Talk:Parmenides (dialogue)

Greece Mid‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Philosophy: Literature / Ancient Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Ancient philosophy

Plato's most Challenging work?

This seems a very subjective claim. 128.239.47.74 (talk) 10:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(ruud.schuurman@linea-recta.com) Yes, it seems to be pretty straightforward. Simply put:

• Deduction 1 - Hypothesis: If it is one. Conclusion: The one is nothing, does not exist, and is not the object of perception, knowledge or opinion.

Of course: The one = being = no thing = being is not a thing that "exists" in the world, not anything that can be perceived.

• Deduction 2 - Hypothesis: If the one is. Conclusion: The one is everything and is the object of perception, knowledge and opinion.

Of course: Everything appears in and to the one. Everything is of its essence, substance. The one as it is manifested, as it appears, is the object of perception.

• Appendix to Deductions 1 and 2 - Hypothesis: If the one is one and many, neither one nor many, and in time. Conclusion: The one comes to be and passes away in an instant outside of time.

Of course: The one (as perceiver, as consciousness, as that which knows) comes to be and passes away with that which is perceived, and is thus in the world and thus in time. The one as the essence and substance remains, unchanged, nothing added or taken from, is that from which the world is made and thus prior to/beyond/outside time.

• Deduction 3 - Hypothesis: If the one is. Conclusion: The many have contrary properties.

Of course: For example. The one is timeless, spaceless, uncaused. The many are in time, space and subject to causation. The many are contradicted in themselves and by themselves.

• Deduction 4 - Hypothesis: If the one is. Conclusion: The one is not in the many and the many not in the one; the many have no properties.

Of course: The one is not in the many because the one is not in the world, but transcendent. The many are not in the one when viewed as transcendent. The many have no properties because they are not; only the one is.

• Deduction 5 - Hypothesis: If the one is not. Conclusion: The one comes to be and passes away and neither comes to be nor passes away.

Of course: The one as consciousness comes and passes away (with that of which it is conscious). The one as pure being does not come and passes away (as the source in which consciousness and that which it is consious of may appear).

• Deduction 6 - Hypothesis: If the one is not. Conclusion: The one is nothing and in no state.

Of course: The one is no thing, not a thing. The one is not found in any state, because it is transcendent, that to which all states appear. (And it is immanent, in all, and can therefore not be distiguished from its background and can thus not be found in any state although it pervades all states.)

• Deduction 7 - Hypothesis: If the one is not. Conclusion: The many have contrary properties.

Of course: The many are contradicted by themselves and in themselves.

• Deduction 8 - Hypothesis: If the one is not. Conclusion: Nothing exists.

Of course: Nothing is, nothing is what it seems, not as real and solid as it seems, all is impermanent, just temporary, changing from one apparant thing into another, not really existing at all.

It is most challenging to Tom, less challenging to Dick, and not challenging at all to Harry. That is subjectivity. 96.235.173.81 (talk) 00:58, 11 December 2019 (UTC)De'Shawn Carter[reply]

Title

This should be titled Parmenides (dialogue) like the other Platonic dialogues (cf. Critias (dialogue))--Ibis3 05:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interpretations

This article should lay out the best attempts to make sense of the challenging second section of the dialogue. It should discuss at least the interpretations of Proclus, Thomas Taylor, Cornford, Meinwald, Miller, Allen, and Sayre.

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 13:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Number of arguments

At least according to SEP, the number of arguments Parmenides gives is 6, not 4,[1] and the order here seems to be mixed too. Could anyone clarify this? Reinis^talk 01:26, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Parmenides (dialogue). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718230215/http://deposit.ddb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?idn=979835429&dok_var=d1&dok_ext=pdf&filename=979835429.pdf to http://deposit.ddb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?idn=979835429&dok_var=d1&dok_ext=pdf&filename=979835429.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:53, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]