1 / 20

Parmenides of Elea (530-450)

Parmenides of Elea (530-450). Claim:. Eleatics founded Greek logic Greek metaphysics Philosophical theology. 1. Greek Logic. HERACLITUS “flux” co-presence of opposites  to assertion of contradictory statements. PARMENIDES Principle of Non-Contradiction

nuri
Download Presentation

Parmenides of Elea (530-450)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Parmenides of Elea (530-450)

  2. Claim: Eleatics founded • Greek logic • Greek metaphysics • Philosophical theology

  3. 1. Greek Logic HERACLITUS • “flux” • co-presence of opposites •  to assertion of contradictory statements PARMENIDES • Principle of Non-Contradiction • Idea of Logical Deduction/Proof ZENO • Idea of Disproof through Dialectic, Contradiciton

  4. Heraclitus Asserts contradictions: • Things taken together are whole and not whole… • We step and do not step into the same rivers, we are and we are not. • The same thing is both living and dead, and the waking and the sleeping, and young and old… Co-presence of opposites (CPO): • the same thing can have both X and ~X properties (usually opposites, not just contradictories) • in reality or • as seen relative to different things or • by different perceivers • at different times

  5. Principle of Non-Contradiction (PNC) Principle of Logic Principle of Reality Contradictory things cannot both exist. Socrates cannot be in Larissa and in Athens at the same time. The world is not irrational; it is not possible that logically contradictory things exist. ~pos (S is P & ~P) Contradictory statements cannot both be true. • “Socrates is wise” and “Socrates is not wise.” It is not rational to ascribe opposite properties to the same object at the same time, in the same place. PNC = ~pos (S is P & S is ~P)

  6. What follows from CPO? Illogical consequences Rejection of Heraclitus They are carried along by experience, deaf as they are blind, amazed, uncritical herds, for whom to be and not to be are judged the same and not the same, and for whom there are in all things opposites. That it is and cannot not be is the path of persuasion. • If A can be X and ~X, and X is Y, is A also Y? • But if something that is X is also ~X, then if A is Y, can’t it also be ~Y? • So we cannot really argue that if X is Y, and Y is Z, then X is Z, because it might not be. • If A can be X and ~X, why can’t it also be ~A? • So if COO is true, a thing might not even be itself!

  7. Greek Metaphysics HERACLITUS • Doctrine of flux or fire  real world = continuous change, becoming, no ‘being’ • Doctrine of relativity  no knowledge of objective reality ELEATICS • Doctrine of ‘being’  real world based on ‘being’ in which • Doctrine of truth based on reason  knowledge of ‘what is’

  8. Attributes of “Being” On this way there are many signs— • being ungenerated it is also imperishable, • whole and of a single kind, unshaken and complete. Nor was it ever, nor will it be, since it is now, all together, • one, continuous. • For what birth will you seek for it? How and from where did it come forth? I will not permit you to say or think that it came forth from what is not; for it is not to be said or thought that being comes to be from not-being. • Remaining self-same in itself, being is what it is, and does not change; • for it is contained by necessity within the bonds of limit; nor is it fitting for what is to be incomplete, for being cannot be lacking—or it would not be. • ungenerated (imperishable /eternal) • whole (not sum of parts) • one (not many) • known by reason, not senses • at rest or self-same, unchanging • necessary, not contingent

  9. What is being? the ‘Is’? • Parmenides: “Is” can refer only to what is real, or what is ultimately real. • This = • “Absolute eternal being” in contrast to the things that ‘seem’ or ‘appear’ OR • “Enduring transient beings” which can have opposite properties that change, e.g. color, size, etc.

  10. Metaphysics a. Identity of objects over time • Parmenides rejects flux b. Cosmological Argument • From insights to deductive ‘proofs’ c. Necessary vs. Contingent being • Parmenides on this distinction

  11. a. Identity/’being’ of objects • Theseus, sailing ship A to Crete, replaces plank by plank of his ship. • Scavenger, in ship B, picks them from the sea and replaces all the parts of his own ship, before they make land. • Is Theseus sailing ship A or is Scavenger? Possible answers: • By component parts theory, ship A ceased to be A with the first plank • By spatio-temporal continuity theory, it is the same—and would be even if the planks been shaped into a completely different vessel • By functional purpose theory, it ceases to be the same ship, as soon as it changes its function

  12. b. Cosmological Argument? • For what birth will you seek for it? How and from where did it come forth? I will not permit you to say or think that it came forth from what is not; for it is not to be said or thought that being comes to be from not-being. • Either (a) being (the universe?) always existed or (b) it came into being (i.e. from nothing) • But (b) is impossible: nothing comes into being from nothing • Therefore being has always been.

  13. c. Contingent vs. Necessary • Contingent truth = could not be the case, “There are tigers in India.” • Contingent or necessary? • Natural laws ? • Empirical or historical facts? • Metaphysical truths? • Contingent being = that which can not exist, e.g. every physical thing • Necessary truth = must be the case, 2 + 2 = 4 • Concepts of ‘modal logic’: • necessity, possibility, actuality • 2 + 2 = 4 is T in every pos-world • There are tigers in India is~T in all pos-worlds • Necessarybeing = that which cannot not exist. • God or Ideas? Souls or Essences? Atoms? • Is this concept coherent?

  14. Zeno • Parmenides: develops positive logic to prove e.g. that there could be no beginning to “what is” & identifies key principle of logic = PNC • Zeno: develops negative logicto disprove arguments or views of opponents by showing they are self-contradictory: his paradoxes.

  15. The Arrow (paradoxes of motion) • If the arrow flies toward the target, it must pass through ½ the distance, then ½ of the remaining distance, and so on. • It will always be traversing another ½, and never reach the target. • Likewise, Achilles will never catch up with the tortoise. He makes up ½, again ½, and so on, but never catches up. • Conclusion: The realm of motion is incoherent.

  16. Greek Philosophical Theology • Initiated by Xenophanes (~540) • Critical theology = concept of anthropomorphism • Positive theology = philosophical concept of God • Parmenides will identify attributes of ‘being’ (ungenerated, eternal, noncorporeal, necessary-being, one, etc.) • Distinction of faith vs. knowledge

  17. Critical Theology • If oxen and horses and lions had hands, they would draw their gods to have the shape of oxen, horses, and lions. • The Celts give the gods red hair, the Nubians make them black. • Anthropomorphism = • “gods” conceived in human form • human passions • human character traits, i.e. imperfect • Xenophanes: the Olympian gods = products of human imagination

  18. Philosophical concept of God • God is one, greatest among gods and men, not at all like mortals in thought or body. • Without effort he shakes all things by the thought of his mind. True “God” = • One • Radically unlike • Acts of mind (“creation”) • Not = Person • Perfectly good?

  19. Epistemology and religious belief • No man has seen nor will anyone know the truth about the gods and the things I speak of, for even if a man said what is the case, he does not know, but only shapes a belief about it. Later philosophical theologians: • Is there a way to know that ‘God’ (one, etc.) exists? • Might knowledge of ‘God’ be an insight of reason, not mere belief?

More Related