What is the Theseus Paradox? Why Does This Paradox Never End?
The ship that brought Theseus, the legendary king of Athens, back from Crete with the young men of Athens had thirty oars. This ship was preserved by the Athenians until the time of the Greek philosopher Demetrius Phalereus. The Athenians preserved the ship by removing its old planks and replacing them with new, stronger timber.
Paradox is a philosophical term, and anyone interested in philosophy knows very well what this word means, but let's briefly explain it again for those who are unfamiliar with it.
Paradox: A statement or line of reasoning that appears correct at first glance but creates a contradiction, leads to an impasse, and results in an inescapable situation. When we examine the thousands of years of philosophical history, we see that there are many issues that have not yet been resolved, even today, and undoubtedly at the forefront of these is ‘Theseus' Paradox’. For those unfamiliar with the subject, I would like to recall its history.
The ship that the legendary King Theseus of Athens returned to Athens with the young Athenians had thirty oars. This ship was preserved by the Athenians until the time of the Greek philosopher Demetrius Phalereus. They preserved the ship by removing the old planks and replacing them with new, stronger wood. For this reason, the ship became a tool for philosophers to illustrate logical problems concerning growth. One side argued that the ship remained the same, while the other side maintained that it was not the same, having changed over time and become a different ship.
Theseus's Ship became famous in philosophy as a paradox and thought experiment that asks whether something whose parts have changed over time is still the same thing. This brainstorming has continued to the present day and seems likely to continue.
Today, contemporary philosophers have attempted to understand the causes of social collapse by approaching this issue from the perspective of Karl Marx's dialectical materialism and historical materialism.
The Theseus's Ship Paradox in Marxism, concerning the existence of qualitative change and its connection to quantitative change, can be approached from the perspective of dialectical materialism and historical materialism. Marxism argues that objects and concepts do not have fixed essences, but rather undergo constant transformation within historical processes. In short, just as time is sometimes the cure for everything, if the development or change produced by the human mind, including ideologies, does not continue, one day everything will lose its function.
In this context, the event we refer to as the ‘Paradox of Theseus' Ship’ provides a basis for analysing, through a Marxist lens, how an object (or a social structure) can remain identical during a process of change, or whether it transforms into a completely different entity. I have chosen this topic specifically. Today, we are seeking new balances in an environment of imbalance produced in a unipolar world crushed under the weight of American hegemony. The collapse of Marxism should be seen as just one example within this paradox. For everything that does not develop, is not developed, and cannot renew itself is doomed to disappear over time. We can also evaluate religions within this framework! Contradictions and opposing poles are the inertia of life.
Dialectical materialism argues that contradictions change existence and social processes. Theseus' ship underwent a natural evolution through the replacement of its parts.
Marx agrees that quantitative changes lead to qualitative changes at a certain point and defends Hegel's thesis of the law of transition from quantity to quality. Marx is known as a thinker who was most influenced by Hegel's ideas and philosophy.
As the ship's parts are replaced, it may still appear to be ‘the same’. However, if a certain threshold is crossed, that is, if the fundamental structures, functions, or contextual relationships that define the ship as ‘Theseus' ship’ change, then the ship is no longer the same thing. It is expressed as something new.
This also applies to societies. Over time, class struggle and technological developments have changed the capitalist model of production. However, when a significant change occurs in production relations, a social framework and structure different from capitalist society emerges.
In Marxist analysis, identity is more concerned with the social production process than with individual or metaphysical issues. If we were to analyse the metaphor by assigning meaning to Theseus' ship and consider the ship as a means of production, we would conclude that the ship's identity derives more from its social functions than from its physical parts.
If the ship continues to perform the same function with new or old parts, its identity is preserved. However, if the ship's mode of production changes, i.e., if it is used in warfare rather than maritime trade, it becomes difficult to say that it is still the same ship.
This paradox continues to be a metaphor for reasoning even today. As we journey through time, we must be in a state of development; philosophy is an important tool for asking questions. The answers to questions do not always tell us the truth or lead us to the truth. Even what we believe to be true today may need to evolve or be developed in the future. Everything that is static will one day collapse and inevitably disappear. We must understand this very well in all areas of life and act accordingly. For this reason, it is not the living dead who win, but those who are open to continuous development over time while they are alive.
