Ancient Philosophy

Classical Ancient Philosophy

The beginning of the 5th century BCE is regarded as a transition into the classical period in the history of ancient Greece. Philosophically, this era is characterized by an anthropological shift, marked by a predominance of issues related to humanity. The harbingers of this shift were the Sophists, yet it was Socrates who most distinctly embodied this change.

Sophists

Initially, the term "Sophist" referred to anyone dedicated to intellectual pursuits or someone knowledgeable in some field of wisdom. However, by the end of the 5th century BCE, the meaning of the term narrowed, reflecting a different context. A demand arose for teachers of philosophy and rhetoric, as well as for popularizers of scientific knowledge. Such instructors came to be known as Sophists. The necessity for their services stemmed from the development of ancient democracy, which required educating the youth to think and speak effectively in order to participate actively in political and civic life and advance their careers. The Sophists taught a wide array of subjects: physics, astronomy, mathematics, poetry, music, and even military strategy.

Alongside the Sophists, skepticism emerged in ancient philosophy. The groundwork for skepticism was laid by the preceding development of Greek thought. The multitude of perspectives on the essence of the world led to doubts about the legitimacy of any single viewpoint claiming to be the sole truth. This skepticism particularly pertained to "appearances." Each thinker dismissed the "imaginary" as inherently false. The Sophists drew a straightforward conclusion: there is no objective truth; there exists only its semblance, its appearance, and the highest human art is the ability to create such appearances and instill in others a state of conviction. This explains the famously provocative assertion of the Sophist Protagoras: "Man is the measure of all things—of existing things that they exist, and of non-existing things that they do not exist."

In other words, whatever seems true to anyone is indeed true for them, since there exists no other "being" apart from that which we perceive and which is given to us in experience. Thus, subjectivism becomes the foundation of Sophism.

Protagoras (481—411 BCE) can be regarded as the first Sophist, as he was the first to charge for his teachings. It is said that he was the first to distinguish verb tenses accurately and articulate the timing of actions precisely. He was a great master of debate, not overly concerned with opinions, focusing instead on arguments and being meticulous about the meanings of words. One of his works began with these intriguing words: "Concerning the gods, I cannot know whether they exist or not, for too many obstacles impede such knowledge—the question is obscure, and human life is short."

Another notable Sophist was Gorgias, who was renowned not only for his long life (483—373 BCE) but also for his original and fundamental theses: 1) nothing exists; 2) if anything exists, it would be unknowable; 3) even if it could be known, we could not express the results of that knowledge in words, for they are untransmissible. Regarding the first thesis, Gorgias evidently relied on the Eleatics.

In general, the Sophists held that there is no truth, no knowledge; there exists only "appearance" and the endeavor to convince others through words. Only "verbal art" is acknowledged, along with its maneuvers and tricks. A true rhetor can argue for or against any proposition. Overcoming the extremes of Sophism could be achieved through the development of logic, particularly the study of syllogism, which Aristotle later accomplished. To the credit of the Sophists, one can acknowledge their pursuit of truth, despite various social circumstances and their despair in achieving it.

However, the most dedicated seeker of truth was Socrates. In his work "Apology of Socrates," Plato emphasized that Socrates was not a teacher in the conventional sense; he was merely the embodiment of philosophy as a striving for truth and knowledge, and precisely because he was a seeker rather than a teacher, he taught more than anyone: he taught the search for truth and awakened philosophy in the souls of others.

Socrates was born in 469 BCE in Athens. His father, Sophroniscus, was a sculptor, and his mother, Phanarete, was a midwife. In his youth, Socrates practiced sculpture. He was acquainted with all previous and contemporary philosophical teachings, yet he approached them with skepticism. Even in his youth, he recognized that knowledge of nature was of little concern to humanity, as these were divine matters beyond human control, and philosophy should engage with human affairs—those within our influence.

The wisdom that Socrates sought was essential for all: for ordinary mortals and statesmen alike. He spent his time conversing with his fellow citizens, especially those who considered themselves experts in any field. Whenever Socrates learned of someone claiming certain knowledge, he immediately sought to engage with them to verify their claims, for he famously stated, "I know that I know nothing." Naturally, Socrates possessed substantial knowledge; rather, he held an extraordinary sense of responsibility regarding the quality of knowledge, its alignment with truth, and the relativity of understanding. Often, during Socratic dialogues, the "expert" would find themselves bewildered regarding their initial certainty about the correctness and consistency of their knowledge. Socrates liked to assert that there is but one good—knowledge—and one evil—ignorance. Even in his old age, he learned to play the lyre, arguing that it is not disgraceful to acquire knowledge of what one does not know. When asked, "What is appropriate for a young man?" Socrates replied, "In the words 'nothing excessive.'" He advised young people to often look in the mirror: the beautiful should avoid disgraceful conduct that would tarnish their beauty, while the less attractive should adorn their shortcomings with good behavior. He also remarked that he eats to live, whereas others live to eat. When told that someone spoke ill of him, he responded, "That is because they have not been taught to speak well."

Now, regarding Socrates' teachings. His philosophical stance fundamentally differs from that of his predecessors, who primarily sought to establish the first principle of all that exists. Socrates too sought a principle, but not in the sense of "archê" as understood by his forerunners. Confined to moral philosophy, he aimed to uncover the principles of righteous actions, which are nothing other than norms and ideals—convincing exemplars of life in all its manifestations. If such norms exist, and they are objective and common to all people, then they will represent the true norms of any human activity, regardless of its field of expression. Without knowledge of such norms, all our endeavors will be haphazard, and life will be unconsidered.

Thus, having set aside physical knowledge as indifferent to humanity, he limited himself to ethical questions. All human activities must be guided by rational norms, and therefore Socrates sought to discover objective standards of behavior. Herein lies a clear distinction between his position and that of the Sophists. While the Sophists rejected such norms, deeming each person the measure of all things, thereby justifying human arbitrariness concerning norms, Socrates endeavored to find a universal and objective standard within human reason. This raises questions about the identity of human reasoning and what ensures the consistency of conclusions drawn from reasoning. This explains Socrates' choice of methods for discovering truth-norms: self-examination and methodical inquiry of others. By questioning others, the philosopher helps their souls gain knowledge. The same can be achieved through self-examination by posing questions to oneself, that is, through reflection.

Socrates concluded that human knowledge is realized through concepts, and that the true concept serves as the norm of knowledge. Through concepts, we come to know not so much individual external things as the general norms of human relations. Socrates also maintained that knowledge cannot be transmitted or taught through external means to the learner; instead, one can only awaken in them a desire for knowledge. Each individual must draw from within themselves through self-knowledge and self-examination. This is why Socrates, reducing virtue to the knowledge of the good, denied that it could be taught for a fee, as the sophists did.

The concepts through which knowledge is realized and exists are formed through logical deduction or induction. The conscious use of induction as a method is a unique invention of Socrates. He taught that through everyday examples and comprehensive examination of subjects, one must clarify their concepts. However, as we recall, he sought definitions of concepts within the realm of ethics. In his ethical teachings, Socrates reduced all human virtues to knowledge as actualized wisdom. Wisdom is both the beginning and the end of moral, that is, true, human activity.

Socrates was convinced that if people could grasp the true meanings of concepts such as virtue, justice, goodness, and the like, they would immediately align their behavior with these understandings. This, of course, is a utopia, a naiveté, but a noble naiveté that continues to characterize humanity. The concept of “virtue” (ἀρετή) was one of the central tenets of Socratic ethics. It was equivalent to knowledge in several senses: knowledge of what something is; knowledge of what something ought to be; and knowledge that a person must necessarily realize in their everyday behavior, that is, live in accordance with knowledge. A virtuous life requires a thorough analysis of the concepts involved: good, well-being, happiness, and so forth, since, for example, one can only do good when we understand what this concept represents in everyday experience. Socrates taught his contemporaries and instructs us to be responsible in our actions, to contemplate the principles we uphold in our deeds.

After Socrates’ death, his disciples established several so-called minor Socratic schools (the Megarian, Cynic, Cyrenaic, and Eleatic). Each of these absolutized certain aspects or characteristics of Socratic philosophy, methodology, or even lifestyle. For instance, the followers of the Megarian school (named after the city of Megara, located near Athens and at one time in conflict with it) were called "disputants" or "dialecticians." The school was founded by Euclid, the eldest of Socrates’ pupils. Among Euclid's students, Eubulides distinguished himself, known for having cured the stammer of the prominent orator Demosthenes. Eubulides became famous for inventing many sophisms, such as the “horned,” “bald,” and “sorites.” According to accounts, one Megarian, Diodorus Cron, even died of grief after an unsuccessful contest with Stilpon, the most famous Megarian after Euclid.

The name of the Cynic school comes either from the gymnasium Kynosarges or from the Greek word κύνιος (dog). The school was founded by Antisthenes, but it was particularly glorified by Diogenes of Sinope (from the city of Sinope on the Euxine Sea), who was called “the mad Socrates,” while Plato referred to him as “the dog,” a title of which Diogenes was quite proud. He is known for having lived for a time in a clay jar (pithos). At times, in broad daylight, he would walk about with a lantern in hand, explaining, “I am looking for a man.” As Plutarch recounts, one day Alexander the Great wished to visit the famous philosopher, who was utterly unconcerned with the greatness of the renowned commander and was calmly lying in the sun. Diogenes slightly propped himself up upon seeing a throng approaching him and gazed intently at Alexander. After greeting him, the king asked Diogenes if he had any request. “Step aside a little,” Diogenes replied, “don’t block my sun.” It is said that Diogenes’ words made a profound impression on Alexander; he was struck by the pride and dignity of a man who regarded him with such disdain. On the way back, Alexander told his companions, who were joking and mocking the philosopher, “If I were not Alexander, I would want to be Diogenes.” Diogenes became renowned for the calm consistency with which he embodied the ideal of behavior he had developed.

The founder of the Cyrenaic school (from the city of Cyrene, a Greek colony in Africa) was Aristippus, who believed that the goal of human life is pleasure, the good lies in achieving satisfaction, and happiness is attained through behavior consciously directed towards this goal. Philosophy is a practical science; it guides a person towards happiness. He also taught that each person is imprisoned by their internal sensations, like citizens in a city surrounded by enemies. Wisdom consists in enjoying all the benefits of life while guarding against falling entirely captive to one's sensations and passions, avoiding suffering from excessive indulgence in the pursuit of pleasure.

However, the greatest of Socrates' students and the founder of a truly great Socratic school, if not a magnificent one, was Plato. Born in Athens in 428 BC, his father was named Ariston and his mother Perictione, who descended from the renowned Solon, one of the seven earliest Greek sages. This was an old aristocratic family with many connections and wealth. Thus, Plato received an excellent upbringing. From an early age, he exhibited remarkable abilities, and his parents spared no expense in developing and educating their gifted child. Plato wrote poetry, engaged in painting and wrestling. For his sturdy physique, he earned the name “Plato” (wide), by which he entered history, although his real name was Aristocles. During Plato's era, the political situation in Athens was quite complex. He witnessed the difficulties of both oligarchic and democratic rule; aristocratic governance was succeeded by tyranny, leading Plato to constantly dream of radical reforms in the political and social order. His grim outlook on the state of political affairs led him to conclude that as long as rulers are not philosophers, or philosophers do not become rulers, the state’s misfortunes will be endless.

When Plato turned 20, he listened to one of Socrates' discussions and became his unwavering disciple for eight years, until the teacher’s death. In addition to conversing with Socrates, Plato also engaged with representatives of other schools (the followers of Heraclitus and Pythagoras). However, the influence of Socrates was the strongest. It is said that Plato later thanked the gods for making him a man, not a beast, a man, not a woman, a Greek, not a barbarian, and most importantly, for allowing him to live in the company of Socrates. After Socrates' death, Plato began long years of wandering. Over twelve years, he traveled to Egypt, Sicily, and other places. Upon returning to Athens, Plato settled in the Academy. This was, as Diogenes Laertius reports, a gymnasium (a complex of architectural structures and grounds for physical exercise, relaxation, and spiritual communion) in a grove outside the city walls. It was named after the mythological Athenian hero Hecademus (or Academos, in another transcription). Here, Plato began his teaching career. His Academy lasted nearly 900 years before being closed by Emperor Justinian in 529, along with all other educational institutions stemming from pagan traditions. It preserved all accounts of Plato, copying and safeguarding the works of the founder. This period of Plato’s life associated with the Academy was entirely devoted to scholarly activity. The school was located in Plato's own house. Teaching typically occurred through private discussions, although there were also public lectures and courses on rhetoric, geometry, aesthetics, and so on. Plato suspended his teaching activities twice (in 368 and 361 BC) for trips to Syracuse, where he believed political conditions might allow him to realize his ideals of governance. However, both trips ended unsuccessfully. The remainder of Plato's life was spent without leaving Athens, and he died in 347 BC, having lived 81 years.

From Plato, we have inherited 37 dialogues and 13 letters, all of which reflect the key stages of the author's intellectual journey. In the initial Socratic period, Plato remains significantly influenced by Socrates, and his works lack original ideas. These dialogues address the nature of true and false knowledge, as well as the essence of virtue. Everything resonates with the spirit of Socrates: no one is inherently evil; virtue is defined by knowledge, and the aim of philosophy is to unveil illusory knowledge and attain the truth.

Following Socrates’ death, Plato continued to embrace the Socratic approach to philosophy, regarding it as a vital activity with the ultimate goal of knowing and internalizing the higher good. He believed that without true knowledge, there can be no genuine action. Such philosophical knowledge is not dogmatic doctrine to be merely learned and absorbed like other scientific knowledge. Until the end of his life, Plato maintained this purely Socratic view of knowledge within philosophy. “This cannot be expressed in words,” he wrote in his old age, “like the other sciences: only if someone continually engages in this endeavor and merges with it throughout their life, will they suddenly, like light shining from a spark of fire, find this awareness within their soul, which nourishes itself there.” True knowledge cannot be acquired from lectures or books; only a few are capable of utilizing the pointers found within books, while most barely grasp them. Only through communal life in philosophy, a spiritual union aimed at communion in truth, did Plato understand the Socratic legacy.

In his second period, Plato expounds upon his own philosophical contributions. The third period is characterized by a reevaluation of his earlier resolutions concerning certain philosophical questions.

In elucidating the essence of Plato's teaching, it is crucial to recall that Socrates sought to identify universal rational norms, accessible to humanity, which serve as the foundation of virtuous action. For Plato, the aggregate of these norms constitutes the essence and substance of a certain spiritual realm, apprehended by reason (the intelligible world), in which these norms are fully realized. Thus, the ultimate content and subject of true knowledge is this divine world of ideals, the realm of eternal norms. Let us examine the distinct facets of Platonic philosophy in greater detail.

Regarding the theory of knowledge, Plato adheres to Socratic dialectics. Dialectics, as a method, is the art of forming concepts and their conjunctions. Through induction, dialectics leads a multitude of specific things to a general notion of their kind. Plato enhances Socratic induction, the method of defining concepts, with a new verification approach through examining the consequences of accepted premises. Each concept reflects the commonality found among individual items of a certain kind; thus, we do not recognize isolated entities but rather the general attributes of a kind. Kinds remain unchanging, and their concepts endure, while concrete things are mutable and contingent. In the kinds resides the true essence of things; conversely, in individual items, we find only the accidental; they exist only “by participation in the kind,” which defines them. Dialectics, however, does not end there but continues in the relationships among kinds.

In the dialogue “Theaetetus,” Plato thoroughly investigates the nature of human knowledge. He demonstrates that sensations do not provide true knowledge, as there are also general relations between objects that are not sensed but understood by us. The critical analysis of sensory knowledge clearly targets Protagoras' thesis that “man is the measure of all things.” The measure may be man, but only one who already possesses knowledge.

True knowledge emerges within the individual as if from a dream. One can acquire knowledge without learning from others, solely by responding to questions; thus, the individual retrieves knowledge from within themselves, akin to recollection. Plato was convinced, aligning with the Pythagoreans, that the human soul is immortal. Before arriving on Earth and inhabiting a specific body, the soul existed somewhere (in Hyperuranion, or the “Beyond Heaven”), where it observed the true essence of being and retained knowledge of it. Through this process of recollection (a unique form of “knowledge”), each person seemingly becomes aware of that which was already within them. This is what Plato refers to as true knowledge.

General concepts correspond to actual generic forms, or ideas. Since these ideas exist as unchanging, they possess true being. Plato defines them as essences. An idea is primarily the essence of things, aligning with the true concept of them. Ideas embody eternal reality and are impervious to any changes. Each idea casts a shadow of particular items related to it; it serves as their archetype. For instance, as Plato states in the dialogue “Symposium,” concerning the idea of beauty, it is “something that is, first, eternal, meaning it knows neither birth nor death, nor growth nor diminishment, and secondly, it is not beautiful in something ugly, not at any time, somewhere, for someone, or in relation to something else beautiful, but at another time, in another place, for another, and in relation to another ugly. This beauty will not present itself in the form of a particular face, hands, or any other body part, nor in the form of any discourse or knowledge, nor in anything else, whether an animal, Earth, sky, or something else; but it exists in and of itself, always in itself uniform; all other varieties of beauty participate in it in such a way that they arise and perish, while it does not become either more or less and is unaffected by any influences.”

Although ideas are the essence of objects and their causes, Plato posits that they are distinct from the material world, incorporeal, and eternal, accessible only to spiritual contemplation. It should also be noted that the world of ideas is also the realm of norms for all that exists, its ideal, so to speak. Everything we see around us is merely an approximation or deviation from the ideal. Plato unites the multitude of ideas into a single norm, which is the good.

Plato’s ethical teaching is linked to the idea of the good, which, of course, exists beyond the confines of the world. Thus, the highest aim of morality also resides in the intelligible world and can only be attained through renunciation of all sensory experiences. The human soul has its origin not in the earthly realm, and its existence within the body leads it to suffering. Hence, the task and purpose of humanity coincide somewhere with the soul's aspiration: to rise above the world of evil and soar towards the Creator. In the dialogue “Phaedo,” Plato asserts that the highest task of a person is to liberate the soul from all corporeal attachments, focusing on the true and eternal. The therapeutic function of “purification” (katharsis) in this regard is fulfilled by philosophy, as it frees individuals from passions and desires, increasingly separating the soul from the body. Complete liberation from all evils can only be achieved through death. In this context, Plato advocates for asceticism.

In other works, Plato offers a different solution to the problem of the good, where the ideal of a purposeful life is “kalokagathia”—a term that signifies the measure encompassing both virtue and the health of the soul, as well as human happiness. In a later phase of his life, Plato softens the demands of asceticism and promotes a virtuous life as the most pleasurable and happy, maintaining a balanced equilibrium between pleasures and sufferings.

Plato also constructs his theory of the state. A viable state or society (notably, he does not yet distinguish between these concepts) comprises three social groups (classes): 1) rulers, or philosophers; 2) guardians, or warriors, who safeguard the state; 3) workers, namely farmers, artisans, and merchants. These three classes correspond to three parts of the soul: 1) the rational part; 2) will and noble desires; 3) appetites and sensory passions. All individuals are naturally destined to belong to one category or another. The quality of the rulers (philosophers) is wisdom; the warriors are characterized by courage, while moderation adorns the populace. People establish society or the state to attain the good, one characteristic of which is justice. Justice does not pertain to the qualities of any one of the three mentioned classes; it is a universal quality of the state, resulting from the harmonious interaction of all classes, where each fulfills its function in accordance with the nature of things.

At the time, Plato classified the known forms of government into two categories: permissible and regressive. To the first category, he assigned the aristocratic republic and his own model of state closely resembling it. The second category encompassed timocracy (the rule of a few based on military strength, exemplified by Sparta), oligarchy (the power of a few supported by commerce and the lower echelons of society), democracy (which he regarded as the rule of the mob), and tyranny (the dictatorship against aristocracy). In his most comprehensive work, "The Republic," Plato elaborately describes how the ideal state should be organized to embody justice as an aspect of the good. He details the process of educating representatives of all classes, insisting that some should not possess private property, have families, or be allowed to raise children independently. These requirements have led some to regard Plato as one of the earliest heralds of communism.

A more distant consequence of the Socratic anthropological turn in philosophy was Aristotle, a student of Plato’s Academy. Born in 384 BCE in the city of Stagira, he is often referred to simply as the Stagirite. Aristotle's father, Nicomachus, was a physician and a friend of the Macedonian king Amyntas, who was in turn the father of Philip and the grandfather of the famous Alexander the Great. His father died early, and until the age of 17, Aristotle was raised by Proxenus. Later, after Proxenus's death, he himself became the tutor of Proxenus's son Nicanor. At the age of eighteen, Aristotle arrived in Athens, where he enrolled in Plato’s Academy, which at that time was in Sicily in Syracuse. Initially, he attended lectures by Speusippus, but upon Plato’s return, he became his most diligent student. For twenty years, until Plato’s death, their close relationship continued.

After Plato's death, Aristotle, together with Speusippus, journeyed to Asia Minor to visit his Academy friend Hermias, who was then the tyrant of the city of Atarneus. Three years later, after Hermias's demise, Aristotle fled to Mytilene, where he married Pythias, the sister (or possibly niece) of the deceased Hermias. From there, he returned to Athens and established a school of rhetoric. However, the school lasted for a short time, as in 342 BCE he was invited by Philip to tutor the thirteen-year-old Alexander. Aristotle remained in Macedonia until the beginning of Alexander’s Asian campaign.

With the onset of the campaign against Persia, Aristotle returned to Athens in 335 BCE and founded his school, the famous Lyceum, named after the temple of Apollo Lyceius located nearby. Here, at the Lyceum (the school was also called the Peripatetic school, deriving from the Greek word περίπατος, meaning 'walk,' since classes were sometimes held during strolls), Aristotle taught for the last twelve years of his life while simultaneously conducting extensive scientific research. These years proved exceptionally productive. Diogenes Laertius reports that Aristotle left behind 445,270 lines of texts.

Alexander took good care of his teacher; however, after Aristotle's death, the philosopher's position weakened. He was accused of impiety, which compelled him to flee from Athens to Chalcis, where Aristotle passed away in 322 BCE after a prolonged illness.

Aristotle stands as a magnificent figure of an encyclopedic scholar, or, as it is often said, the universal intellect of the ancient world. For science, he accomplished as much as many scholars in the centuries following him. Aristotle’s works have not survived as well as those of Plato, yet they provide ample insight into the scale of his contributions. He wrote on metaphysics, political philosophy, logic, physics, zoology, psychology, economics, rhetoric, and poetry, producing around one thousand works by ancient counting.

Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates, as representatives of a singular tradition, share close views on the nature of knowledge. Knowledge manifests in conceptual forms. Through concepts, one comprehends the unchanging essence of things, the universal and necessary within them. However, there exists a fundamental difference between Aristotle and Plato. Plato associated true essence with the transcendent realm, while Aristotle focused on the study of earthly reality. Plato contrasted the world of ideas with the world of phenomena, regarding them as separated essences from real things. Conversely, Aristotle acknowledges that the world of phenomena embodies true and singular reality, not opposing essence to reality, nor ideas to things. "It is impossible," he wrote, "for essence and that of which it is essence to exist separately from one another; how can ideas, if they are the essences of things, exist apart from them?"

Aristotle critiques Plato’s theory of ideas from the standpoint that ideas explain nothing: neither existence nor the origin of things. Ideas also provide no insight regarding the understanding of objects. Aristotle does not accept the division between the intelligible and the sensible realms. He seeks to reconcile experience with theory, which, according to the ancient tradition, was considered the result of the contemplative (speculative) work of the intellect.

Dialectics as the science of concepts transforms in Aristotle into logic. Logic is the science of the forms of thought and knowledge. Aristotle established the theoretical foundations of logic as a discipline, formulating the law of contradiction (one cannot affirm and deny something about an object in the same respect and demand that both judgments be true) and the law of excluded middle (of two contradictory judgments, one must be true). Aristotle paid special attention to inference, developing a logical doctrine concerning categorical syllogism. The development of definitions, that is, the clarification of concepts, was also of significant importance.

Aristotle’s metaphysics. In regard to his teachings, Aristotle himself did not use this term. He designated the relevant section of his philosophy as "first philosophy." Its subject matter includes being, existence, first principles, and causes of being. The problem for Aristotle was framed as follows: is being solely something corporeal, as the early physicist philosophers believed, or is it also something ideal, as Plato maintained? After examining all previous viewpoints, he substantiates his position.

The term "being" possesses numerous meanings, which Aristotle categorizes into four groups:

1. Being as categories (being in itself). This is the principal group of meanings of "being," which distinguishes the higher kinds of being, among which are:

✵ essence (e.g., a human, a horse);

✵ quality (e.g., white);

✵ quantity (e.g., a length of two cubits);

✵ relation, that is, in relation to something (e.g., half, double);

✵ action (e.g., to cut);

✵ passion, to suffer (e.g., someone is cut, something is roasted);

✵ place (e.g., in the square);

✵ time (e.g., yesterday, last year);

✵ possession (e.g., shod, armed);

✵ being in a certain state (e.g., lying, sitting).

2. Being in potentiality and actuality, or potential and actual.
3. Accidental being.
4. Being as truth and non-being as error.

Regarding the first group of meanings, it can be attributed to anything that exists. Thus, being is represented through categories as the state of something (that is, any being) in some manner, somewhere, at some time, always or sometimes, in some relation, and so forth.

The foundation of being as such is the first matter. It is undefined and cannot be delineated by any of the categories through which we articulate the specific states of existence. The first matter serves as a kind of potential precondition for existence, a common substrate for future transformations, which itself remains unchanging and never arises from anything else. It possesses no form or quality; it exists solely as an indeterminate possibility for change. In contrast, form is that which defines matter, bestowing upon it certainty, actual appearance, and properties. Thus, Aristotle effectively acknowledges two principles: matter and form. Actual being is the unity of matter and form.

The doctrine of principles is complemented by the doctrine of causes, which Aristotle identifies as fourfold:

1. The material cause, which resides within the matter itself as the potentiality of all future transformations;
2. The formal cause, which derives from the form that determines the essence of the being;
3. The efficient cause (more accurately, that which accounts for motion), linked to the question of the source of movement, which Aristotle ultimately traces back to God as the first mover of all existence;
4. The final cause, which pertains to the purpose for which everything exists.

Aristotle also taught that all living beings possess a soul. The soul, in relation to the body, can be seen as akin to form, as it represents the first entelechy (the realized purpose) of the body. The soul exists on three levels:

1. The vegetative (or plant) level, manifesting as the capacity for life; this level is inherent to all living beings;
2. The sensitive level, characteristic only of animals and humans;
3. The rational level, unique to humanity.

Aristotle characterizes humans as political beings, that is, social creatures, as "polis" for the Greek denotes both city-state and society. In his work "Politics," Aristotle perceives society as an advanced association of communities, and a community as a complex system of patriarchal families. Ultimately, the family serves as a model for him to elucidate the organization of society and the state.

Aristotle defends slavery as a natural condition of society, positing that there are individuals who, by nature, are destined to be slaves. Free individuals are categorized into three classes: the very wealthy, the poor, and the middle class. The middle class holds particular significance for the well-being and stability of the state. Among the forms of governance, three are deemed correct (monarchy, aristocracy, and polity) and three incorrect (tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy). The latter three arise when those in power begin to prioritize their own interests over the common good. Aristotle considers polity—the rule by the middle class—to be the most acceptable form of governance.