Parmenides V Heraclitus
Sanjog Bhatti
Professor Lennox
Philosophy has been present throughout time, even before the time of Socrates in
Ancient Greece. This pre-Socratic philosophy was focused on the oldest branch of thinking, metaphysics. Philosophers, such as Parmenides and Herclitus, basically wanted to answer the fundamental question: what? These two philosophers mainly focused on the nature of reality and why it exists. Although they agreed on the idea that the world could be reduced to one thing, Parmenides and Heraclitus disagreed upon what that one thing was.
Parmenides believed in the idea of “IS.” In (insert fragment ⅘), Parmenides focused on the question that if something doesn’t exist, how can you know it? He believed that there was no idea of becoming. When something is becoming, it means that thing has not been present this whole time. According to Parmenides, the world only exists in the present, not the future or the past. The future and past don’t exist because those emphasize a period of not being. The past suggests that you no longer exist and the future suggests the idea that you don’t exist yet.
However, Parmenides was a firm believer against that. Parmenides also visits the idea about how we gain knowledge. He believes that its not enough to rely on just the senses for knowledge, but to rely more on thought.
Look steadfastly with thy mind at things though afar as if they were at hand. Thou canst not cut off what is from holding fast to what is, neither
scattering itself abroad in.
This fragment focuses on the notion of the key of thought.
Parmenides is trying to say that if you’re thinking, you can’t think of nothing, which leads to the idea that there’s no such thing as nothing. This corresponds to the idea of being and not becoming. On the other hand, Heraclitus believes in the idea that we are both being and not being.
He thinks that we are becoming, which comes to a notion of change.
The world which is the same for all, no one of the gods or men has
Professor Lennox
Philosophy has been present throughout time, even before the time of Socrates in
Ancient Greece. This pre-Socratic philosophy was focused on the oldest branch of thinking, metaphysics. Philosophers, such as Parmenides and Herclitus, basically wanted to answer the fundamental question: what? These two philosophers mainly focused on the nature of reality and why it exists. Although they agreed on the idea that the world could be reduced to one thing, Parmenides and Heraclitus disagreed upon what that one thing was.
Parmenides believed in the idea of “IS.” In (insert fragment ⅘), Parmenides focused on the question that if something doesn’t exist, how can you know it? He believed that there was no idea of becoming. When something is becoming, it means that thing has not been present this whole time. According to Parmenides, the world only exists in the present, not the future or the past. The future and past don’t exist because those emphasize a period of not being. The past suggests that you no longer exist and the future suggests the idea that you don’t exist yet.
However, Parmenides was a firm believer against that. Parmenides also visits the idea about how we gain knowledge. He believes that its not enough to rely on just the senses for knowledge, but to rely more on thought.
Look steadfastly with thy mind at things though afar as if they were at hand. Thou canst not cut off what is from holding fast to what is, neither
scattering itself abroad in.
This fragment focuses on the notion of the key of thought.
Parmenides is trying to say that if you’re thinking, you can’t think of nothing, which leads to the idea that there’s no such thing as nothing. This corresponds to the idea of being and not becoming. On the other hand, Heraclitus believes in the idea that we are both being and not being.
He thinks that we are becoming, which comes to a notion of change.
The world which is the same for all, no one of the gods or men has