Contingency vs Necessity (Ενδεχομένως εναντίον Αναγκαιότητας)

-From the Meletic Scrolls.

There are certain things in the cosmos, nature and reality that are contingent, and there are certain things amongst them that are necessary. This is where the concept of being is defined within the order of the Logos and described within its existential nature, as either necessary or contingent in its relative function. The concepts of contingency and necessity are fundamental to understanding the essential fabric of existence itself.

A contingent thing is something whose existence depends on something else, whilst a necessary thing is something whose existence is not dependent on anything else. In order for something truly to be contingent, it must have a cause, and that ultimate cause cannot itself be contingent. Thus, that particular cause must be necessary. A human being, a tree, a planet or even the cosmos itself are contingent. These things could be distinct, or they could have never existed at all, but they require a necessary state of being to demonstrate their subsequent existence. This is where being is important in the nature of a contingency or necessity.

A necessary thing, on the other hand, is something that exists by its own nature. A mathematical truth, such as the equation 2+2=4, or the concept of a triangle having three sides to its design is considered necessary. These things are true by their own nature and could not be otherwise in their conception. They are not dependent on any external factors to be valid or real. The concept of necessity implies an inherent existence that does not rely on external forces, but is relevant and unalterable.

If we affirm that the cosmos is contingent, meaning it could not exist under different circumstances without depending on other things, then we must assume that its existence must have a cause. This cause, however, cannot be another contingent thing, for that would lead to an infinite regress of contingencies, never arriving at an ultimate explanation. Instead, the cause of the cosmos must be something that exists by necessity.

If the cosmos had no cause that necessitated its existence, then it would be reduced to merely the finite nature of contingency, lacking any significant reason for its actual being. This would mean that the cosmos would not exist unless there were an underlying necessary existence that sustains it. The Parmenidean principle that "nothing comes from nothing" leads us to deduce that something initiated the process of animation of the cosmos, nature and reality, and that something must have already been existential.

This necessary existence is called (To Ένa) the One. To Ena is the unchangeable and ultimate reality that is not contingent in its essence, but is necessary for the unified being of universal existence. The idea that something is dependent on a specific event or circumstance implies that the existence of that thing is not absolute, but dependent on external factors. In contrast, To Ena is the fundamental source of all that exists, not in the manner of a creator god, but as the foundational principle of universal existence itself. It is the arché (Η αρχή) as known in Greek, which is the beginning.

It is important to emphasise that To Ena is not a deity in the traditional sense, nor is it a conscious being that acts with intention. Rather, it is the essential reality from which all contingent things emerge. To Ena does not create in the manner of a craftsman assembling materials; it serves as the source from which existential things evolve into matter and form. To equate To Ena to the status of a god would be to place To Ena within the time and limits of creation. If we suggest that a god created the cosmos nature and reality, then that god would have been required to have existed within time and those limits of creation. The cosmos was not created; it was merely shaped by its existential things of a finite nature that developed into becoming. Thus, this would manifest into change. The change that Heraclitus suggested.

To assume that matter and forms existed before To Ena would be to negate the fabric of existence itself and contradict the logical foundation established by Parmenides. If matter and form were not contingent, then they would be necessary, but we know that without existence or the state of being, matter and form cannot sustain their viability. The principal element to consider in this realisation is that without existence, a thing cannot be contingent, just as it cannot be necessary.

Being is the foundation that makes something contingent or necessary. If we contemplate this one thought, we begin to understand and infer that it is being itself that reflects the deeper truth of the cosmos, nature and reality. The Logos is the rational principle that governs the order of existence and substantiates this being. The Logos provides coherence and intelligibility to existence. Without the Logos, the cosmos would be a formless chaos, lacking actual structure or meaning. The distinction between a contingency and necessity is itself an expression of the Logos, as it allows us to comprehend the relationship between things that depend on external causes and things that exist independently.

Understanding the relationship between a contingency and necessity has consequential implications for how we perceive reality. If we accept that the cosmos is contingent, then we are compelled to seek the necessary foundation upon which it rests. This necessary foundation is not simply a philosophical abstraction, but is the basis for all existence.

If we take this principle further, we recognise that everything we experience in the world, from our thoughts, emotions, physical surroundings and even the laws of nature is contingent upon something greater. This realisation creates a viable sense of interconnection, as all contingent beings share in their dependence on the necessary existence that sustains them.

Furthermore, the distinction between a contingency and necessity has ethical and metaphysical implications. If human existence is contingent, then our purpose and meaning must be understood in relation to the necessary existence. This perspective encourages introspection and a deeper appreciation for the fundamental truths that underlie our reality.

The relationship between contingency and necessity is not merely an intellectual exercise, but a valid question that shapes our understanding of existence. The cosmos as a contingent entity must have a necessary foundation that sustains it. This necessary foundation is To Ena, which is an unchanging, ultimate reality that is not contingent but necessary. It is not for the cosmos to understand us; instead, it is for us to understand it. The one demonstrative thing that is the undeniable truth that reflects the cosmos is existence, either through being or becoming.

Through the transparent lens of the Logos, we observe and understand the interaction between being, necessity and contingency. The Logos provides coherence to existence, allowing us to discern the structures that define reality. It is through the recognition of this structure that we gain insight into the deeper truths of the cosmos, nature and our own place within them.

Ultimately, the study of a contingency and necessity is a journey towards a greater comprehension of existence itself. By acknowledging the necessary foundation upon which all contingent things depend on for existence, we cultivate a keen awareness of the principles that govern reality. This awareness not only enriches our philosophical understanding, but deepens our connection also to the universal order that sustains all things within the Logos. Existence is the door to reality and to a higher state of consciousness that is revealed by To Ena.

Recommend Write a ReviewReport