Opposites and Explanations in Heraclitus

Abstract

Abstract This paper offers a new interpretation of Heraclitus’ use of opposites and how they feature in his explanation of the cosmos. It argues that the so-called “unity of opposites’ thesis does not exhaust Heraclitus’ interest in opposites. It contrasts Heraclitus with his Ionian predecessors, Anaximander and Anaximenes, who treated opposites as fundamental explanantia for the cosmos. Viewed from this perspective, Heraclitus’ opposites appear to be explananda—things to be explained. The paper argues that this analysis of Heraclitus’ use of opposites reveals some features of his theory of explanation. Heraclitus rejects explanatory fundamentality but promotes the idea of a cosmos whose various parts explain its other parts. Opposites are both explananda and (non-fundamental) explanantia along with all the parts of the cosmos. Interestingly, Heraclitus’ cosmos itself appears to be both an explanandum and an explanans.