Omar Safwan Bataineh Student Number: 0187888

Can you find any common denominators underlying the various theories of the pre-Socratic
philosophers?

In this essay I will talk about what pre-Socratic philosophers, such as Thales of Miletos,
Heraclitus, and Parmenides, had in common in terms of the kinds of questions they asked as well as the
assumptions they worked under. I will give a brief summary of some of their theories and point out the
common denominators.

While it is true that Heraclitus and Parmenides had completely opposing views of what ultimate
reality is (Heraclitus believed that nothing ever remains the same and Parmenides believed that nothing
ever changes), they both moved away from traditional mythological explanations (Mythos), in favor of
rational explanations (Logos), that assumed an ordered natural arrangement of the universe that the
human mind is able to understand.

All these philosophers were interested in solving ontological questions such as where everything
came from and what is ultimate reality? Unlike Socrates who was preoccupied with answering moral
questions, these ancient philosophers were mainly occupied with ontological questions in regards to the
cosmos and the physical world. Thales of Miletos, for example, supposed that one of the four main
elements, namely water, is the fundamental element from which the other elements emanated.
Anaximander, on the other hand, rejected this and supposed that the Source, what he called the
“Indeterminant” or the “Unlimited”, must be an aboriginal, nameless, formless element behind all
things. Pythagoras believed that the world was made out of numbers and can be reduced to
mathematical equations. The common denominator underlying all these hypotheses is that they all
presuppose that “the concept of difference is logically dependent on the concept of sameness, which is
more basic, and that difference must somehow be reducible to sameness. Furthermore, they assume
that the human mind is capable of fathoming that unchanging one behind the many” (Palmer, 8).

In conclusion, pre-Socratic philosopher preferred to look for universal principles to explain

Nature as a whole, and they rejected traditional mythological explanation for rational natural
explanations. They covered many field of study and did not believe in the distinction between
philosophy and other forms of rational thought such as scientific thinking. They rejected supernatural
explanations and attempted to have logically coherent argument that covered many fields of study.