Dialogue

 1 Parme|  reductio ad absurdum’ of the Eleatic philosophy. But would Plato
 2 Parme|    that he has ascribed to an Eleatic stranger in the Sophist
 3 Parme|      of the Eleatics. But the Eleatic stranger expressly criticises
 4 Parme|       not a refutation of the Eleatic philosophy. Nor would such
 5 Parme|       was a problem which the Eleatic philosophers had never considered;
 6 Parme| Megara or elsewhere, with the Eleatic and Megarian philosophers.
 7 Parme|      Being were to an ancient Eleatic. ‘If God is, what follows?
 8 Parme|     not of his own but of the Eleatic dialectic, had he intended
 9 Parme|      to criticize the earlier Eleatic philosophy from the point
10 Parme|        the last review of the Eleatic doctrines. The latest phases
11 Parme|      naturally proceed to the Eleatic One or Being which is the
12 Parme|      spirit he criticizes the Eleatic doctrine of Being, not intending
13 Parme|      but showing that the old Eleatic notion, and the very name ‘
14 Parme|       only a criticism of the Eleatic notion of Being, but also
15 Parme|  truth of his own, and of the Eleatic theories. In the Theaetetus
16 Parme|   Ideas, and secondly, of the Eleatic doctrine of Being. Neither
17 Parme|       Platonic as well as the Eleatic doctrine must be remodelled.
18 Parme|       method of Socrates; the Eleatic One or Being is tried by