The Milesian school of philosophy developed during the Pre-Socratic period. The importance of this school and its doctrines are relevant in the fact that they were trying to formulate theories on the origin of the universe. The major philosophical doctrines that emerged from this school has been credited to mainly three philosophers- Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes. The focal point of this essay will be to analyze the scientific approach taken by Anaximenes in his philosophical doctrine.

Anaximenes shares the basic foundation of his theory with Thales. Both these philosophers believed in one unifying element that is the building block of the entire universe. For Anaximenes, this material substance was air.  Although Anaximenes uses a primitive element, just as Thales did with water, what could classify as scientific in his theory is his methodology.

In order to explain how concrete objects are formed from the primitive element, he introduces the notion of condensation and rarefaction. ( Copleston 1983, p.26)

Anaximenes used the density of the air to explore the ways in which the universe is comprised of air. He explained how the condensation of air results in the air getting colder, resulting in the formation of solids such as stones, rocks and eventually the Earth. His theory of rarefaction revolves around the assumption that during the process, the air becomes warmer, eventually culminating in fire. These concepts of condensation and rarefaction are now used actively in science. Another key element in his doctrine is his attempt to establish the relationship between quality and quantity with reference to air.

The important point in his doctrine, however, may be said to be his attempt to found all quality on quantity—for that is what his theory of condensation and rarefaction amounts to in modern terminology. (Copleston 1993, pp. 26-27)

Anaximenes also bases his theory of air being the unifying element, by empirical observation-

“We are told that Anaximenes pointed out that when we breathe with the mouth open, the air is warm; while when we breathe with the mouth shut, the air is cold—an experimental proof of his position”( Copleston 1993, p.27)

Through the above quotation, a conclusion can be made on how Anaximenes has taken a different approach with respect to other philosophers of his time. Most philosophers, including Thales, made fallacious theories based on little or no evidence. There were also no proper experiments done at the time by philosophers to give their theories a proper backing. In comparison to said philosophers, Anaximenes used experiments to back up his theory or a claim made by him. Disregarding the simplicity of his experiments, we can identify a certain paradigm-shift from philosophical theories with no pragmatic evidence to philosophical theories with empirical backing.

 Thales and Anaximenes share similar foundations in their respective theories, along with other aspects in common. However, there is one major area where these two philosophers share different views. That area is the inclusion of divinity in their theories. Thales chose to drift away from the relationship between anthropomorphic gods and natural processes. On the other hand, Anaximenes chooses to include gods and everything divine as something originating from the air itself.  According to Copleston:-

“Air then is the Urstoff of the world, from which the things that are and have been and shall be, the gods and things divine, arose, while other things come from its offspring." (Copleston 1993, p.26)

Another interpretation of this can be that Anaximenes considered air itself to be a god. A reason for this being as he considered air to be both eternal and infinite, qualities that are often associated with a god.  He also makes the statement-

"Just as our soul, being air, holds us together, so do breath and air encompass the whole world.” ( Copleston 1993, p. 26)

The above quotation is another example of how Anaximenes considers air like a god. He refers to the soul, as a product of air. The relation he makes between the function of the soul and the air that surrounds the earth shares the similarity of the air holding us together. Thus an interpretation can be made on how he is considering air as a substance that regulates all life on earth, a similar function to that of a god.

Anaximenes also attempts to explain natural phenomenon through a rational hypothesis. Taking the same views as in Thales, even Anaximenes understands the Earth to be a flat disk. For him, the earth drifts or floats on air like a leaf. Considering the period of time he lived in, and the fact that scientific discoveries were looked down upon, the assumption of the earth as a flat disk was a controversial claim-

“In the words of Professor Burnet, "Ionia was never able to accept the scientific view of the earth, and even Democritus continued to believe it was flat.”( Copleston 1993, p.27)

Anaximenes also attempts to explain another natural phenomenon. In the instance of a rainbow, he concludes that it is the sun’s rays that are falling on an impenetrable cloud. His account on how hail is frozen rainwater was also later scientifically proven to be true.

As a conclusion, we can make the assumption that Anaximenes was using a quasi-scientific approach in his philosophical doctrine. What set him apart from Thales was how even though he used a scientific approach, he did not completely abandon the notions of myth and divinity and instead included them in his doctrine. His concepts of condensation and rarefaction exemplify the different atomic densities of air, which would make him one of the very first philosophers to engage in and analyze different densities in substances. His doctrine, which can be considered as a material monistic doctrine, paved the way for the fusion of science and philosophy.

REFERENCES-

Copleston, Frederick. 1993. A History of Philosophy. Double Day: New York