、瘟疫等灾害发生时，凡人不能光是呆坐在那儿，等着神明来解救。他们必须在这场对抗邪恶的战争中出力，而他们出力的方法则是举行种种宗教仪式。
在古代的北欧，意义最重大的宗教仪式乃是献祭。对神明献祭可以增强神明的法力。举个例子，凡人必须以祭品供奉神明，以给予他们战胜混乱之力的力量。其方法是宰杀牲畜，祭拜神明。古代北欧人祭祀索尔时通常以山羊为祭品，祭拜欧丁(Odin)时有时还会以人为祭品。
北欧国家最著名的神话来自冰岛一首名为《史莱慕之诗》(TheLayo{Thrym)的诗。诗中叙述有一天索尔醒来，发现他的锤子不见了，气得双手发抖，吹胡子瞪眼睛。于是他带着侍僮洛奇去拜访芙瑞雅，问她是否可以将翅膀借他，好让洛奇可以飞到巨人所住的“约腾海”(Jotunheim)，以查探那些巨人是否偷了索尔的锤子。
洛奇到了约腾海后，见到了巨人之王史莱慕。后者得意地宣称他已将锤子藏在地下七里格的地方，并说除非诸神将芙瑞雅嫁给他，否则他不会归还锤子。
苏菲，你了解吗?这些善良的神明突然间面临了一个全面的人质危机。巨人们夺走了诸神最有力的防卫武器，这是令人完全无法忍受的情况。只要巨人们拥有索尔的锤子，他们便能够百分之百控制诸神与凡人的世界。他们要求用芙瑞雅来交换锤子的行为也令人无法接受。如果诸神被迫放弃芙瑞雅这位保护天下生灵的丰饶女神，则田野上将看不到绿草，所有的神明与凡人也都将死去。
这真是令人左右为难的困境。假如你能想象一群恐怖分子扬言要在伦敦或巴黎的市中心引爆一枚核子炸弹，除非他们达到他们所提的可怕要求，你马上就可以了解这个情况的严重性了。
据说，洛奇回到阿斯加德后，就叫芙瑞雅穿上她的新娘礼服，准备嫁给巨人之王。(呜呼哀哉！）芙瑞雅非常生气。她说，如果她答应嫁给一个巨人，人们准会以为她想男人想疯了。
这时候，一个名叫海姆达尔(HeimdaU)的天神想出了一个很聪明的办法。他建议索尔扮成新娘，把头发梳起来，在衣服内垫两块石头，装成女人。可想而知，索尔当然很不情愿，不过他终于不得不承认，如果他要取回铁锤，这是唯一的办法。
于是，索尔穿上了新娘礼服，洛奇则扮成伴娘。洛奇说：“现在，就让我们这两个女人前往约腾海吧!”以现代话来说，索尔和洛奇是天神中的反恐怖特勤小组。他们男扮女装，任务是渗透巨人的根据地，夺回索尔的锤子。他们到达约腾海后，巨人们开始筹备婚宴。
然而在筵席中，新娘(就是索尔)一口气吃下一整只牛和八条鲑鱼，并且痛饮了三桶啤酒，把史莱慕吓了一大跳。这个“突击小组”的真实身分几乎就要曝光了。幸好，洛奇及时辩称芙瑞雅是因为期盼到约腾海来，整整一个星期都没有吃饭，才化解了这场危机。
史莱慕掀开新娘面纱要亲吻新娘时，吃惊地看•到一双红彤彤的眼睛。此时洛奇再度出面解围。他说，新娘是因为在婚礼前太过兴奋，才整整一个礼拜都没有阖眼。于是，史莱慕使命手下将锤子取来以便在进行婚礼时放在新娘的怀中。
据说，索尔拿到锤子时，忍不住放声大笑。他先用锤子击杀了史莱慕，然后便将巨人们以及他们所有的亲族杀个精光。就这样，这个可怕的人质事件终于有了一个美满结局。索尔这个天神世界中的蝙蝠侠或OO七又再一次击败了恶势力。
这个神话故事到此结束。然而，其中真正的意义究竟是什么?这不仅是一个有娱乐效果的故事，同时也具有说明的作用。我们也许可以做如下的解释：当旱灾发生时，人们便思索天空之所以不下雨的原因，是因为巨人们偷了索尔的锤予吗?也许这则神话之缘起，是人们试图解释一年中季节更替的现象：冬天时大自然死亡，是因为索尔的铁锤被偷到约腾海，但是到春天时索尔便将它取回。如此这般，神话的作用便是为人们不了解的事物寻求一令解释。
然而，一则神话可不只是一个解释而已。人们同时也进行与神话有关的宗教仪式。我们可以想象当时的人在荒旱或作物歉收时，如何依照神话情节来搬演一出戏剧。也许村里一名男子会打扮成新娘，用石块绑在胸部，以便从巨人那儿偷回铁锤。人们这样做的目的在采取若干行动以促使下雨，好让田地里长出作物来。
除此之外，世界其他各地也有许许多多如何将“季节的神话”编成戏剧，以加速季节更替的例子。
到目前为止，我们只对古代北欧的神话世界有一个粗浅的印象。事实上，关于索尔与欧丁、芙瑞耶(Freyr)、芙瑞雅、霍德尔(Hoder)、波尔德(Balder)与其他多位天神，还有数不清的神话故事。这类神话式的观念遍布全球，直到哲学家们开始提出疑问为止。
当世界上最早的哲学开始寒展之际，希腊人也有一套表达他们世界观的神话。这些有关他们的天神的故事乃是数百年来世代流传下来的，这些神包括主神宙斯、太阳神阿波罗、主神之妻希拉，与司智慧、艺术、学问、战争等的女神雅典娜、酒神戴奥尼索斯、医术之神艾斯克里皮雅斯、大力士海瑞克里斯与海菲思特斯(H印—haestos)等等。
公元前七百年左右，有一大部分希腊神话被荷马与贺西欧德(Hesiod)以文字记录下来。至此情况大不相同，因为神话既然以文字的形式存在，也就可以加以讨论了。
于是，最早的希腊哲学家对于荷马的神话提出批评，理由是神话里的天神与人类太过相似了。他们与人一样自大、狡诈。这是破天荒第一遭有人说神话只不过是人们想象出来的。
批评者当中有一位名叫赞诺芬尼司(Xenophanes)的哲学家，生于公元前五七O年左右。他指出，人类按照自己的形象创造出这些天神，认为他们也是由父母所生，并像凡人一样有身体、穿衣服，也有语言。问题是，衣索比亚人认为天神是扁鼻子的黑人，史瑞思(巴尔干半岛东部的古国)人则认为神有金发蓝眼。假使牛、马、狮子会画图，一定也会把天神画成牛、马、狮子的模样。
在这段期间，希腊人在希腊本土与意大利南部、小亚细亚等希腊殖民地建立了许多城市。在这些城市中，所有的劳力工作都由奴隶担任，因此市民有充分的闲暇，可以将所有时间都投注在政治与文化上。
在这样的城市环境中，人的思考方式开始变得与以前大不相同。任何人都可以发言质疑社会的组成方式，也可毋需借助古代神话而提出一些哲学性的问题。
我们称这样的现象为“从神话的思考模式发展到以经验与理性为基础的思考模式”。早期希腊哲学家的目标乃是为大自然的变化寻找自然的——而非超自然的——解释。
苏菲继续在偌大的园子里信步走着。她试着忘记她在学校——尤其是在科学课上——学到的东西。假使她生长在这花园中，对于大自然一无所知，那么她对春天会有什么感觉呢?她会不会试着为突然下雨的现象找出某种解释?她会不会编造出某种神话来解释雪到哪儿去了，及为何太阳会升起?会的，她一定会的。这是毫无疑问的。她开始编故事：邪恶的穆瑞耶特将美丽的奚琪塔公主囚禁在寒冷的牢房中，于是冬天遂以它冰冷的手掌攫住了大地。然而有一天早上，勇敢的布拉瓦托王子来到这里，将她救出。奚琪塔高兴得在草原上跳舞，并唱起一首她在湿冷的牢房中所作的曲子。大地与树木都受到感动，以至于雪全都化成了眼泪。后来，太阳出来，把所有的眼泪都晒干了。鸟儿们模仿奚琪塔的歌声鸣唱着。当美丽的公主将她金黄色的长发放下来时，几绺发丝落到地上，化为田野中的百合花。
苏菲很喜欢自己编的美丽故事。如果她不知道其他有关季节变换的解释，她一定会相信这个自己编的故事。
她明白人们总是想为大自然的变迁寻求解释。这就是他们何以在科学还没有产生之、前会编造出那些神话故事的原因。
The Natural Philosophers
nothing can come from nothing
When her mother got home from work that afternoon Sophie was sitting in the glider, pondering the possible connection between the philosophy course and Hilde Moller Knag, who would not be getting a birthday card from her father.
Her mother called from the other end of the garden, "Sophie! There's a letter for you!"
She caught her breath. She had already emptied the mailbox, so the letter had to be from the philosopher. What on earth would she say to her mother?
"There's no stamp on it. It's probably a love letter!"
Sophie took the letter.
"Aren't you going to open it?"
She had to find an excuse.
"Have you ever heard of anyone opening a love letter with her mother looking over her shoulder?"
Let her mother think it was a love letter. Although it was embarrassing enough, it would be even worse if her mother found out that she was doing a correspondence course with a complete stranger, a philosopher who was playing hide-and-seek with her.
It was one of the little white envelopes. When Sophie got upstairs to her room, she found three new questions:
Is there a basic substance that everything else is made of?
Can water turn into wine? How can earth and water produce a live frog!
Sophie found the questions pretty stupid, but nevertheless they kept buzzing around in her head all evening. She was still thinking about them at school the next day, examining them one by one.
Could there be a "basic substance" that everything was made of? If there was some such substance, how could it suddenly turn into a flower or an elephant?
The same objection applied to the question of whether water could turn into wine. Sophie knew the parable of how Jesus turned water into wine, but she had never taken it literally. And if Jesus really had turned water into wine, it was because it was a miracle, something that could not be done normally. Sophie knew there was a lot of water, not only in wine but in all other growing things. But even if a cucumber was 95 percent water, there must be something else in it as well, because a cucumber was a cucumber, not water.
And then there was the question about the frog. Her philosophy teacher had this really weird thing about frogs.
Sophie could possibly accept that a frog consisted of earth and water, in which case the earth must consist of more than one kind of substance. If the earth consisted of a lot of different substances, it was obviously possible that earth and water together could produce a frog. That is, if the earth and the water went via frog spawn and tadpoles. Because a frog could not just grow out of a cabbage patch, however much you watered it.
When she got home from school that day there was a fat envelope waiting for her in the mailbox. Sophie hid in the den just as she had done the other days.
THE PHILOSOPHERS' PROJECT
Here we are again! We'll go directly to today's lesson without detours around white rabbits and the like.
I'll outline very broadly the way people have thought about philosophy, from the ancient Greeks right up to our own day. But we'll take things in their correct order.
Since some philosophers lived in a different age--and perhaps in a completely different culture from ours--it is a good idea to try and see what each philosopher's project is. By this I mean that we must try to grasp precisely what it is that each particular philosopher is especially concerned with finding out. One philosopher might want to know how plants and animals came into being. Another might want to know whether there is a God or whether man has an immortal soul.
Once we have determined what a particular philosopher's project is, it is easier to follow his line of thought, since no one philosopher concerns himself with the whole of philosophy.
I said his line of thought--referring to the philosopher, because this is also a story of men. Women of the past were subjugated both as females and as thinking beings, which is sad because a great deal of very important experience was lost as a result. It was not until this century that women really made their mark on the history of philosophy.
I do not intend to give you any homework--no difficult math questions, or anything like that, and conjugating English verbs is outside my sphere of interest. However, from time to time I'll give you a short assignment.
If you accept these conditions, we'll begin.
THE NATURAL PHILOSOPHERS
The earliest Greek philosophers are sometimes called natural philosophers because they were mainly concerned with the natural world and its processes.
We have already asked ourselves where everything comes from. Nowadays a lot of people imagine that at some time something must have come from nothing. This idea was not so widespread among the Greeks. For one reason or another, they assumed that "something" had always existed.
How everything could come from nothing was therefore not the all-important question. On the other hand the Greeks marveled at how live fish could come from water, and huge trees and brilliantly colored flowers could come from the dead earth. Not to mention how a baby could come from its mother's womb!
The philosophers observed with their own eyes that nature was in a constant state of transformation. But how could such transformations occur?
How could something change from being substance to being a living thing, for example?
All the earliest philosophers shared the belief that there had to be a certain basic substance at the root of all change. How they arrived at this idea is hard to say. We only know that the notion gradually evolved that there must be a basic substance that was the hidden cause of all changes in nature. There had to be "something" that all things came from and returned to.
For us, the most interesting part is actually not what solutions these earliest philosophers arrived at, but which questions they asked and what type of answer they were looking for. We are more interested in how they thought than in exactly what they thought.
We know that they posed questions relating to the transformations they could observe in the physical world. They were looking for the underlying laws of nature. They wanted to understand what was happening around them without having to turn to the ancient myths. And most important, they wanted to understand the actual processes by studying nature itself. This was quite different from explaining thunder and lightning or winter and spring by telling stories about the gods.
So philosophy gradually liberated itself from religion. We could say that the natural philosophers took the first step in the direction of scientific reasoning, thereby becoming the precursors of what was to become science.
Only fragments have survived of what the natural philosophers said and wrote. What little we know is found in the writings of Aristotle, who lived two centuries later. He refers only to the conclusions the philosophers reached. So we do not always know by what paths they reached these conclusions. But what we do know enables us to establish that the earliest Greek philosophers' project concerned the question of a basic constituent substance and the changes in nature.
THREE PHILOSOPHERS FROM MILETUS
The first philosopher we know of is Thales, who came from Miletus, a Greek colony in Asia Minor. He traveled in many countries, including Egypt, where he is said to have calculated the height of a pyramid by measuring its shadow at the precise moment when the length of his own shadow was equal to his height. He is also said to have accurately predicted a solar eclipse in the year 585 B.C.
Thales thought that the source of all things was water. We do not know exactly what he meant by that, he may have believed that all life originated from water--and that all life returns to water again when it dissolves.
During his travels in Egypt he must have observed how the crops began to grow as soon as the floods of the Nile receded from the land areas in the Nile Delta. Perhaps he also noticed that frogs and worms appeared wherever it had just been raining.
