Philosophy Final Assignment

Alright so I had a 6 page paper due last thursday and being the slacker I am im just now starting it but I gave up after 1 paragraph, I'm doing it on Anaximander and his "to apeiron" anyone of you know anything about him or have an exsisting philosophy paper I can have to edit up?

All I know is that everything consists of the boundless.
Isn't to aperion just Anazimander's definition of an indeterminate stuff
which somehow took on determinate properties?

Anaximander was a younger contemporary of Thales, who also sought
for the first material principle; he was a disciple and successor of Thales
and philosophized in dialogue with him. Anaximander was not mentioned
until the time Aristotle, who classifies him as belonging the "physical" school
of thought of  Thales. Unlike Thales, Anaximander wrote a philosophical work,
entitled On Nature; unfortunately, neither this work nor any of his others
has survived. Information about his philosophy come from summaries of
it by other writers, especially Aristotle and Theophrastus. Anaximander was
said to have drawn the first map of the inhabited world on a tablet, which was
a marvel in his day

Anaximander shares Thales' assumption that  all things emerged from
one original "stuff" and ultimately were that "stuff"; to use Aristotle's
terminology, he holds that there is a first principle (archê) of all things.
Unlike Thales, however, Anaximander asserts that the first principle is not
water, but what he calls the apeiron, translated as the Indeterminate or
Limitless. Simplicius, drawing upon Theophrastus' work, gives the following
account of Anaximander's view:

More here

Anaximander named the archê and element of existing things the apeiron,
being the first to introduce this name for the archê. He says that it is neither
water nor any other of the so-called elements, but a different substance that is
limitless or indeterminate, from which there come into being all the heavens
and the worlds within them. Things perish into those things out of which
they have their being, according to necessity; for they make just recompense
to one another for their injustice, according to the ordinance [or assessment]
of time—so he puts it in somewhat poetical terms.
For Anaximander, the archê, or first principle, is not any of the elements—earth,
water, air or fire—but that which is before all the elements (and everything else),
from which the elements emerge and which they all ultimately are
(see also Aristotle, Physics 187a 12). Because his archê is no existing thing,
Anaximander names it the apeiron, by which he means that the archê is
indeterminate and has no characteristics: it is before and beyond all distinctions
in being. As such it cannot be limited by anything, in the sense of being
conditioned by something. In the passage cited above, Simplicius says that
Anaximander was the first to name the archê the apeiron. 

    According to Simplicius (and previous interpreters), Anaximander reasons
that the first principle (archê) cannot be one of the elements derivative from it,
such as water would be: "It is clear that when he observed how the four elements
change into one another, he did not think it reasonable to conceive as one of
these as underlying the rest, but posited something else" 
If all four elements change into one another, then the first principle cannot be one
of these elements but must be prior to all of  them. Only that which was not
any of the elements could give rise to them. Probably alluding to Anaximander,
Aristotle explains, "There are some people who make this [a body distinct
from the four elements] the infinite, and not air or water, in order that the
other elements may not be annihilated by the element which is infinite.
They have contrariety with each other—air is cold, water moist, fire hot;
if one were infinite, the others by now would have ceased to be. As it is,
they say, the infinite is different from them and is their source" .
By "infinity" in this passage, Aristotle means temporal infinity. If any of the
elements were temporally infinite, and so the archê, there would no longer
be a balance between opposite elements, such as hot fire and cold earth,
because the one infinite element would never be transformed into its opposite,
but would remain eternally what it is. Instead, this infinite element would in the
long run destroy all the other elements without itself ever being destroyed.

    In probable dependence upon Theophrastus' work, Simplicius explains that
in Anaximander's philosophy, the opposites emerge from the elements by being
separated from it. He writes, "There is another method, according to which they
do not attribute change to matter itself, nor do they suppose that generation
takes place by a transformation of the underlying substance, but by separation;
for the opposites existing in the substance which is infinite matter are separated,
according to Anaximander" . Likewise, Aristotle says of Anaximander's view:
"The opposites are in the one and and are separated out" . The idea of "separation"
implies that the opposites were already present in the apeiron but not evident as such,
because they were so thoroughly comingled with everything else. In other words,
everything already exists in the apeiron but not as detectable. This means that the
apeiron is not something different from the opposites that are separated from it
but is precisely these opposites not yet separated out but mingled together.
Anaximander may also have reasoned that there must be an infinite source of
all things, in order that, as Aristotle says, "Becoming might not fail" .
The apeiron is the undifferentiated source of all things and, as such,
quantitatively infinite, because only as inexhaustible could it be possible
becoming to continue indefinitely. (Aristotle refutes this idea by pointing out
that there is no need of an infinite body to ensure perpetual becoming because
"the passing away of one thing may be the coming to be of another".

I took philosophy, but never went to the classes....

Alright so I had a 6 page paper due last thursday and being the slacker I am im just now starting it but I gave up after 1 paragraph, I'm doing it on Anaximander and his "to apeiron" anyone of you know anything about him or have an exsisting philosophy paper I can have to edit up?

Sorry dude... I've dabbled in philosophy, but I've never studied Anaximander.