Review- On the nature of the universe

On the Nature of the Universe by Lucretius

My rating: 4 of 5 stars


Lucretius' epic poem ranges far and wide, from the formation of the universe, to the human body and its senses, with a focus on why death should not be feared. At the heart of his philosophy is the idea that all matter is comprised of atoms, and that the universe is formed by the movement of atoms, rather than the machinations of gods. This leads him to the view that the universe is infinite in scope but cyclical in nature- it will one day be destroyed. Although not an atheist (he references Roman deities several times, apparently accepting their existence), gods are spoken of as beings with superior power to humans, but no special claim on their attention.

As a poem, on the nature of the universe sometimes does not set out its arguments formally, but makes use of rhetoric and lyrical language to illustrate its positions. The first point that becomes apparent when reading the book is that despite the broad overlap between the claims made by Lucretius and the findings of modern physics, Lucretius' physics is highly speculative. This is to be expected, of course, for someone who did not have access to instruments to confirm things. For example, atomic theory is first demonstrated by positing that one can smell things without seeing them, and that one can be heated without seeing heat, meaning that those things must be comprised of 'bodies' (atoms) too small to see. This is a reasonable theory is the absence of anything to the contrary, then the argument proceeds in the same way, with inference built on inference, with little empirical confirmation at any of the stages.

Perhaps, at the time Lucretius wrote his poem, intellectual advance required such speculation, as it may have been too limiting to have simply said that little is known about a wide tranche of intellectual topics. Painting on a wide canvas does have it dangers however; the start of Lucretius' argument about the beginning of the universe is the assertion that nothing can come from nothing. Even if 'nothing' could be defined, that is not true logically (if an absolute 'nothing' could be imagined, it is hard to see why causality would apply to it), and perhaps not true empirically, given the findings of modern cosmology.

Lucretius' history is similarly speculative and built on compound inferences. One of the books of the poems describes the development of human civilization, and he states that belief in gods came about when people had visions of gods that they imbued with various powers. It's not obvious why this is a complete explanation for the creation of all religions, the origins of some of the more recent ones being better known.

Many of the arguments about physics and history are of historical interest only to the modern reader, but the more strictly philosophical arguments retain their power. For example, one of the best known arguments against fear of death is the observation that one does not fear the time before one's existence, which represents non existence just as surely as the time after one's death. This is a brilliant observation. Lucretius is keen to deny the existence of a 'soul', but one might point out that even if a 'soul' continued to exist after death, there would be no obvious reason to posit a continuation of identity between the 'soul' and the deceased creature, meaning that no living being should be concerned about even a hypothesized soul.

Putting aside the arguments advanced, the poem is often beautiful to a high pitch. At the start of book four, Lucretius creates an extended simile, comparing his poem to the practice of smearing honey on cups containing bitter medicine. It's a wonderful, and apt image, because there is much to enjoy in the power and wonder of the poetry, which give the book its thrilling power, and makes it worth re-reading long after some of its formal arguments have become whimsical.



View all my reviews