Philosophy: In St. Augustine's Eighth Book, Third Chapter of the "City of God" on Socratic Philosophy

      In the third chapter of the eighth book of St. Augustine’s City of God, he presents to us the picture of Philosophy in light of his presentation of the Socratic Philosophy.  Philosophy, based on this chapter, is a way to examine the foundation of one’s knowledge of things.  St. Augustine shows this in his critiques concerning the foundation of Socratic philosophy and its aim on attaining the “chief good” or summum bonum.

     Socrates, in this chapter, focused his thought of the “knowledge of things” towards the correction and regulation of manners in one’s life. He showed Philosophy as an instrument for evaluating one’s moral principles in life.  This aim by Socrates was unique from his predecessors, who solely focused on the natural, physical world in their reflection and speculation. However, this notion presented by Socrates concerning Philosophy is criticized by St. Augustine. This criticism is in terms of the reason why Socrates proposed for such way of treating Philosophy.  According to Gyula Klima, in his book entitled Medieval Philosophy: Essential Readings with Commentary, St. Augustine stated that it wasn’t certainly known if Socrates’ purpose for such a treatment in Philosophy is due to the fact that he is uncertain of some things, and so he wished to invest himself into something which can provide him with certainty; or that he was aiming to develop in men some kind of a “purified understanding” which lets them see the causes of all created natures, that is said to be incorporeal and unchangeable¹.

     Although Socrates’ origin of this new movement in Philosophy has uncertain reasons, it cannot be denied that the common point of these identified reasons concerns the examination of the foundation of one’s knowledge about things.  These “knowledge about things” covers all the categories of one’s attained knowledge, including the way one lives his life.  This is assumed to be what is called the “chief good” or summum bonum, which is said to be able to make a man’s life blessed.   The chief good is something which should be man’s greatest or highest purpose in life.

     Concerning this notion, St. Augustine gives another critique on Socrates’ philosophy.  His critique revolved around the idea that although Socrates directed the effort of Philosophy in this “chief good”, but he never arrived at a conviction regarding this “chief good”.  This then brings about the problem of how his disciples like Aristippus and Antisthenes interpreted his thoughts.  The former thought of the chief good as pleasure while the latter, as virtue.  Socrates died leaving a vague concept on the “chief good.”  But it has to be noted that Socrates had shown efforts on understanding morals in the light of something divine.  However, he was not able to fully articulate this when he was alive.

     St. Augustine’s critiques showed that Philosophy, indeed, is a way to evaluate one’s knowledge.  This is seen in the way he evaluated the aims and reasons of Socratic philosophy in directing its efforts towards the “chief good”.  St. Augustine’s presented some strength and weakness of Socratic Philosophy.  The strength concerned on the aim of Socratic philosophy to correct and regulate manners through good morals. However, Socrates was quite confused on such on the basis that such was uncertain as good morals relate to eternal things and requires a purified mind.  Socrates was unwilling to delve into this.  Thus, he shifted his thoughts towards something manifest and certain.  This shift led to the weakness of his philosophy, as it was not able to resolve what really is the “chief good.”  Thus, because of this, his disciples had varied interpretations of his thoughts.

    Source:

       1.   Gyula Klima, “Augustine on Ancient Philosophy”, (USA: Blackwell Publishing), In Medieval Philosophy: Essential Readings with Commentary, 32.

Philosophy in St. Augustine's Second Chapter, Book Eight of the "City of God"

          In the second chapter of the eighth book in St. Augustine’s work entitled City of God, he shows a particular way in which he presents Philosophy.  For St. Augustine, Philosophy is a way in which man can realize his actual relation to God, in a rational presentation of truth.  He shows this by his elaborate presentation of the ideas of the two philosophical schools, namely the Italic and the Ionic schools and their founders.

      The first whom St. Augustine discussed was the Italic school, which had Pythagoras as its founder.  Although St. Augustine did not actually dwell too much in the Italic school, what can be of note in his understanding of them concerning the premise would be the way Pythagoras had presented Philosophy.  Pythagoras presented Philosophy as a reflective endeavor. This is an important concept in St. Augustine’s representation of Philosophy, because reflection is a crucial part in the rational presentation of truth concerning man’s realization of his relation to God.  For the concerns of such philosophy involve one’s life in the search for truth.  Reflection is an important concept in Philosophy as seen by St. Augustine.  Since it is dominated by theological concepts during his time, Philosophy involved not only reasoning but also faith. This is what can be seen in St. Augustine’s brief discussion of the Italic school.

        Now, we proceed to the discussion of St. Augustine with the Ionic school, which consisted of the famous Pre-Socratics: Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Anaxagoras, Diogenes, and Archelaus.  Let us first discuss the concepts made by these thinkers before we see them in relation to the premise.

Thales presented the notion of water as the source of all things in the world.  He justifies this reason with the phases that water undergoes to account for the different things in the world, which is water being in a solid, liquid, or gaseous state.  Indeed, Thales presented a good reason for water being the origin of the things in the world, but St. Augustine criticizes this thought.  This criticism by St. Augustine, according to the book Medieval Philosophy: Essential Readings with Commentary, states that Thales failed to account the “divine” aspect in the origin of the things in the world ¹.  This is quite true, for if Thales really wanted to make water as the origin of “all”, then he should have not excluded the immaterial things, such as the ones that are “divine”.  This is the same mistake which Anaximander also made in his concept of the “apeiron” or “boundless”.  This is because the mere fact that everything in this world springs forth from an eddy, which produces the different things in the world by a cyclical process of an alternate dissolution and regeneration gives the assumption that it excludes the possibility of a “divine” aspect.  It excludes the possibility of something which is “divine” because a “cycle” presupposes “eternity”.  “Eternity” for one thing, has no need for a “creator” for it is capable of operating without any external principle to govern it.  

Anaximenes, who was the student of Anaximander, started the advancement concerning the problem of the origin of everything in the world.  This advancement was his notion of theology, although it wasn’t explicitly stated in his concept.  Anaximenes held the position that the source of all things was air, and that things were produced by the change of quantity in air.  His notion of theology is expressed by his account of neither denying nor ignoring the existence of gods.  The mere fact that Anaximenes did not debunk the thought of a “divine” thing gives the possibility that he acknowledges the presence of such, in relation to his concept of air as the first principle. This notion is considered to be an advancement from the previous thinkers since it doesn’t only resolve the problem of “how” and “what” the things were made of. Rather, it also provided “why” such things were made, which resolves the confusion of the additional principles involved in the transformation of things. This confusion of additional principles can be found in Thales’ account of water as the origin of things, since water needed to be either exposed to either hotness or coldness for it to change its phase.  This then makes Thales’ water as the “first principle” to be wrong, since it needed other “principles” for it to change its phase, namely the “principles” of “hotness” and “coldness”.  Therefore, Anaximenes, by indirectly recognizing the “divine” was able to give a solid foundation concerning the origin of things by providing “why” such things came to be.

The advancement started by Anaximenes was adapted by his successors, Anaxagoras and Diogenes.  Anaxagoras, who claimed earth as the origin of things, gave the explicit recognition of a “divine” mind to account for the different things that came from the element of earth.  Earth, being a static, stable element, naturally needed another factor which can account for the dynamism required for the creation of things.  The “divine” mind is a necessary factor in this notion.   Diogenes, on the other hand, also recognized the “divine” mind. However, he did not establish a dichotomy between the “divine” and the material principle.  Instead, he considered the material principle and the “divine” as one.  Diogenes held the position that everything came from air, which also had the characteristic of a “divine” reason which explains the difference in the things in the world. 

Anaxagoras’ successor and Socrates’ teacher, Archelaus also recognized the notion of a “divine” mind.  Archelaus held the position that things consists of homogeneous particles that were guided by a “divine” mind, which in turn animated all eternal bodies or those particles, making them alternately united and separated.

The advancement and flow of ideas and concepts of the Pre-Socratics as presented by St. Augustine paints the picture of the premise concerning Philosophy: that it is a way in which man can realize his actual relation to God, in a rational presentation of truth.  It can be observed that the journey towards having a solid foundation in truth was presented in a rational manner.  This “rational” manner can be traced back from Pythagoras until Archelaus.  This “rational” manner which depicts Philosophy is as follows: from Pythagoras, a starting point was made for the search for truth.  This is the notion of reflection, which involved one’s life in relation to the truth that must be sought.  For one to begin searching for an answer, the first thing that he does is to reflect upon the problem and see the different aspects of it. In seeing such aspects, one can see the significance of the truth sought in relation to the advancement of his mind and his understanding of things around him.  This is the thought which Pythagoras represents in St. Augustine’s account of the Pre-Socratics.

After reflection, one moves to speculation.  This is depicted by the Ionic School and its founders, who focused on speculating the nature of things and their origin.  This usually involves something that is material. In this speculation of the material origins, one begins to realize that something “material” alone cannot account for change or the differences between things.  Speculation, therefore, can make one see beyond the material aspects of this world. Speculation can make one realize that there is something “divine” after exhausting one’s reasoning with the material principles in the world.  

The movement from oneself through reflection, and towards one’s world by speculation proves the “rational” manner in the search for a solid foundation of truth.  This is because there is a dialectical process or a system that can be traced back after one had arrived at a conclusion. There is something “divine” that governs the material world.

Now how can such rational manner lead man into realizing his relation to a “divine” or God?   Reason, therefore, aids man in his search for truth and realization of faith in God.  Frederick Copleston, in his book entitled A History of Philosophy, supports this claim saying that reason plays an important part in preparing a person to faith and once the person has faith, reason then can help him evaluate the different concepts of faith².  This gives a picture of Philosophy in St. Augustine’s context which emphasized the complementary relation of faith and reason. Unraveling the truths associated with something “divine” always requires reason as a sort of recognition of what have been there.  It then goes through more deeply by speculation and reflection. Creatively and consistently, these activities lead man to understand the what, how, and why of things.  It is in this stage that he comes to understand the “divine” aspect present in all things and his relation with it. 

Sources:

1. Gyula Klima, “Augustine on Ancient Philosophy”, (USA: Blackwell Publishing), In Medieval Philosophy: Essential Readings with Commentary, 31.

2.   Frederick Copleston, “Pre-Medieval Influences: Augustine”, (New York: Double Day), In A History of Philosophy, 48.