 |
| Antigone attempting to bury Polyneices. |
You may remember the Sophist Protagoras' account about the origin of human civilization from my previous article. As noted in Plato's 'Protagoras', the Sophist was involved a debate with Socrates about virtue. Protagoras's story was a testament to his skill of persuasion, and the story itself was also well-executed. Starting with the mythological details that often put the audience on-the-edge, the plot eventually reached an orderly state through the emergence of institutions. This account of human history is important for the topic of this article – the 'Nomos-Physis' debate in the 5th century BC.
Why
should we be bothered with 2 words that even the spellings do not
look quite right? Because the 'Nomos-Physis'
debate addressed the most fundamental questions regarding humanity's
relationship with the world. 'Nomos' means law and convention that
originated from humans, and 'Physis' means nature. The two words take
a broader scope in terms of meanings. For 'nomos', that also includes
subjective properties of perceptions and sense impressions. For
'physis', the word does not only
mean the natural phenomena that can be studied by empirical natural
science. As the distinction between philosophy (metaphysics in particular) and
natural science have been vague in the ancient times, therefore 'physis' also includes the
concept of metaphysical substance (being), the concept of Divine and
human 'nature'.
An
early and naturalistic example was illustrated by Democritus's famous statement about the nature of reality:
by convention hot, by
convention cold, by convention color:
in reality atoms and the void.’
- Democritus
To
Democritus, the only metaphysically real entities were the atoms,
which re-arranged and combined to become complex configurations. The
atoms belong in the realm of 'physis' – they are the nature of
things. Filtered by our senses, we perceive all sorts of properties –
temperature, taste, texture and so on. These properties are part of
'nomos' because they depend on human perceptions and therefore
they can be considered as human conventions. There was why Democritus maintained that
atoms were closer to the nature of reality than all these
feelings and perceptions commonplace in human existence. It would
turn out that humanity's engagement with the concepts of nomos and
physis were not merely limited to these proto-scientific endeavors.
The
key theme of the nomos-physis debate was to argue which aspect was more important
for the human civilization in general. While many philosophers have argued for
either side of the debate, certain philosophers celebrated both sides
and others were indifferent to the issue. Not only the debate had
philosophical urgency, the implications also influenced many
practical aspects of human lives.
To
start with, the consequence of the debate concerns the nature of
knowledge itself. In a world governed by physis, the approach to
acquire true knowledge is to discover Nature itself. Through reason
and impartial observations, one can discover the laws that operates in the natural world. If, by contrast, the human world is governed by nomos,
approaches should be focused on the way to implement the best social,
legal and political strategies to serve the best outcome for a civilization. Through the
study of history, observations and introspection, one will understand how the customs and conventions shape the experience
of individuals in a civilization.
The
nomos-physis debate was also insightful because one often finds contradictions when they compare human conventions and laws of
nature. Through an ethical dimension, should we follow our nature (even if
that proves to be immoral) and should we be governed merely by
man-made laws and conventions? Should a law be revolted against if it violates some laws of human nature? Are there any
overlapping areas for the 2 contrasting beliefs? In the scenario of
social and legal reform, the opinion on the debate can influence
how the conventions and laws address nature itself. In a
positivist sense, the jurist can abandon completely the consideration of any
'human nature' or moral outlook in favor of sources and conventions
only.
Antigone's dilemma
The conflict of nomos and physis found its most iconic and dramatic expression in Sophocles's 'Antigone'. Antigone, who was the daughter of Oedipus and Jocasta (through their fateful incest), attempted to bury her brother Polyneices after the latter died from a battle with Eteocles. Eteocles was ironically the brother of Antigone and Polyneices, and the two brothers were found to fight on the opposite side of a wars. When both brothers died in the ensuing struggle, the new ruler, Creon, decided to give Eteocles a proper funeral, but he didn’t grant it to Polyneices because the king felt that he was a traitor. Believing in her familial duty as well as a commitment to the gods (physis), Antigone risked her neck to bury Polyneices, though laws dictated by Creon (nomos) would not allow her to do that. Antigone, risking persecution and even her life, believed in the existence of natural laws (commitment to the Divine), and in her judgment she embraced physis above nomos, even if that meant her preference would lead to her tragic martyrdom at the end.
It
was unlikely that Sophocles merely wished to chronicle the tragic
fate of Antigone through her confrontation with an ethical dilemma.
The Greek dramatist wished to address the conflict imminent in the
different expectations from nomos and physis. While one could take
side with nomos and blamed Antigone to be responsible for her own miserable outcome, the fact that Antigone wholeheartedly committed to the burial
suggested a moral intuition that was so common-sensial to anyone who
had familial roots. The fact that she was prosecuted for that
apparent moral action seemed to reflect the failure of the man-made
laws to address the realm of physis that shaped human nature.
The
people from ancient Greece would likely not have foreseen the impact
of their heated debate on the future generations. Once
there is still a point to cherish the wonder of human existence, the
battle between nomos and physis will likely to continue.
(1/2)
2nd part:
Who were the physis philosophers?
Were the Sophists, who were more humanistic than their philosophical predecessors, all supporters of nomos?
How would the debate itself shape further understanding for the years to come?
by Ed Law
Conatus Classics
(1/2)
2nd part:
Who were the physis philosophers?
Were the Sophists, who were more humanistic than their philosophical predecessors, all supporters of nomos?
How would the debate itself shape further understanding for the years to come?
by Ed Law
Conatus Classics
