PARMENIDES
Parmenides was a Greek philosopher and poet, born of an illustrious family about B.C.E. 510, at Elea in Lower Italy, and is is the chief representative of the Eleatic philosophy. He was held in high esteem by his fellow-citizens for his excellent legislation, to which they ascribed the prosperity and wealth of the town. He was also admired for his exemplary life. A “Parmenidean life” was proverbial among the Greeks. He is commonly represented as a disciple of Xenophanes. Parmenides wrote after Heraclitus, and in conscious opposition to him, given the evident allusion to Hericlitus: “for whom it is and is not, the same and not the same, and all things travel in opposite directions” (fr. 6, 8). Little more is known of his biography than that he stopped at Athens on a journey in his sixty-fifth year, and there became acquainted with the youthful Socrates. That must have been in the middle of the fifth century BCE., or shortly after it. (Information taken from http://www.iep.utm.edu/parmenid/)
For a detailed introduction and philosophical analysis of Paremenides' work- click here.
Assignment: In the Comments section, compare and contrast Thales and Parmenides. How are their approaches different? What questions are at the heat of their texts? Do either offer any answers to these questions?
Thales and Parmenides both question the start of matter but the two think in opposite direction. Parmenides believes whole heartedly that something cannot come from nothing due to nothing being nothing. Thales considered that matter itself had to arrive from some source since everything has a begging. Parmenides urges for staying on point with reality while Thales wishes to investigate farther back then everything.
ReplyDeleteThales talks about the Nature of Reality and Parmenides talks about the Nature of Thought. Parmenides also talks about the thought and actions that go in to human relations. Both of these philosophers talk about the future, like the cause and effects.What does Parmenides mean by " it is" and " it is not"?
ReplyDeleteParmenides talks about one's thought and actions. He explains how one's habits based off experience should not guide your life. But he also uses "it is" and "it is not" very frequently, which got me confused as of what he was talking about. I was unsure if he was talking about an original cause or being of something. Thales on the other hand talks about the Reality, and how water is the cause of all things, and that there always will be a cause of something which is different from Parmenides, as he believes that if there is nothing, then it is nothing and there was no cause.
ReplyDeleteThales explains matter by saying that what has come to be in our lives has built up from different influences . Also that nature becomes beautiful to us for much more than physical appearance(matter). Parmenides believes that the world was created all at one time and as time passes the cycle of life does no change and something cant come from nothing.It is almost like Parmenides does not believe in evolution and Thales believes in creation by god.
ReplyDeleteBoth Thales and Parmenides use the nature of reality, although their ways of going about reasoning it vary. Thales believed that matter was the building block an origin of everything and from that everything stemmed from. Parmenides believe that things like matter couldn't have just come from nothing because nothing can not be. There must always be something so even matter, according to him, has an origin
ReplyDeleteParmenides continuously talks about what it is to be, and at the same time it is not, and must not be. He talks about this in the origin from which everything comes. Thales also believes this in a way, but brings out the idea of everything in existence comes from water. Parmenides thinks that all things made of are not. Both Philosophers connect how everything has come from something else in reality. That concept is hard to digest because in reality some things just cannot physically connect. How is it possible for something to be, and to not be at the same time? Why does Parmenides talk about human nature before he can finalize a thought on existence of the rest of reality and life? Does Thales ideas enhance Parmenides ideas or is it the other way around?
ReplyDeleteTrue Reality is the main idea of Parmenides works. This differs from Thales for Parmenides focus more on what can think rather then see. The idea of what is and what is not the same. Parmenides unlike most pre-Socratic philosophers does not work with just what one can see rather take the approach that everything as a deeper more in depth side. Thales talks about how everything is a cause by water while Parmenides would see it as how everything can relate to one another through the cause.
ReplyDeleteWhile both Parmenides and Thales's theories revolve around the same topic, the origin how everything, their beliefs and views are vastly different. Thales had a more scientific and literal view to the origin for everything, Parmenides had a more spiritual view to it. This can be seen in Thales's "Water" as Thales deduces that since the earth floats on water, that makes water the source of all. Parmenides however focuses on human thought and actions. He states that we cannot determine what can be the possible origin or what can't be. This can be seen in his center idea of his work, "it either is or isn't".
ReplyDeleteWhile both Parmenides and Thales's theories revolve around the same topic, the origin how everything, their beliefs and views are vastly different. Thales had a more scientific and literal view to the origin for everything, Parmenides had a more spiritual view to it. This can be seen in Thales's "Water" as Thales deduces that since the earth floats on water, that makes water the source of all. Parmenides however focuses on human thought and actions. He states that we cannot determine what can be the possible origin or what can't be. This can be seen in his center idea of his work, "it either is or isn't".
ReplyDeleteWhen Thales talks of reality he says that everything springs from everything when he talks of water as the cause of matter while Parmenides talks of how everything is either at a state of "fully be, or be not at all" in which he is saying he sees it as it is there or it is not there he is not pondering how it came to be for he believes nothing came before it.Would Thales theory be more of an inspiration to Parmenides theories?or could Parmenides be using his theories as a way to shoot down Thales theories?
ReplyDeleteAs both philosophers spoke, they focused on one agenda. Thales was focused on the study of matter and how matter works within itself. Thales' scientific theory was that "H2O" was the cause of all things. Parmenides talks about matter in a different way. He talks about the criteria for something to even exist in the first place. Parmenides begins a step back from Thales in the thought process of how things came to be. Parmenides also speaks paradoxically in his writing. He looks at both ends of the spectrum on which he speaks about. He is not just challenging human minds and human life as other philosophers may do but he challenges the human mind. Thales says there are 4 different causes that make up the world. Parmenides makes it even simpler; either something IS or it IS NOT.
ReplyDeleteThe Philosopher Thales takes a much more convoluted approach to his studies. Thales uses the world around him to understand not just ideas but himself in the process. Parmenides takes a much more simplistic approach to his work. He focuses more on how the mind perceives things and how they should be. He focuses more on humanity than nature.He uses the thought process of something is or something is not as a tool to understand things. This is a more basic approach to discerning the actuality of an object or idea.
ReplyDeleteThe comparison between these two comes up very short. Both speak of the idea of existence in their works, however they branch off into different topics. While Thales speaks more on the idea off cause and effect, Parmenides speaks on the things that are real and things that are not real. Thales has this idea of matter and his belief that matter is a way of cause. Everything works around matter, and as said in class "everything that comes out of its origin must have components of its origin." Thales discussion is about how things come to be, which is a step further, almost as if Thales is searching for an answer to the way things work. On the other hand Parmenides comes off as much more basic. Saying that if it can be touched on then "it is" and if it cannot be spoken of or rightfully proven then "it is not" in such existence, Then near section 8a we can see that once something "is" that then you can ask many questions about it, for example "How and from where did it grow?" Into only the 4th class we can all realize that Parmenides order of philosophy is based around questions, and as we may know "The wise man doesn't give the right answers, he poses the right questions."
ReplyDeleteThales and Parmenides approaches are similar because both of these people they only worked around one basis of how the world works. The reason they differ in approaches is because they Thales focuses on causes and matter while Parmenides has a more common look onto things we think about and do today. Questions like "what necessity could have impelled it to grow later rather than sooner, if it began from nothing?", and "For there must be one or more than one nature out of which the rest come to be, while it is preserved?" Thales' does not normally answer his questions but more expands to what he is asking, and Parmenides' actually answers his questions although you have to read in depth to understand him.
ReplyDeleteIn Thales the biggest question is 'what are the causes which make everything up.' Thales answers this question by providing his opinion on the matter and giving the four causes. Parmenides asks the question about 'what is and is not.' Parmenides provides his opinion while also giving the opinions of others and disproving them. Unlike Thales, Parmenides does not use the other opinions and thoughts as help to form new thoughts or sharpen his own. Parmenides explains that it is impossible for something to not be. He goes on to question how something could come-to-be because if it came-to-be then it is not. Thales speaks on the thought that we are the result of more than one cause but does not address the idea of what caused the causes. Parmenides and Thales have different opinions on how things come to be. Parmenides believes that something can not come from nothing because there is no such thing as nothing while Thales believes that there are four causes that are the simplest building blocks and cannot be caused by something else.
ReplyDeleteParmenides questions "what it is and what is not." These two questions are based off of reason and physical evidence if you have neither "then it is not ." In Parmenides says " for neither could you know what- is-not nor could you point it out. If something is it means you have multiple inclinations to its existence. "on this path there are a multitude of indications that-what-is being ungenerated is also imperishable whole of a single kind immovable and complete. Socrates questions how things have come into existence? Which means he based the solution off of its natural origin. Thales and Socrates were different because Thales used myths to prove a point. "Thales claims the motion of the subterranean was the cause of earthquakes. In this case Thales has made a decisive break with traditional explanations of earth quakes as due to Poseidon (Greek god)."
ReplyDelete