“Nature does not tolerate emptiness” is an expression that everyone must have heard more than once. But at the same time, its significance, and even more so the author, is not known to everyone. Written on the topic "Nature does not tolerate emptiness" essays are usually considered in a moral aspect. Although in fact this expression is directly related to science - physics.
Greatest thinker
The author of the expression "nature does not tolerate emptiness" - Aristotle. This philosopher lived in Ancient Hellas in the 4th century. BC e. He was a student of the famous thinker - Plato. Later, from 343 BC. e., was assigned to the young Alexander of Macedon as an educator. Aristotle founded the philosophical school of peripatetics, better known as the Lyceum.
He belonged to the naturalists of the classical period and had a very great influence in the scientific community. He founded formal logic, laid the foundation for the development of the natural sciences. Aristotle created a system of philosophy that encompassed many areas of human development. These include:
- sociology;
- philosophy;
- politics;
- logic
- physics.
It is to the last of these sciences that Aristotle’s statement “nature does not tolerate emptiness” is related.
Fundamental treatise
The foundations of physics as a science were laid down by the greatest thinker and philosopher in one of his treatises called "Physics."
In it, he first considers it not as a doctrine of nature, but as a science that studies movement. The last of the categories is closely connected by Aristotle with the concepts of time, emptiness and place.
To understand what Aristotle’s statement “nature does not tolerate emptiness” means, you should at least very briefly familiarize yourself with what he talked about in his fundamental treatise, which consists of eight books.
The essence of the treatise
Each of his books says the following.
- Book 1. Controversy with philosophers who argued that movement is impossible. To prove the opposite, examples of the difference between such concepts as form and matter, possibility and reality are introduced.
- Book 2. Evidence of the beginning of peace and movement in nature. Separation of random from arbitrary.
- Book 3. Identification of nature with movement. Her connection with such concepts as time, place, emptiness. The consideration of infinity.
- Book 4. The idea of movement as the main form of movement, for which place is an important factor. Emptiness and chaos are also varieties of place, although the first philosopher considers it non-existent.
- Book 5. We are talking about two types of movement - the emergence and destruction. The movement does not apply to all philosophical categories, but only to quality, quantity and place.
- Book 6. The statement on the continuity of time, on the existence of motion, including infinite, which goes in a circle.
- Book 7. Reasoning about the existence of the Prime Mover, since any movement must be initiated by something. The first of the movements is the movement, which has four types. It is about pulling, pushing, carrying, rotating.
- Book 8. The question of the eternity of movement and the transition to paradoxes. The conclusion is that the root cause of the circular motion is a motionless prime mover, which must be one and eternal.
Thus, after a brief acquaintance with the essence of Aristotle’s treatise, it becomes clear that the expression “nature does not tolerate emptiness” is an integral part of the philosopher’s reasoning about fundamental physical concepts and their relationship.
Denial of emptiness
As noted above, it is in the fourth book that void and chaos are interpreted by Aristotle as varieties of place. At the same time, the philosopher considered emptiness only theoretically, he did not believe that it existed in reality.
Any of the places is characterized by three dimensions - length, width and depth. It is necessary to distinguish between a body and a place, since the body can be destroyed, but there is no place. Based on his doctrine of the place, the philosopher also explores the question of the nature of emptiness.
Dispute with natural philosophers
Its existence was assumed by some of the representatives of Greek natural philosophy and, first of all, by atomists. Their thesis is that without recognition of such a category as emptiness, one cannot talk about movement. After all, if there were universal occupancy, then the bodies would not have a gap for movement.
Aristotle considered this view wrong. Since the movement can occur in a continuous medium. This can be seen in the example of fluid movement, when one of them takes the place of the second.
Other evidence for the thesis
In addition to the above, the recognition of the fact of the presence of emptiness, on the contrary, leads to the denial of the possibility of any movement. Aristotle did not see the reason for the movement in the void, since it is the same here and there.
The movement, as can be seen from the treatise "Physics", suggests the presence in nature of dissimilar places. Whereas their absence leads to immobility. The final argument of Aristotle when considering the problem of emptiness is the following.
If one assumes the existence of emptiness, then, once having come into motion, none of the bodies could stop. After all, the body must stop in its natural place, and such a place is not observed here. Therefore, emptiness itself cannot exist.
All of the above allows us to understand what “nature does not tolerate emptiness” means.
Figuratively
The expression "nature does not tolerate emptiness" from the field of science has passed into social practice, and today it is mostly used in a figurative sense. It gained its popularity thanks to Francois Rabelais, a humanist writer from France who worked in the 16th century.
In his famous novel "Gargantua" medieval physicists are mentioned. According to their point of view, "nature is afraid of emptiness." This was their explanation of some phenomena, such as the rise of water in pumps. Then there was no understanding of the pressure difference.
One allegorical understanding of the studied expression is as follows. If in a person or in a society one does not consciously cultivate and maintain a good, good beginning, then evil and evil will inevitably replace him.
The dream of reason gives birth to monsters
This Spanish proverb is an analogue of the expression "nature does not tolerate emptiness" when it is used in a figurative sense. The proverb gained widespread fame when used by Francisco Goya, a famous Spanish painter of the 18th century, in the name of one of his creations.
It is part of the acclaimed etching cycle, which is known as “Caprichos”. Goya himself wrote a comment on the picture. Its meaning is as follows. If the mind sleeps, then monsters are born in the sleepy dreams of fantasy. But if fantasy is combined with reason, then it turns into the progenitor of art, as well as all of his wonderful creations.
In the era of Goya, there was such an idea of painting, according to which it was considered as a universal language of communication accessible to everyone. Therefore, originally the etching had a different name - "Universal Language". However, the artist found him too impudent. Subsequently, the picture was called "The Dream of Reason."
In order to describe the reality surrounding him, Goya used fantastic images. The dream that gives birth to monsters is the state of the world of his contemporaries. It is not mind that reigns, but stupidity. However, people do not make any attempts to get rid of the shackles of a nightmare.
When the mind loses control, it sinks into a dream, a person is captured by dark essences, which the artist calls monsters. Moreover, this is not only about the stupidity and superstition of one person. Bad leaders, false ideologies, unwillingness to study the nature of things take over the minds of the majority.
It seems that the expression “nature does not tolerate emptiness”, if used in an allegorical sense, can be fully applied to everything that the Spanish painter spoke of.