Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Allen R.E. & Furley D.J. - Studies in Presocratic Philosophy

    Uploaded by

    Jean-Claude Picot
    318 views208 pages
    Vol. II - the Eleatics and Pluralists - 1975

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Vol. II - the Eleatics and Pluralists - 1975

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    318 views208 pages

    Allen R.E. & Furley D.J. - Studies in Presocratic Philosophy

    Uploaded by

    Jean-Claude Picot
    Vol. II - the Eleatics and Pluralists - 1975

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 208
    International Library of Philosophy and Scientific Method Studies in Presocratic: Philosophy Vol. I The Eleaties and Plaralists edited by R. E. Allen and David J. Furley a ATLANTIC HIGHLANDS HUMANITIES PRESS 182 FOTHE Fare. David are Sark ti ils Library of Congr Contents: 1. The be First publicbed in the Tire! Aten ? i NI. 07786 \ Printed in Great Britain tee & Kegan Pal Li (Revised) Farley, David J. Sines in presoraticphilo International ibrary of philsophy and si 2. The Eleatis on Ancient Theater —Aadresis, e827 ca, Resinald Buy 19 BriB.Fay ISBN 0 391 00360 7 of brief aloging in Publication Data int comp. CONTENTS Hermann Feinkel Prior Enerite, S Wee nd Foren ford Unive H. Bec ticle ‘Parmenidesstudien’, igrivchiscen Denon, C 19533 4 revised version of eh 1 der Gittng. Geli ch der Wissenschaften, 1930, G.B. L, Owen Lawrence Pr te University of Cambri (Clasival Quarterly 10, 1960, 84-102) or of Ancient Philosophy A. A. Long Professor of Greek in the University of Liverpool (Phrouesis 8, 1963, 90-107) Hermana Friinkel Forman jrtiytebis 0553 a revised version of Ai 5 and 195 enkons, Cs 1. rican Journal of Philology, Beck, 63, 1942, 1 G. BL, Owen 8 of th Aristotelian ely 1957-8, 199-222) Gregory Vlastos Stuer? Professor of Philosophy, Princeton University (Gnomon 25, 1933, 29-33) Gregory Viastos (From a review of H. Fekinkel’s Wege snd Ferme ribgriecbtchen Denkans ia. Gannon 3%, 2959, 19$-9) page vii 82 143 166 7 VIII A NOTE ON ZENO’S ARROW 184 Gregory Viastos (Phronsis x1, 1966, 5-28) Ix ZENO’S RACE COURS - wane Gregory Viastos Hisiry of Philesophy 4, 1955, 95-108) Couraal of t FE. Solmsen Mase Slaaghter Professor of Classical Stadier in the University o OUR thanks are due to the Aristotelian Society for permission to : a tablish article V, which fies appeated in the Pravegs to Beck irons 10,1963, 109-48) 5 pot rartcleT and supplementary portions of artcte TV from SI EMPEDOGLES AND THE CLERSYDMA i Wage vd Formen, and acticles VI, VIL and XIV from Gnomon to David J. Fasey refuo of Cas Pri a the Clarendon Pres for articles I and XU, which fst appeared in meal of Helle Ste 71, 262957 79) the Classical Quarterly; to the Johns Hopkins Press for article IV, XIT ANAXAGORAS’ THEORY OF MATTER aT, which first appeared in the American Journal of Philology; to the FM, Coenford Late Lawrence Profesor of Ant Seetety forthe Promotion of Hellenic Studies for article XI, which Philomply inthe University of Cambridge fest appeared in the Jourtal of Helloie Studies; to Walter De (Claical Quarter 24,1930» 14-39 208 8-99) Gruyter and Company for article XV, which frst appeared in the Geogory Vaston sity of California and to the editors of the Jounal ofthe Hitry of (Philarphical Review 39, 1959, 31-37) hzophy for article TX; to the editors of the Philasopbical Review “ Greg Viastos les TH, VIII and X. Cee Coie of H. Frinkel’s Weg and Forme We wish to acknowledge a special debe of gratitude to Mr friiigrivchischon Denkenr, in Gnomon 31, 1959» ™ Renato Cristi, for his work on the index. ey TH PHYSICAL THEORY OF ANAXAGC 361 Our thanks age also due to Mes David Harvey and Professor xy olin Strang Reader in Pbilerphy in the University of jchael Frede for help with the translation of articles from Ger Ce es im 1, and to Mz Alan Bowen for help with proof-reading Capa fi Gulehe der Pilplie 4, +965, 308-18) er 5 AND PHYSICS IN DEMOCRITUS tt a Cy enh 2943 8-98 08 $5 1945 58 Philssophers « t Philosophers and Commentators 019 Presoer 1 Other Ane INTRODUCTION $ second volurse begins with the Eleatics and continues aaa ‘ers who argued against the Eleatics or terms with their arguments. i ‘been published before, wih tose plilso rd gai chosen ales tat Dave sed the be feo ad i nt er iach fr poate of te Greek Sat tbe author have made ome mj change ntl So et gh th four mor pilosophial post eee as ie arguments of Parmenides and Zen0 tons of the Tere: gmporary plot theo, and the chee 2 eo tippedodes, Anaxagoras and the el Ao in i orealy the most important Pilosophers who ince a ocophy is aoe prs distorted i we con. Se nothing dey om Me! eS eee st eT tthe Ate The reson snp that we found nothing available of the right scope and quality wve confined our books, We have citations in the o alterations and additio sus, and that z STUDIES IN PARMENIDES* Hermann Frinkel MY intention in the following studies is to correct and extend tial aspects of our present knowledge of the fof Parmenides by criticism and interpretation of original fragments ind testimonia. In so doing, I shall take particular care to keep the otiginal text, as is done as a matter of course in the interpretation of ‘pure’ literature, but is easily weglected in the case of a strictly philosophical text, where the content appears to speak for itself, quite independently of che cls which happen to be used. And yet much will be radically misunderstood, and many of the best, liveliest and most character- istic features of the doctrine will be missed, if one fails to read che nrle as an epic poem which belongs to its owa period, and to approach it as a historical document, through its language. close to the wordin _ These studies ate presented in such a way that only Dels- Kranz. is required as a companion.! The image of the proud chariot of the Muses, with which Par- enides? epic opens, has an exact parallel in Pindar’s 6th Olympian Ode. The parallel is so close, even ia individual details and word- that we must posit a definite rel tionship be The features they have have been closely connected in the source, as they are con- centrated in a few lines ia Pindac, whereas in Parmenides they re spread out over a larget a the poems, this translation as Professor Priokel he would have wished, Pindar, OM 6. Parmenides Fragment 1 *Q @ivrs, a abévos Hyudvur | rdx2s, 1 rai je dépovowr dav oP ent Boyds txdvoe, eho", Grete 638 Broa Aino redelig 7 ev Bexor, ewpal re pbs, dvBpas ‘paves. wetvas yap && ANN: mie ai : dB siyeydvevor Bar" dycuoretiont ra cl Bégawo. xp) Tot» ares as my will reach scorted me, swhen they eame leading me on sturdy mules, with all seed, to that we may set our car om g the clear path, and I mzy reach the way of much speech .« [the theme of] the descent of rest : now how to lead “The gates, opening Bout pots eer of the Mace cue and Promotes io ec MGtae the poet is engaged in. Pindar gives 0 att sal touch tothe image by making the tam which ‘ th the victorious mules. He himself immediately ‘way’ identical explains and interprets this unexpected point: ‘because of the in Olympia, these animals can lead the way beter than others. That means? it is the fame of the newly tron victory which puts the song of celebration and the praise of mankind back on the path to their ancestors and their ancestorial a ee hep of foney taken bythe se i aeone and the same “ime the course ofthe song and the course of the ideas, thoughts and other content expressed therein. Utrer- ance and thought, word and thing were inseparable in archaic times, and they are one in a special sense for Parmenides. The ‘yay’, or journey, portrayed in the lines that follow, is the course ¢, not any kind of way along which one victory which they wo of Parmenidean thot: could travel with a -eal chariot, led by daughters of the Sun. Now, to begin the derailed interpretation, let us take the first ine as a whole (as indeed we must): “The steeds that carry me as fieas my will...*—then it does not say ‘desires’ but, unexpec- edly, ‘advances, reaches’, So the will journeys afar, and the riot of the Muses (speech and thought) follows it to the same tion. Hesiod says likewise that his poetry, unconfined by se bounds of private and common experience, is able to sing ag, he chooses’. ine 2 the imperfect méenov (‘escorted’) gives an actual instance of the preceding general proposition. The journey of the tind will now be portrayed: that journey which is to be re ‘punted in the following epic and, by being recounted, performs \ process of thought can only be reported by going through it wnew. Each time the epic is recited, this ascent takes place, this ‘evelation comes to pass. For the poet, too, the experience did not happen once only; on the contrary, he often followed this way of thought, In the narrative which, on the whole, is kept in che past tense as a report of things past, the events therefore link up. with features which have a greater or absolutely static character, befits Parmenides’ theory of knowledge. For in Parmenides, nt is not an act, but a form of existence. As soon as che dess has completed her greeting, all motion stops completely; thete is nothing but the theory which is geadually unfolded in an unhurried exposition, The dependent clause of the second line means: ‘after they led me to begin this poem (this path of thought) with that first line which rang out a moment ago’. The verbal expression is close to 1 Hesiodie turn of phrase: 2a pe 73 mpdrov [Mov ‘ndBnoaw dows (“in the place whi me in the at) ayupis re they [se. the Muses] frst set of clear song’), Works and Days 639 (sce also Tbycus 5. 24, though this is not clear) When Parmenides lescribes the path with the adjective which usually refers to the singer (Odyssey 22, 376) or the song (Pind, Istbw. 8. 38), he course of the song is endowed ‘with much significant ech’. ‘The path is ‘of much speech’ just as the steeds are ff much understanding’ (line 4).¢ Line 5 causes particular difficulties. If we keep to the trans- hited text Gaduoror, the demons the “muse of this poem, ident th the goddess of 1. 22, It refers to something which acts “force on mankind and is therefore divine and called a goddess; ‘hati, the power of apprehension, and of the doctrine, both as to, 3 ght. Parmenides In the following narrative, two things are described with con- oable reference to physical detail: the speed of the journey, sidvtine gate. However, the use of such concrete details is in rd ho more than an archaic method of emphasis and of attract foct ention.*° This should not mislead us to posta sae of the journey in other respects, or to take the trouble to {i such a picture by means of a posteriori combinations, restora vie and conclusions, in an attempt to establish the supposed ‘iofre with all its stopping-points. Such attempts have offen teen made!" none has produced a result which remained plausible set alongside the text. On the contrary, Parmenides’ own s show that there is no route which can be located. ‘There is imply 2 realm which is left behind (that of the night, the senses nid our behaviour on this eaeth); a destination (the realm of jreht, of the sun and of trath); and between them a gate (the gate knowledge). Now in the picture these app fiaction. But once again, this archaic repeti nformation should ot lead us astray. One and the same thing, the ascent from darkness to light, is symbolized within three lines (9-11) not less than four times: First in the naming of the powers which conduct this ascent as daughters of the Sun, then 1 the leaving of the House of Night, then in the throwing back the veil with which the maidens had been covering, their ceads, and finally in the passage through the gace which divides the paths of day and night, Each of these things signifies the nind’s breakthrough to ilkimination. If this meaning. is taken away and the images are given an independent value, the whole sls to make sense or hang together.** Bue if the actual meaning is allowed to shine theough each detail, and if one sees what is common to the many expressions, the whole becomes simple and numental, What is depicted by the image of the ascent amounts > little more than this: wise, sunlike powers (the steeds and the idens) carry and lead on a resounding path the man who knows «proclaims; the journey is dizzily swift and violent; and itis a ‘cit moment when the mighty gates of comprehension of the world fly open before the maa selected by Fate. To be able to see and to proclaim this, Parmenides has taken © of whatever in the way of concepts and images, roughts and words, had been used before him with reference to 2nd night, to the power and sovereignty of thought. That is didnot wat ith zscitons he wibed to avoid But if we sav i alering befites 0 Bains, we wold fll Sci cages of the Sum ata very aly stage, The ince aoe fe equally well 10 "he goddes® oF 0 "tbe rea esc posi stone to dh same eng od ft F of the maidens is one and function of the goddess of the way and the same: they lead to knowledge. “The problematic relative clause in line 5 returns to the present tense in its general cr timeless use. This, and the content of the e, link ie with the first line. Both become comprehensible if swe compare a Homeric simile (liad 15, 80) 8 Gx! dv dun woos dndpos, Bs 2° ent nod ata adypwlds, gpcot reveaNlinor orion A cigs’ 9 "eva, pevourinat Te roMd xa. “Hpy dss xpaumtis pepavta Bulr7e ‘As the thought flashes in the mind of a man who, having traversed uch territory, thinks of things in the mind’s awareness AT wish I were ia this place, of this,’ and imagines many things; so rapidly in her eagerness winged Hera, a goddess (rans, Lat more, adapted) For Parmenides the main interest of the simile lay in what it ays about Man, Just as for a god to will something is to cause it to happea, the mind (ros) of man can place itself instantaneously many pice it happens to know. For eh vdbs Chaving traversed’) jimplice previous acquaintance gained by experience, knowledge; thes it is identical with Parmenides’ eds. ‘The power of know- Tedge (the goddess, ot the path) ‘leads the man who knows—the tman who already knows the destination’ ‘to any place he desired’. His will presses ahead tothe distant destination (urna), Sad knowledge is axle to follow because she is acquaintances this {Riovious) knowledge of that which is known again beas the crimp, if our interp:etation is cosrect, ofthe static charactes of the philosophy of Parmenides, an impression explicitly confirmed in Fragment 2 So the line may be paraphrased: “I travelled in the path of mental presentation (cf. 2, 3), which opens up every Aistant place to the man who knows.” 4 5 why we understand him more easily and more surely if we pursue such connections. But in the end all outside influences have melted and fused into a new, Parmenidean creation, which we can ‘understand in its individuality only from within." In the last synopsis we passed over the strange figure of Dike, the heavenly (aldepéy!s) gate of light and who is the custodian of puards its keys. What is the meaning of this image, and what is the meaning of die in Parmenides altogether? There have heen two attempts to treat the Dike of Parmenides in a wider context, that is, in terms of the notion of Dike in reneral use. Hitzel, who produced an extraordinarily rich amount of material in his book Themis, Dike und Vermandtes (1907), w98 tunable to fit Parmenides’ Dike into his picture at all, He does not ‘an interpretation for her but only protests against her ce in this poem: ‘From the point of view of content, appears Parmenides’ “truth” has nothing to do with a goddess of Justice, let alone &ikey zodtzowos. This is followed by an explanation through false analogy: he says that since Dike was often linked with Aletheia in another sense, so Parmenides seems to have Tinked his truth with Dike (p. 126, n. 2). Ehrenberg, who sought to chaify the concert of Justice in early Greece (Die Rechtside im ridin Gricchentom, wget), attempts (particularly on pp. 92 f) to ‘approach Parmenidss’ Dike from two sides, He suggests that took over Dike ‘as a world-principle’ from Anaxi rmander—and, indeed, took it over without making it Gt properly, so that ‘the seams snow’. On the other hand, Dike in the proem is said to be Orphic. But the identity of the two dike ‘unites teligious mysticism and philosophical doctrine; the Orphic custodian of the gate is also, for Parmenides, a symbol of the Parmeni world-principle’ ‘Obviously, the thing to do is to compare everything that we know from other sources about Dike with Parmenides’ Dike, and to examine whether his concept can be said to include any- thing of the others’, For the interpreter of archaic (and even of later) Greck literature is often forced to free himself fom our modera specialized and minutely restricted ideas, to find the way back to older and more powerful conceptions. Since they are free 6 jom the confines of the systematic division and separation of the tierent compartments of reality that put blinkers on our sight ch archaic nowaday of life bi mon aspects. But it is this, the complex nature of the con: h meaningfully and powerfully, and bring out their specific, less central aspect of the idea. Pein Tr any cave, our fst tak isto extablih from Pasmenider! own ar what he meant by Did, on the assumption that be really did ian something. Aer in the expectation that, lite everyting a his philosopher, the coneape of Dide fas diets gushe 4 ‘Dike holds in fetters ...’, exactly like Necessity in 30 )) in 37. What is held by her? According to the :sual interpretation, ‘Coming into being and perishing.” This neans taking the infinitives as nouns in the accusative with no ice, which is linguistically questionable.” The actual sense of he fettering would be that coming into being and perish mained imptisoned in their non-existence and etror, which is ven more questionable, But this interpretation is made com- cly impossible if we compare 8. 30 and 8. 37. For in these two es, Being itself is held fast in its unchangeable, immovable nity and singularity, as if ia fetters—exactly as the sense ze- ites, Coming into being and Perishing, on the other hand, cer described as ‘bound’—that indeed would be unim: one considers the nat of these concepts. On the contrary, ming into being which is assigned in the world of the senses to vositive, active element of Fire, is “extinguished! (8. 21) in the rid of Being, whereas Perishing, as befits the dulls igetfulness of the negative element in the world of the senses, comes unknown in the world of Being by ‘disappearing’ (8. 21 also 4. 5 £). The way of Not Being is similarly (8. 17) ‘left to ide, unknown, unnamed’, In another place ‘a coming. into 8. 12), and in 8. 28 Coming into being ing ate ‘driven away";? both times by the same power, see below, p. 9). Now, after their expulsion, the filse ‘pts of Coming into being and Perishing have to ‘wande » as Parmenides expresses it with fine ambiguity, or rather srofundty. ‘This haphazard staying in eile isthe opposite of @ Feeiatog sach nsf sserbed 10 Being. Therefore in 8.16 d tee ip with te anki, like ¢ et: “Dike did not release (it Pond but holds them fest ; Nie what does Dib in 8,14 mean and denote? The ‘Fete ate likewise binding >owers; thus the same function (8. 14; 303° 37)" But in our Shy Dike is named and aot one of the other norms is because Decision is mentioned immediately after. Just as in a lawsuit Dike is conclusive for the decision, so too Dife is conclusive sophical cases. Thus here Die means the binding force according rightly decided, as we a philo- to which the doubtfal question is to be would put it ‘Tt could be argued from the text that this interpretation is mis taken, on the grounds that Dike would then shift its meaning: in the sight decision in one sense, it is the logical norm fos thought, and in another, it is the factual law o binds Being, but aot our thoughts about Bi = objection, but it will not hold for Parmenides, ht and Being are the same for him (Fr, 5), he eannot dis. th the norm of correct thought from the law of reality. reality. For it This would be ting: ; that which proves in thought to be correct is therefore real Apart from this general argument, the text also contains a par ticular detail, which points in the same direction. Dike docs not sosen the fetters, ‘in consideration of this’—that is, ia con: sideration of the arguments that have been adduced. Dike allows that to be which (in accordance with the correct judgment of thought) ought to be so ‘Thus Dike is hete the ‘Rightness’ of quence as binding for states of affirs a fo Tt regulates what we ean and must expect as uniquely suitable for ing to its essence and the law of its thoughts about them. the object in question nature. Dike passes judgment in favour of self-consistency, and with all that is necessari But what has a Dike of this type got in et ordinary concept of Dike? We must defer the answer to that 8 2, on the basis of nmon with the restricts the meaning of the word fetters and bonds and part question and be stisted a this point with the general reply that I een fal craps acts AO seh Right ripen he took it over into the ventless word of pure Being et dee covet pages aca Baeseald SS lh cay frm out view. We have sought to find in Dide the norm of that cGteetness of both Being and thought whichis so pecalaly harcterstie of Parmenides' procedure. In Parmenides, the pro ede isthe “Way's and th Way by which he reached ‘Truth of Dike (1. 143 27 £). Moreover, is Dike should have close connections with our concept of ; and, indeed, there are words exactly parallel to Dike hich clearly indicate evidence. Thus in 2. 4 the Way of Right Knowledge, which is usually regarded as the Way of Dike, is a Way of Persuasion; at 8, 12 there stands next to Dike (8. 14) the lartos loyss with a similar function; and at 8 28 alors adythfs ctves, to judge by its meaning, the same purpose as Dike in 8. 14. ‘Moreover, itis interesting to see to what extent Parmenid ovis. He has tu nat in ordinary life has the quite general meaning of ‘reliability, jth, trust’ into ‘certainty’; he has changed and narrowed the t in exactly the same way as the concept of Dike, If in addition to the tule of necessary consequences both in night and ia ebjects there is anything else ia this concept of Dike, it can be only one thing: the dignity and particular majesty ‘evidence’ of the norm, which Parmenides serves with such a proud end devotion. The pitiless s rerity of the truth which he per- ceived appeared to him to be so similar to the severity of Right, ia and again he causes the most important subject of his losophy, that whieh is alone valid, to be locked by Justice ia tivity, like a victim of justice. And, on the the knowing subject, this severity, energy and clarity of wught would imply a kind of moral dignity, comparable to justice in community life. But this is so far only a suggestion. We find confirmation for it ot in the presentation of the theory, but in the presentation of i act of knowing and of the procedure, the ‘Way’, to use umenides’ word. Ac Themis and Dike have ent forth’ the philosopher on the Way of the revelation which 9 at he ‘must? now learn all if Dike is ‘correctness’. ‘Thinking is assured awaits him, The next clause says thi things—which is understandable enou: He who has once found the Way of Rig stimtion and of contemplating the trath—in a suis already makes us think of ‘vas allowed’ to travel along ~jupa) refers explicitly to the of reaching the de: way it is ‘due’ to him.s But T something else: that Parmeni this way.’The verb ‘sent forth’ (xp ddmitted to Rightness. This admittance to Rightness is of course something diferent ftom Rightness (he admittance only concerns the philosopher, not the ies one a Jedge he is admitted. And yet moment at which he was facts to whose Rightness and know d here too it is said to be Dike who decisive, Can this be the same Dike which operates within the realms of light? Is Dike, 4 with the other who rules the Way Ihuaan ofthe pe dentel Sn binds Being? asthe preset et ws Kee the p Ts knowledge s generally races +e The good free, the pacar meni, is egnenty mentioned int 26, and st way whieh hs never ben teoden before assage under considers men’. This means to mankind, and it is, les is allowed to ace which befell id to be pre ¢ goddess as sent you fo by men’. This easily interpreted brach Bieike, of Uarightcousnes, the path of mankind AS the Sree ad distinet.on, or sewntds worthiness, Tat ths distinc She mmoral maidens, seen tobe indicated by Dy the simple juste being escorted by the first words of the greeting, even if only position of the two, Porhis is expressed clearly in the first Dite passage 9 whlch we now tuen (1. 14). The Gate of Light and Truth only opens for Parmenides at the ‘gentle:? and cunning” intercession of the Daughters of the Sun. Dike opens it; to be more precise, Aly ‘mohvwouos. What does the adjective mean here—if it can be under- stood at all? How does this Dike avenge? “The text gives a clear answer to the last question. The * S18 Dike rewatds by opening the gate, and punishes by keeping it shut in the face of him who seeks entrance. Her rewarding and punishing, too, are only in connection with Knowledge; thus her faaction is also incorporated in Parmenides? ilosophy, and adapted to its special nature Bat if we go on to inquire what it is that is requited—toth generally, and in this particular passage—the context seems to ve an unsatisfactory and ambiguous answer. If the maidens llowed to enter, then the Realm of Light is their home, to which they always have access; itis hardly a question of reward, Again, we can hardly speak of merit and right of entry in the ease Parmenides, because he does not gain admittance by his own tions, but receives it as a favour through the intercession of the maidens. Only if we could fase the different persons together vould the patidox be solves ifthe maldent power of igh ould ribed to Parmenides as his own merit and personal worth, nis admittance to the Realm of Light would be a just reward, In fact we may, or rather must, make this fusion, It would be ing, in reading the works of archaic Greek literature, to intro- duce into them our own concept of the separate person, and regatd to the god who works with and through mankind as a separate and distinct entity. If we were to say in such cases that twas not the man but the god who did the deed or had the thought, then the antithesis would usually be false in both respects. were, an impervious outerskin, and » way something wholly outside. Powers flow freely 1¢ knows that they are divine because they descend 1 him like a gift and a blessing—or like a curse and a scourge fy are spontaneous and cannot be traced back to mechanical ircumstantial causes; they transcend his own person and vniversally valid and effective, And yet he may call the powers h enter him dis powers, part of his own nature, ted and ennobled by them. I person does not yet have, nd is in hich is is like those occasions when My that someone’ talents and gifts both can and cxnno! be ributed to himself alone.2° Having one’s own merit and being divinely gifted are not mutually exclusive when it is a question of hings which reach into the nature and substance of man, The eater a man’s nature the more of the Divine exists in it and nters into it, Merit and good fortune are in this sense linked catially and rightly, not by blind chanee. Parmenides: the Daughters of the Sun are not entities, even if they afe called ‘immortal’. In to 21 there is no ‘T; it is represented aughters of the Sun; they are the only ae. eho are mention=d. Translated into our own language, they are the philosopher's own urge for knowledge, which strives he light, According to Parmenides’ own philosophy, uminous element of his individual natute, powerful veigis and render harmless the earthly, forces of light are part of his person, 1t which, tion of ‘To xeturn to external and alien the long passage from 1 and symbolized by the D: and strong enough to outw dark element in him. These f snd at the same time part of the fundamental force of ules and forms the whole universe.*" ‘Thus our interp the opening is confirmed by Parmenides’ theory of knowledge, as itis presented in Fr. 16 without images ot symbols. Noe the philosopher does not owe this luminous nature to nown depths; ‘no ill Fate’ bestowed himself; it comes from ual jron him, But once he has this nature, itis a natural reward, the correct consequence of his nature: in a word it is die that he Should be admitted to knowledge. The dike which avenges is, Tike the one who fetters, a standard of self-consistency and rightness for the person: true to the philosopher's nature (Hiaws 16. 3), it causes him to achieve w he does. “eke would show Parmenides’ concept of dike to be meaningful and coherent. Now we m st ask whether it is related to the general concept ot dike, and if 30, how Tor the close connection between ‘right and truth’ in Greek antiquity, Hirzel prevides (on pp. 108-26 of his book) numerous examples, In particular, he gives (p. 112, n. 2) a list of passages fn which ‘what is true is called sight’.## Of these passages, how: ever, we can only make use of one (Soph. Ajax 347), and different sense from Hirzel’s interpretation of it, Some pass tre misunderstood,’ and in others, without exception, Rig! pentioned because Truth is supposed to help bring about Rights Taher che judgment in a court case is the right one, or certain fnterests will be hamed by a deviation from the truth.” Since a Greek gave a wider meaning to Sieaor than we do to “justice Gace he included everything which we would call ‘justified fnterests? in the domain of dike, whenever such interests are to be protected a meation of dike is in place. All other passages Tare of this kind. Truth is nowhere called anything, cited by Hirze Ise, such as ‘Right’, while remaining ‘Truth. But behaviour in cordance with the truth, in conformity with the standard which esto fia the situation, is called ‘righefu All this has nothing to. do with Parmenides’ dike, For in all hose examples Truth was the way to dike: to be just to someone, tote ie crcaen ree Gh So Obst TES) Ge nat be fast: IRGliny and a laws.28 5 i By contrast there is a completely diferent view of dite in, for sam cxpesin shs Soph i (ona app clzep Buxals dort duds ra raxpéler, nat is, Fhe is my son, not only by descent but di he is my sent but also according to is nature’ (ef, nso). If he chs nae takes after th of is begetter than the soa is ‘rightl" his father’s child, Here dide neans the standard of consistency of a distinct character: from he man wi is the son oF Aj, oe can and indeed mur, expect With this passa vuld be ca wage ive exer he no hu de sz The frm ely he whieh ear ea ro ce Oe i Sogn alli a nce by icnkgeNCSEEt atzilen hae esc. Fa ential tesa Te mie and octy eomesponding fo the sci nest of ne’s self or of conformity to Nature.*? ‘7 Sucpeingly, the dla of That which ight for oes mata! istice’, occurs several times in the Odyssey. Dike here means a , coeding to ica corte nd of ype of appropria behav fed in a cestain kind of person—just as fearlessness is to be ‘¢ of behaviour is “ : i eraspes Gs bceriou is shown by reference tothe uully lid ails be wespeted and sxeeptiona one glodous 10d cphained by reference to dike; in the two 3 cone inglorious exception. The examples are Od. 14, 592 (you may ot expect mote than a small gift), ‘for this i ehe die of menials, sno ave always oppeessed by anxiety when a young ruler has power over them’; 19, 43: (You need not be surprised at the Prreadour, and you would do better aot to ask about if), “for this 3 the dike of the Olympian gods’, 19, 168: (You cannot expect thing bat utter misery), fr this is di, when a man has to wonder for yeass far from his home’; 11, 218: (You cannot expect to find mote than the shadow of a man here in the undet- sare, and what you see before you is no illusion), “but this is Thedie of men when they have died: the fire consumes their corpo reality and only a dreamlike form remains’; 4, 69t: (Odysseus vTad not treat his subjects according to his whim), ‘a is the die of sod like kings: they hate one man and favour another; but he Bevleeated nobody’; 18, 273: “This was not the dike of suitors Wooing a noble and rich bride in former days; on the contrary cetertained the bride and her family and bestowed gifts on them. ‘Thus there is always a genitive with the word dite: the die basally refers to definite persons. ‘This genitive is expanded 68——replaced) by a subsidiary clear. Bach person is seen, not sega individual, but as an example of his kind and his position: pea god, of a king, ota servant; asa suitor, or a dead, cremated aan farteavelling wanderer. An inner consistency links the esson with a course of behaviour which can be postulated. Ie is called dite just as Parmenides uses the mame vipe for the inner consistency which enables us to postulate be haviour from the nature of a being, and which actually regulates this behaviour, Tt keeps this being fettered in its own nature and purity, and does not give it the freedom to turn against its own vetue and come into being and perish, Tt gives and withholds wach mortal according to the nature conferred on Mo where necessary (of once—19, 1 clause which makes the sit nature of the knowledge t nim by Fate lu, HUMAN KNOWLEDGE (Fragment B x6, and A 46)" Fragment 16 is as difficule as it is important; but a few uncer tainties can be cleared up immediately, if we compare it clause by in the Odyssey (18, 132-60, exp. sf) and a fragment of Archilochus (68 Dichl-yo Bergh): sb iyudony dry 1s jueNdeww mohumdyperen os dvOpeimoun Sips ylyerae Bryrotoe ure rrapdor nice eyeupdiwow Epypacw p dpoveer ychdwn pious Apdo kal naw kal navel As is the kind of day brought on by the father of gods and ch. As is the kind of day brought on by Zeus ms, As every time the mixture of much-wandering, lim Age Jp-wandeting limbs i J. s0’is the mind of men who dwell on earth. $0 the spir comes to mortal men, 1385, 13840 for all men and for each. ra What the two earlier passages say is that our disposition, mood adetioc of ths Oey ead ArtalaeStirwere hickiog pt ctetiosde © prac! Af, paras sncidsoe or eel res he plrpor ofthe old saying ome that a chsge of fe precise, thoughts about Being and Not-Being.# Moreover, Parmenides himself must very often have experienced varying grades of enlightenment and Sbecurity, in the sense of his philosophy. For his ideas about Being are aot of such a kind that one could meditate leisurely and unwaveringly upon them, nor indeed, safe in their possession, Gould one ead one’s caly life according to their precepts. On the contrary, they requirean clevated state of mind, and in their ulmi tution shey presuppose a temporary removal to the sphere of pure mind, a removal similar to that which js poem as 4 headlong journey into untrodden Forms which Plato deseribes nally fortunate moments. In less wandering of thoughts; to be more the philosopher portrays symbolically in h distances, and to the vision of the ns a rare occurrence of exceptio' och ences, in the vacillation of ordinary men and in his own silty to astain a firm grasp on Being, we have specially va experiences, Compared to that, the influence of the: e soul was Parmenid Condition of the body on the functions ascribed to # setSmmonplace experience. We have a particularly clear illus + ean of this in Sextus’ explanation of Protagoras) ‘man is the vemmsure of all things’ (Pyrrb. Hyp. 1, 217-19): the senses are Transformed and altered ... according to the conditions of the body... Men app:chend diferent things, at diferent. times oe diag to thei different states ... according to their time of Iie’ (ch, LmpedoclesB 108) ‘and each kind of sta fF, Wehthi, in Muscumr Heleericam 8, p- 46). the second sentere gives the theoretical proof why it must be sot For the nature of the limbs is identical with that which one® ‘hake? This is of course a theory rather than something that can he irectly observed; yet it may similarly have a basis in Par~ pe sides own experience, inasmuch as he must have felt in memments of supreme clarity that his whole person was changed sacl teansfiguredi: he was then nothing buta being of light, which aie conscious only of its own existence,*4 and the entire clair Miscur of the lower world, which owes its illusory existence (0 the illosion of NotBeing, bad at that moment for him “be catinpuished and perished” (8. 21). When this tate had passed, he Sahir back again into the usual mixed form of existence. It should, Ee noted in this context that the second sentence is the reverse of crs and of the model in Archilochus: this time it is suggested thar the nature of the limbs is dependent upon the nature of the 8 thoughts. ‘This is an idea far removed from mechanistic causa- i ine sar as te Toeagraes cb ie ua aun shee ory inf te ok em rid of appearances to agree with this assumption, a world of i th a part (8. 50 Mf). To retin to te second sentence, The sabjet an object of ought are the same in nature:55 the man whose make-up con: ns more ofthe Light wll have more thoughts of Light, that Of spiritual, tue, lasting things, whereas the man whose make-up contains more ofthe Dat wil have mre dul thoughts (belo s), that is, of material, illusory transient things. The to clments hin themelvs and things which bef hem: hey do in man as well and as constituent parts of his limbs. Here too (GE's) tarot Mad of identey benrensTebag and aking us Ear is moved for emphasis to the beginni re, ; the beginning of the lin make the phase ‘is what one thinks’ doubly applicable. sess one filets of xpdos around onc; _eperences a wodl of the same minture, Thus the scoud nee provides a sttking conimation of the fact that the tions in a man’s nature ate accompanied by luctus tions in panied by fluctuations ia Theclosing words ofthe second sentence tke up the pice fest again, to make it fc , to make it mote precise for both sentences in troke. What the preceding lines established is true ‘both for men and for each maa’. 4l/ men ate condemned to impure, sicct thought by the gene which is We sees one’s own jedéen S oP ae on the: apes a it, which Fate Bi 26) has im- sadly each perron has a lesser ot pester falar ro ondng to the amount of Bark which tks 9 To this éxdorore up the space not filed by Light in his nature 1. The two most in the first line adds the effect of fluctuation in ti poral fluctuation are the state of total en- the fortunate recipient for pure Being; and extreme cases of ter lightenment, which leaves no room in any trace of earth, filing him completely with the state of death, in which one is only Not-being and perceives only Not-being, sees only darkness, hears only silence and feels Saly cold.s? ‘The inerplay of polatity and interdependence in the two elements in Parmenides’ view of the world will be clari- fied in our next section. Iv, THE WORLD OF THE SENSES! ITS CONSTITUENTS (Fragment B 8. 51-613 9) ‘The second part of Parmenides’ work described the world of mses, ‘The philosopher explained how the world was made out cents, at the same time making clear down to some detail the plan and function of the completed whole. ‘This exposition of the internal structure of that creation ako uncovers the bssic axiom on the validity of which the whole and each detail of it cleacly depend. or and the illusion ate traced back 10 their fundamental fault. We are thus given, fst Jnformation about the immanent Rightness of this completely iipenasistent workd, and we perceive that his world has af inevitable appearance of reality for each of its members, for excl man. Bat second, we also learn where to look for the principal error, by the removal of which the whole structure is annulled and, $0 to speak, wiped out. This complex of ideas w and proceeds in a way consist of its two el which starts with a false hypothesis, with that false hypothesis, is paralleled not only >y the wording but also by the stracrare of the PXposition. First a ‘deceitful arrangement of words’ is announced {52}, and then we have the false hypothesis, with a second hing that i ly after that the “structure! ‘which Parmenides is going to describe is called ‘plausible’ (62), nd the meaning which is about to be brought out is praised as being the best according to human lights. Parmeaides need only mention etroneouss iled proofs had been given eatlier (eg is false (54). But immediatel cause d but érg mean that although i ule the ote, Light, given the way itis postulated, i ap ights Now 40 far aothing hus been sald sbout the nature aod so, And i's seth good season that to eictra begins ou pis point tio leas is of doe eh eat foveal woul Of appestatosh ch Sade welch eae theft orld, even if there are necessarily certain similarities and con- jons between the positive side of the world of the senses, ind that which truly exists Light is Sdentical with itself”; thus for Parmenides ‘bright’ and shi’ and ‘gentle’ ate not three separate qualities but they qualities bue they are all ities of the luminous character. Since the analogue is true for )ark, everything that exists can be assigned to one or other of the elements, oF divided between both, on the grounds of its quli- Surduets) (Fr. 9, 1-23 the language is not completely cleat). in that case the whole of space is entirely filled with the two ies. For the qualities are opposed to each other ina way which ‘ould be called complementary. Light and Dark, Hot and Cold are logically and empirically so closely linked that less light, for sample, necessarily means more darkness. Thus the total 1e ins the same in every case regardless of the varying, propor tions of the two elements. “Both, Light and Dark, together fil area completely.’ ‘That is stated word for word by Per Everything is full of Light and unseen Dark together, 1 equal” (Fr. 9, 3-4).$# The only dificulty is ‘equal’. I do not usr with Bignone’s interpretation (Eada, 1916, pp. $41 6), cxualiquantitativamente quality; and when the element cles, the context (1 In itself fos means any kind of re similarly ealled toa revra in ‘equality but rather qualitative equality and essen gland Dackistould he tcpnoded ba pf Cap ales ancl in particular with regard to the topic which is being dis- ie does not make any ticle of Dark hia esage—dar lg oF apace: Screane whose igo oz Dberseren lay One “Bveeything fs fille by Light and inpetcepib the, both equal (a value)” ‘This also makes the final explanatory clause fit perfectly, if one takes it as follows. Méreys with the dative means: “I belong to” hole.’ So the sentence means: ‘For 5 to nothing.’ No thing (or space)! or a piece of Light, fa group, am part of aw neither of the two belong ‘no part of a thing is neither a piece of Dark nor Light and Dark in certain propott "The structure of these two clauses 9. 3 ion, The first positive statement that spac which negatively he essence of the 4. has an unsurpassable logical prec pletely filled is explined by the final clu sssiility of unfilled space paloneed by the corresponding negations ( Be ) in the form of a chiasmus; shor duorépen, dps pera pape. The complete filling-up of space was caused, as we have seen by the complementzry character of the opposites.“* While the lack of a positive (Light) was regarded as causing of the deficient mode (Dark), this ij » caused by ne; comes a quasi-ér. Tae Greek language offered a formulation of his idea by distinguishing between two negations, ob which ¥ 4h causes.°s Thus it provided the means and the mrticular opportunty to ask scriously whether a p aareralle Parmenides makes that which is negasvely caused wie aly in the world of the senses as something quasi-positives frere beside the Light stands the Not-Light, the Dark, tora! and a8-a second thing. The phllosplier should not be Caarsed for the obseutities which result, since he as just ex: Pinined thae iis jos this which isthe basi eror ofthe world of aeeeases, ‘Thus the following flow into each other in the realtm ee enowledge in this world: forgetting (an act which wipes out Something positive), non-perception® (the absence of a positive tei), and die experience of the non-existent (a postive act in a excludes the po positive clause is cancels and px} wh Ve THE WORLD OF THE SENSES? ITS STRATIFIED (Fragment A 37; B 10-15) ‘The most detailed account that we have of Parmenides’ com: A 57) is in Stobaeus and es rastus, 1 take! pomes from Aetius, in other words, from Theophr 1c first sentence to mean ‘Parmenides posits rings‘ laid around pe vcieele, in (continual) alternation, one made of the Rare a of the Solid; and others between them made of a rand Dark.’ ‘That éréQypos means “in (continval) vad from the context; moreover the revised Liddell and Scott ‘illustration of this sense feom Philon IT p, 221, 18 Wend- nd-Cohin: ‘Forgetting and recollecting occur to everyone yeB6) from child wod.’ This makes the sentence clear and complete; the various nreempts to emend it become wi If we now put this senteace of Theophrastus beside the inal lines (B 12. 1-2) transmitted by Simplicius, it is clear, in rst place, that it is a paraphease of these lines, and that it ean nderste Theo follow y (each ring of fire) are made of Dark; and between them {as transition at the borders) there shoots in extra fire (betw ally in continuous alternation (éaAyfhos J word by word as a paraphrase of ther : clearly took the second line to mean: “The tin the ler zones of the dark rings, which are next to the fire)” Bat, second, it becomes clear that the paraphrase is wrong. The correct ion of the lines is: ‘For the narrower’ (the paraphrise s ‘rings’) ‘are® filled with unmixed fire; those that follow {with dark, into which a part of fire shoots.” iphenseus’ account then skips the next lines and tells us achat snreemnds them (ae the rings) all, ike a wall, i ie yy fing, So is that which is in the centre of all (te. the tings); around this (reading # with Boeckh ey P), a shell and ¢ 1, puce Dark. Accordin according to Parmenides ¢ innermost aucleus consist of to the two relative clauses of this nony, each of these two dark rings would then have a light rder—and this would have to be inside the outer ic and outside the innermost one. Of these light rings the which Parmenides several times (10. 13 11, 2). The other, which encircles might be identical with the Aethe nucleus of the universe (that is, the Earth), is most strange.7 ot at all compatible with the statements in the second half Theophra 1s? account, But this, the main difficulty in our re arified the Theophrastus’ first sentence, ‘Theophrastus inter- can be easily solved now that we have 1n that according to Parmenides the rings dance with that he put a re can both understand, preted the text to m of Light and of Dark a ring of fire around the Earth too. Th ‘and eliminate this information as an inference based on an extant false explanation of n extant genuine text. After this critical solution of a demonstrable misunderstanding, we arrive at a complete picture into which the remaining informa- Yon about Patmeniées’ theory of the structure of the world fits nides’ account began with the outermost yaros (11, 2) surrounds the universe like consists of pure dark (the night sky); unmixed, with no viv sit were dead, and, in its absolute, purely. ‘ompletely and it is im wall?) Te fying addition, this shell is material density, it cuts off everythin penetrable, The world contained within it is ja stata according ‘he two elements) drrexpin Zxarépeon” (as the pa (Scholion to 8. 60 Sidxoopov). .d remained suspen= > weight: r word should be written) éx "The less heavy tose, the heavy sank, the mi ded, Thus all isin the order of the amount of Light that it cone tains. ‘For the narrower rings [narrower compared with the sky mentioned before] are filled with pure fire, and those whic follow [yet narrower] are mixed” (12. 1-2). The pure sings of Tight mean the spheres of aether, and the orbits of the sun and the ouher stars (10. 1-2). The deeper we go, the more darkness the Spheres contain. ‘Thus the Milky Way is darker an the Sua, and the Moon darker than ‘the milk of heaven’ (B 1. 25 A 43). The have bordered on the lowest mixed zone, which ‘Would already be very impure; and at the same time it was the definitive symbol of this sublunary world (B 145 15). Tes mixed) Gouble nature is expressed with marvellous precision in| the ambiguous and profound epithet ‘light of the aight’ (rverspads) its ‘round eye’ (10. 4) always looks towards the Sun, whence 18 receives its own ‘Light’, or rather, ‘that of another’. The heavy pathos of these Hices about the moon will have to be explained ie: ike man with his impure double nature, the moon is bouad always turns towards the pare is the heaviest: Earthy ware darkness, 1 of Fr. 12 and the we have still to deal to the low earthly sphere, and light of dl innermost and lowes a, like the hignest boundary, formed of Tt only remains for us to interpret the ¢ central portion of Theophrastus’ account; 24 mines Theophasto i wich the moet ceatmal af the mbiguous év uéow rode’. Thus there is no need to inert Parmenides according tothe rwo pasmges, norkave they the passage to be understood? In fact, in my opinion, Reinhardt PTE poe foci hat i ayprscvately tae cones volute sa Righty Goldaeean evedthooned tin a8 atte ples This is just w it Parmenides said in his own words, ‘Be- fhveen these’, that is the two elements just named, there rules the ‘ower which mixes; ‘between’ is a very common sense of &v péow with the gen This ‘among’7* does not imply any fixed cations but everywhere in the impure, twofold layers where nd Night touch and meet, she forces the elements to ng and the sexes to mating and ‘loathsome child-bearing’ jth the genitive. VI. PARMENIDES AND ANAXIMANDER agment 8. 16-333 62-9) hown that one should not reconstruct the philosophies of this peculiar epoch from te them. Even when our sources reproduce single substantial accuracy, their actual sense and the Point that they are making remain uncersin until we can take them in conjunction with part of the original text. Wi cwiving text we can gain noth iv eBBaka. ways One researches so far have clearly g but vague pressic 5 ; impressions, Dep saty wel be wate wi ney ous inking UG ‘pve’ pioshe er edwin oy boca di, sos, lacking Bah a ealy philosopher on almost ny point vaty s the scholar who 25 to very low. We must always be prepared to be ides porissey perditum ducas 5 reach as far a5 Our Jn alert to the level fh at any given time, from very great rave and give up completely: quod But on the other hand we can always material will take us—but we mus have reached or failed to te: ‘elves, which preat figures of the pre- cassical period can be reasonably well understood by us) the sas yer is only four: Hesiod, the greater part of whose philosophy ail remains to be elucidated—a thing which would produce tich snd to some extent surprising results; Anaximander, whose Single surviving sentence is enough to outweigh whole stacks of seemonia; Heraclitus; and Parmenides, for the knowledge of ‘Shom we are largely indebted to Simplicius’ conscious wish to) in its original form to posterity in the last Parmenides A 21), that v ‘Now if we simply «sk ours rane the world Gee Pit Pe 44s 28 Allowing 2 eonsidemble gap, we may add to these the lessen lowing aes? Tanks and Pyihagoss fave vaished ino cheat, int ydagoras that his school were inthe abit of attributing al Inter knowledge to the master (lamblichus in DK 45, D6 aff) DK 45, D 6 48/5) history of philosophy of this peiod it from exis period ae len the way of ew has bee Se ee atts tendeny to preserves balanced by a eis alse aad lity in providing 06 of the world ap} nd the same time to be an act of soo es regder dacussion has beca so ‘corrected’ that it Bien which polemie disappears and rises anew in a diffe shall follow through just such a proces Peo allow comparison with the philosophy of Aniximander may follows: If the philosophy of this period in 26 doctsine of Parmenides the be outlined more or less a5 seneral is characterized by ire clearly di d. The events in the fores * 0 ie ea dae “Che ht (DIGHE abe Avishai tron ‘Coming into Being exists’, and ‘Perishing Comes into Being’ Ndr as ie bal mae Mijecematter and to the language, For here we are not in the sats of meaningless, compulsive, mechanical causa d stem ‘ypy-’ denote ‘should’ and ‘ought’, ‘ase’ and ‘being useful’ ‘Thus by the addi «happens is not enthroned as a datk, and sensible. The a. of ward 73 ype this rule which governs w i“ tyrannical power, but legitimized as justifiable rds mean ‘as is in order’ Now the second claus it shows more clearly Jo with its also joins on coherently; ; this in order: ‘For they pay pemalty to the command of Time.’ Thus Time sets a final date for pay- ment to obligation (ypedo), at in Pindar Ol. ro. 7 Braler ap nedaw xpdvos édy xaralaxwve Pals xpéos.S Wiha only af ane mie eh greed Armin Fold and Hot with each ober Foe we mat tke the tendon as meaning that no single thing comes into being f the

    You might also like