Dialogue

   1 Parme|              sometimes as discrete: (10) In some parts of the argument
   2 Parme|            terms older and younger: (11) The relation between two
   3 Parme|              existence of the many: (12) Words are used through
   4 Parme|             remain to be considered: 1st, the connexion between the
   5 Parme|        second parts of the dialogue; 2ndly, the relation of the Parmenides
   6 Parme|       further infinite subdivision: (4) The argument often proceeds ‘
   7 Parme|            favoured. Zeno was nearly 40 years of age, tall and fair
   8 Parme|        simpliciter’ and conversely: (5) The analogy of opposites
   9 Parme|             what is unlike in them: (6) The idea of being or not-being
  10 Parme|             time of his visit, about 65 years old, very white with
  11 Parme|     non-existence in place or time: (7) The same ideas are regarded
  12 Parme|          alternatives or opposites: (8) There are no degrees or
  13 Parme|     conception of motion or change: (9) One, being, time, like
  14 Parme|              are again merged in the aboriginal notion of Being. No one
  15 Parme|             that smallness is wholly absent.~True.~But absolute greatness
  16 Parme|             destroy each other. This abstruse notion is the foundation
  17 Parme|            the many involved greater absurdities than the hypothesis of the
  18 Parme|              fear of falling into an abyss of nonsense.’ ‘You are young,
  19 Parme|            force,’ which seems to be accepted without any rigid examination
  20 Parme|            Ueberweg), who in general accepts the authorised canon of
  21 Parme|          Parmenides as spurious. The accidental want of external evidence,
  22 Parme|            come into being except in accordance with its own nature, its
  23 Parme|          come into being in a manner accordant with its own nature. Now
  24 Parme|             just left us to go home.~Accordingly we went to look for him;
  25 Parme|      Socrates, and quite accept your account. But tell me, Zeno, do you
  26 Parme|       supplied if we had trustworthy accounts of Plato’s oral teaching.~
  27 Parme|           with a sort of geometrical accuracy. We doubt whether any abstract
  28 Parme|               When we have described accurately the methods or forms which
  29 Parme|              fallacy of ‘calvus’ or ‘acervus,’ or of ‘Achilles and the
  30 Parme|        partake of time? This must be acknowledged, if the one partakes of
  31 Parme|           are asked with the express acknowledgment that the denial of ideas
  32 Parme|              was at home, and in the act of giving a bridle to a
  33      | actually
  34 Parme|               and of the Hamiltonian adaptation of Kant, as well as of the
  35 Parme|              fineness and regularity adapted to one another. Like the
  36 Parme|             of the one. My answer is addressed to the partisans of the
  37 Parme|              is one, and of this you adduce excellent proofs; and he
  38 Parme|        likeness, difference, nor any adequate conception of motion or
  39 Parme|           preliminary to their final adjustment. The Platonic Ideas are
  40 Parme|              writings too; you prove admirably that the all is one: he
  41 Parme|            to make allowance for the adulteration or alloy which they contain.
  42 Parme|           great is the difficulty of affirming the ideas to be absolute?~
  43 Parme|      relation to phenomena. Still he affirms the existence of such ideas;
  44 Parme|            would such an explanation afford any satisfactory connexion
  45 Parme|            of the morrow, but of all after-ages on the Platonic Ideas. For
  46 Parme|       intelligent cause like a human agent—nor an individual, for He
  47 Parme|          many, neither separated nor aggregated; and in the passage from
  48 Parme|              the Philebus, have long agreed to treat as obsolete; the
  49 Parme|         minus signs in arithmetic or algebra make a plus. Two negatives
  50 Parme|           always remembering to make allowance for the adulteration or
  51 Parme|              for the adulteration or alloy which they contain. We cannot
  52 Parme|         sphere of the Ideas are also alluded to in the Philebus, and
  53 Parme|            Plato, to which Aristotle alludes (Met.), when, as he says,
  54      | along
  55 Parme|              follows, is inferred by altering the predicate into ‘not
  56 Parme|              the universe. A similar ambiguity occurs in the use of the
  57 Parme|              of writing, was not the ambition of an elder man, but the
  58 Parme|              to pieces, because Hume amused himself by analyzing the
  59 Parme|            ideas of Plato without an anachronism, the criticism is appropriately
  60 Parme|              and conversely: (5) The analogy of opposites is misused
  61 Parme|               nor does he attempt to analyse the various senses in which
  62 Parme|         desired. He is indulging the analytical tendencies of his age, which
  63 Parme|             himself, if he had first analyzed from every point of view
  64 Parme|              their ‘catch-words’ and analyzes them from every conceivable
  65 Parme|       because Hume amused himself by analyzing the word ‘cause’ into uniform
  66 Parme|            as transcending them. The anamnesis of the Ideas is chiefly
  67 Parme|             Ionia, the birthplace of Anaxagoras, a citizen of no mean city
  68 Parme|       Eristic had been present, oios aner ei kai nun paren, he might
  69 Parme|            notions, instead of being anomalies, are among the higher and
  70 Parme|             mind with their material antecedents. Yet none of them can be
  71 Parme|         brought to them—some echo or anticipation of a great truth or error,
  72 Parme|             we read it with a purely antiquarian or historical interest;
  73 Parme|            and they had the charm of antiquity. Something which found a
  74 Parme|            we should imagine similar aporiai raised on themes as sacred
  75 Parme|             all things.~To which are appended two subordinate consequences:
  76 Parme|           nor perception nor opinion appertaining. One, then, is neither named,
  77 Parme|          other words, they were only applicable within the range of our
  78 Parme|            of truth. The same remark applies to the second of the two
  79 Parme|         criticisms of Parmenides.~To appreciate truly the character of these
  80 Parme|            been truly understood and appreciated. Upon the term substance
  81 Parme|            alike?~True.~But when you approach them, they appear to be
  82 Parme|        anachronism, the criticism is appropriately placed in the mouth of the
  83 Parme|         received his suggestion with approving smiles. And we are glad
  84 Parme|       opinions, which may be changed arbitrarily by individuals. But the
  85 Parme|            is again answered by the ‘argumentum ad infinitum.’ We may remark,
  86 Parme|             new ideas will be always arising, if the idea resembles that
  87 Parme|           reduced to their strictest arithmetical meaning. That one is three
  88      | around
  89 Parme|             classification; the Good arranged in classes is also contrasted
  90 Parme|           the sciences without first arranging them? These are the deficiencies
  91 Parme|      infinitesimal division is never arrested by the one. Thus all being
  92 Parme|         facts.’ The time has not yet arrived for a purely inductive philosophy.
  93 Parme|            cause, nor yet a maker or artificer. The words which we use
  94 Parme|          which is not really such an artificial work as you imagine; for
  95 Parme|              conceive that the great artist would place in juxtaposition
  96 Parme|            in their connexion, or to ascertain their relation to phenomena.
  97 Parme|             unmeaning slight than to ascribe to their great master tenets
  98 Parme|           questions which Parmenides asks of Socrates. And yet these
  99 Parme|             which proceeded, not ‘by assailing premises, but conclusions’;
 100 Parme|          power than that in which he assails his own theory of Ideas.
 101 Parme|            say, that we who are here assembled are seven, and that I am
 102 Parme|              unity’; you cannot even assert being or time of this without
 103 Parme|             explanation, could Plato assign to them the refutation of
 104 Parme|           mankind from scepticism by assigning to our notions of ‘cause
 105 Parme|           like and unlike it must be assimilated and dissimilated?~Yes.~And
 106 Parme|            is real, or in any way an assistance to thought, or, like some
 107 Parme|           into one sphere of thought associations which belong to another;
 108 Parme|              also a time at which it assumes being and relinquishes being—
 109 Parme|             many, would that be very astonishing. But if he were to show
 110 Parme|              Certainly.~Then the one attaches to every single part of
 111 Parme|            the thought recognizes as attaching to all, being a single form
 112 Parme|            way in which the mind can attain truth and wisdom. And therefore,
 113 Parme|              to Socrates that he has attained the conception of ideas
 114 Parme|             view to the more precise attainment of truth. The same remark
 115 Parme|              is leading us. Zeno had attempted to prove the existence of
 116 Parme|              express facts.~Socrates attempts to support his view of the
 117 Parme|              poetical consistency in attributing to the ‘father Parmenides’
 118 Parme|           which is not, if remitting aught of the being of non-existence,
 119 Parme|           who in general accepts the authorised canon of the Platonic writings,
 120 Parme|        INTRODUCTION AND ANALYSIS~The awe with which Plato regarded
 121 Parme|              there takes the form of banter and irony, here of illustration.~
 122 Parme|          modern philosophy, e.g. the bare abstraction of undefined
 123 Parme|              discovered and made the basis of the correlation of ideas.
 124 Parme|           him or his school. It also bears a resemblance to some modern
 125 Parme|             one. The real difficulty begins with the relations of ideas
 126 Parme|             There is no many; and on behalf of this he offers overwhelming
 127 Parme|               he said. ‘And of human beings like ourselves, of water,
 128 Parme|            human thought. To the old belief in Him we return, but with
 129 Parme|           you deceive the world into believing that you are saying different
 130 Parme|      Socrates, he said, I admire the bent of your mind towards philosophy;
 131 Parme|          employed.~The philosophy of Berkeley could never have had any
 132 Parme|     stumblingblocks of thought which beset his contemporaries. Seeing
 133 Parme|             Clazomenae in Ionia, the birthplace of Anaxagoras, a citizen
 134 Parme|            but ‘whither the argument blows’ he follows.~III. The negative
 135 Parme|           the obvious fact, that the body being one has many members,
 136 Parme|         would be spoken of in modern books. Indeed, there are very
 137 Parme|        afraid that I may fall into a bottomless pit of nonsense, and perish;
 138 Parme|               because they were more bound up with words; and words
 139 Parme|          instructions to a worker in brass about a bridle. When he
 140 Parme|         which follows: How are we to bridge the chasm between human
 141 Parme|              been giving orders to a bridle-maker; by this slight touch Plato
 142 Parme|             we may allow to Plato in bringing together by a ‘tour de force,’
 143 Parme|          away from God; a great deal brings us back to Him.’ When we
 144 Parme|          Parmenides, is a tremendous business of which you speak, and
 145 Parme|             and figure may be made a calculus of thought. It exaggerates
 146 Parme|            more than the fallacy of ‘calvus’ or ‘acervus,’ or of ‘Achilles
 147 Parme|       general accepts the authorised canon of the Platonic writings,
 148 Parme|          yesterday. The impulse that carries you towards philosophy is
 149 Parme|             the truth is, that he is carrying on a process which is not
 150 Parme|      consequences in either of these cases to the subjects of the hypothesis,
 151 Parme|              hound, you do not quite catch the motive of the piece,
 152 Parme|          impossible, he takes their ‘catch-words’ and analyzes them from
 153 Parme|            transcendental use of the Categories.~Several lesser links also
 154 Parme|          term substance at least two celebrated theological controversies
 155 Parme|     fascinated the Neoplatonists for centuries afterwards. Something that
 156 Parme|            it passes from being into cessation of being, or from not-being
 157 Parme|          Words are used through long chains of argument, sometimes loosely,
 158 Parme|          after ages to be peculiarly characteristic of him. How can he have
 159 Parme|         Christians have included two characters or natures as much opposed
 160 Parme|            who was about to run in a chariot race, shaking with fear
 161 Parme|              awful; and they had the charm of antiquity. Something
 162 Parme|             How are we to bridge the chasm between human truth and
 163 Parme|             are not only one but two chasms: the first, between individuals
 164 Parme|            anamnesis of the Ideas is chiefly insisted upon in the mythical
 165 Parme|           any other things which you choose,—to each of them singly,
 166 Parme|            thesis, would hardly have chosen Parmenides, the condemner
 167 Parme|           under the name of God even Christians have included two characters
 168 Parme|        reliance can be placed on the circumstance as determining the date
 169 Parme|          birthplace of Anaxagoras, a citizen of no mean city in the history
 170 Parme|     Anaxagoras, a citizen of no mean city in the history of philosophy,
 171 Parme| classification; the Good arranged in classes is also contrasted with
 172 Parme|         about universals, could they classify phenomena? How could they
 173 Parme|         Plato which cannot wholly be cleared up, and is not much illustrated
 174 Parme|              but still they gave the closest attention, and often looked
 175 Parme|        number of parts; for being is coequal and coextensive with one,
 176 Parme|              admit that he shows the coexistence of the one and many, but
 177 Parme|           same notion, is a singular coincidence of ancient and modern thought.~
 178 Parme|             which can divide but not combine. And he does not stop to
 179 Parme|              is a narrated dialogue, combining with the mere recital of
 180 Parme|                1.b. Let us, however, commence the inquiry again. We have
 181 Parme|              this is a work which is commenced in the Sophist. Plato, in
 182 Parme|           less than things which are commensurable with it, the one will have
 183 Parme|              of things which are not commensurate with it, the one will have
 184 Parme|             two spheres which had no communication with one another.~It is
 185 Parme|            Aristoteles and the whole company entreated Parmenides to
 186 Parme|      illustration of Parmenides, who compares the idea of greatness to
 187 Parme|         other, because there is more complete unconsciousness that we
 188 Parme|            he have placed himself so completely without them? How can he
 189 Parme|         method of Zeno, and that the complex dilemma, though declared
 190 Parme|             us the continuity or the complexity of nature or the different
 191 Parme|             also the particles which compose being seem to be like and
 192 Parme|              of the many as you have composed arguments? Is that your
 193 Parme|            summed up as follows: (1) Compound or correlative ideas which
 194 Parme|             is involved to a want of comprehensiveness in his mode of reasoning;
 195 Parme|             the individuals which it comprises, a further idea of greatness
 196 Parme|             confounded with external compulsion and the internal workings
 197 Parme|             own mind has been partly concealed from us by the dogmatic
 198 Parme|               Because, when a person conceives of any one of these as such,
 199 Parme|           Plato criticizing the very conceptions which have been supposed
 200 Parme|              thing that is, have any concern with it?~No.~Then the one
 201 Parme|           nor we with them; they are concerned with themselves only, and
 202 Parme|            ideas is a relation which concerns themselves only; and the
 203 Parme|            the Platonic writings, to condemn the Parmenides as spurious.
 204 Parme|          intended, to pass a similar condemnation on the Theaetetus and Sophist,
 205 Parme|          have chosen Parmenides, the condemner of the ‘undiscerning tribe
 206 Parme|            we know is subject to the conditions of human thought. To the
 207 Parme|              this last to speak with confidence about it. It would be safer
 208 Parme|            the One and Many is there confined to the region of Ideas,
 209 Parme|               better opinion, better confirmation,’ not merely as the inspirations
 210 Parme|       teaching of Socrates came into conflict with the metaphysical theories
 211 Parme|             or sequence is apt to be confounded with external compulsion
 212 Parme|              himself, have tended to confuse ancient with modern philosophy.
 213 Parme|           these uses of the word are confusing, because they introduce
 214 Parme|           from this and many similar confusions? We see again that a long
 215 Parme|              modes of conceiving the connection. Things are little by partaking
 216 Parme|            the thread by which Plato connects the two parts of the dialogue.~
 217 Parme|             must be gifted with very considerable ability before he can learn
 218 Parme|              urged against them? The consideration of this difficulty has led
 219 Parme|           and others?—consider.~I am considering.~The one was shown to be
 220 Parme|          first, that such a visit is consistent with dates, and may possibly
 221 Parme|        perhaps the motion of the one consists in change of place?~Perhaps
 222 Parme|           the Platonic Ideas were in constant process of growth and transmutation;
 223 Parme|            parts or others, and also contemporaneous with them, for no part can
 224 Parme|               last of all the whole, contemporaneously with the end, being therefore
 225 Parme|           other times with a sort of contempt. But there is no lengthened
 226 Parme|           came into being later must continually differ from each other by
 227 Parme|              one?~It must.~And if we continue to look at the other side
 228 Parme|          from representing to us the continuity or the complexity of nature
 229 Parme|              the one itself does not contradict its own nature, it will
 230 Parme|           Yet this sameness is again contradicted by one being in another
 231 Parme|          arranged in classes is also contrasted with the barren abstraction
 232 Parme|           two celebrated theological controversies appear to hinge, which would
 233 Parme|          perhaps, given rise to more controversy in the world than any other.
 234 Parme|              we retain the word as a convenient generalization, though not
 235 Parme|              dictum simpliciter’ and conversely: (5) The analogy of opposites
 236 Parme|            of any subject; they also converted the idea of Being into an
 237 Parme|            please ourselves with the conviction that we are resting on facts.
 238 Parme|            will be very difficult to convince; a man must be gifted with
 239 Parme|              he gives proofs no less convincing that the many are nought.
 240 Parme|              of Plato have been more copiously illustrated, both in ancient
 241 Parme|               but some one stole the copy; and therefore I had no
 242 Parme|            solution.~If this view is correct, the real aim of the hypotheses
 243 Parme|              and quality, and having corrected the error which is involved
 244 Parme|            in the veteran Parmenides correcting the youthful Socrates. Two
 245 Parme|         beginning of philosophy this correction of human ideas was even
 246 Parme|              Him we return, but with corrections. He is a person, but not
 247 Parme|             follows: (1) Compound or correlative ideas which involve each
 248 Parme|         master in the abstract; this correspondence of ideas, however, has nothing
 249 Parme|            knowledge in the same way corresponds to absolute truth and being,
 250 Parme|        driven from his position by a counter illustration of Parmenides,
 251 Parme|       existence of the many, and the counter-argument of what follows from the
 252 Parme|        receives the strangers like a courteous gentleman, he is impatient
 253 Parme|             you say that each man is covered by the whole sail, or by
 254 Parme|    themselves and the one appears to create a new element in them which
 255 Parme|              which he himself having created is unable to connect in
 256 Parme|             and from all other human creatures, or of fire and water?~I
 257 Parme|         within them, can we have any criterion of a truth beyond and independent
 258 Parme|          difficulty has led a recent critic (Ueberweg), who in general
 259 Parme|           Eleatic stranger expressly criticises the doctrines in which he
 260 Parme|            as a matter of fact, have criticized the ideas of Plato without
 261 Parme|             Parmenides of Plato is a critique, first, of the Platonic
 262 Parme|            could stand the searching cross-examination of Parmenides; and may at
 263 Parme|          lived; and the Megarian and Cynic philosophy was a ‘reductio
 264 Parme|              most comprehensive, the danger of error is the most serious;
 265 Parme|             visit is consistent with dates, and may possibly have occurred;
 266 Parme|         bringing together by a ‘tour de force,’ as in the Phaedrus,
 267 Parme|            us away from God; a great deal brings us back to Him.’
 268 Parme|       retirement to Megara after the death of Socrates. For Megara
 269 Parme|             is in itself it would be debarred from touching them, and
 270 Parme|            and makes us aware of the debt which the world owes to
 271 Parme|             any serious intention of deceiving the world. The truth is,
 272 Parme|              complex dilemma, though declared to be capable of universal
 273 Parme|          that Parmenides affected to decline the great argument, on which,
 274 Parme|              have struck their roots deep into the soil, and are always
 275 Parme|         ourselves or of another, but deeply rooted in history and in
 276 Parme|            the dialogue is in no way defective in ease and grace and dramatic
 277 Parme|            makes one more attempt to defend the Platonic Ideas by representing
 278 Parme|        arranging them? These are the deficiencies which Plato is seeking to
 279 Parme|           Aristotle, and also by the degeneracy of his own followers, with
 280 Parme|        another and smiled in seeming delight and admiration of Socrates. ‘
 281 Parme|          process; the inventor of it delights, as mathematicians do, in
 282 Parme|           two sorts of ‘Idols of the Den’: first, his own Ideas,
 283 Parme|         thought as in speech, we are dependent on the past. We know that
 284 Parme|            described. He is the sole depositary of the famous dialogue;
 285 Parme|              and to have a ‘glorious depth of mind’? (Theaet.). It
 286 Parme|           style of Lysias, or as the derivations in the Cratylus or the fallacies
 287 Parme|         partake, and from which they derive their names; that similars,
 288 Parme|             The first of these views derives support from the manner
 289 Parme|            was ‘a very good word’ to describe the simplest generalization
 290 Parme|             again, he may perhaps be describing the process which his own
 291 Parme|          Plato verifies the previous description of him. After a little persuasion
 292 Parme|             criticism are especially deserving of notice. First of all,
 293 Parme|              other dialogue, and the design of the writer is not expressly
 294 Parme|        processes which a later logic designates by the terms ‘abstraction’
 295 Parme|            cannot compare the two in detail. But Plato also goes beyond
 296 Parme|         individual thing has its own determinate idea which is always one
 297 Parme|            another, their essence is determined by a relation among themselves,
 298 Parme|        placed on the circumstance as determining the date of Parmenides and
 299 Parme|          other mode of participation devised?~It would seem so.~Do you
 300 Parme|           grandfather Antiphon he is devoted to horses. But, if that
 301 Parme|           been inspired by a sort of dialectical frenzy, such as may be supposed
 302 Parme|       residuum of this long piece of dialectics. But to the mind of Parmenides
 303 Parme|           argument often proceeds ‘a dicto secundum quid ad dictum
 304 Parme|             a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter’ and conversely: (
 305 Parme|             Ideas are mere numerical differences, and the moment we attempt
 306 Parme|         recognize that thought, like digestion, will go on much the same,
 307 Parme|             place here. But, without digressing further from the immediate
 308 Parme|           Zeno, and that the complex dilemma, though declared to be capable
 309 Parme|             or equal it must grow or diminish or be equalized?~True.~And
 310 Parme|           difference between them is diminished. In this way that which
 311 Parme|             always going in opposite directions they become in ways the
 312 Parme|            such things as hair, mud, dirt, or anything else which
 313 Parme|         being; so that one is always disappearing, and becoming two.~Certainly.~
 314 Parme|          true nature of Not-being is discovered and made the basis of the
 315 Parme|   mathematicians do, in eliciting or discovering an unexpected result. It
 316 Parme|            remarkable will he be who discovers all these things for himself,
 317 Parme|          continuous and sometimes as discrete: (10) In some parts of the
 318 Parme|             be found ready enough to disown their obligations to the
 319 Parme|              Yet none of them can be dispensed with; we can only be on
 320 Parme|           feelings of admiration and displeasure. He was going out of the
 321 Parme|             now shown the hereditary disposition for horses, is very naturally
 322 Parme|              existence of the one by disproving the existence of the many,
 323 Parme|         words and things. The famous dispute between Nominalists and
 324 Parme|              symbols of one class of disputes; as the words substance,
 325 Parme|              How, while mankind were disputing about universals, could
 326 Parme|          force,’ as in the Phaedrus, dissimilar themes, yet he always in
 327 Parme|              must be assimilated and dissimilated?~Yes.~And when it becomes
 328 Parme|          stop to inquire whether the distinctions which he makes are shadowy
 329 Parme|     temperance, and good, are really distinguishable only with reference to their
 330 Parme|           undefined terms which have distracted the human mind for ages.
 331 Parme|             although I sometimes get disturbed, and begin to think that
 332 Parme|             as a sort of ‘critics or diviners’ of the truth of his own,
 333 Parme|             concealed from us by the dogmatic statements of Aristotle,
 334 Parme|              to be an irreverence in doing so. About the Divine Being
 335 Parme|        sphere of mathematics, may be doubted. That Plato and the most
 336 Parme|              much illustrated by the doubtful tradition of his retirement
 337 Parme|      defective in ease and grace and dramatic interest; nor in the second
 338 Parme|         evanesces into many, as in a dream, and from being the smallest
 339 Parme|          perfectly understands their drift, and Zeno himself is supposed
 340 Parme|             places; but he is easily driven from his position by a counter
 341 Parme|            unity, nor plurality, nor duality, nor any other number, nor
 342 Parme|              go and look for him; he dwells at Melita, which is quite
 343 Parme|            is in no way defective in ease and grace and dramatic interest;
 344 Parme|          mentioned?’ ‘That is not an easy question to answer.’ ‘I
 345 Parme|              or brought to them—some echo or anticipation of a great
 346 Parme|              In the last century the educated world were astonished to
 347 Parme|        partly by development of the ‘ego,’ he never inquires—they
 348 Parme|          Socrates, can easily invent Egyptian tales or anything else,’
 349 Parme|              been present, oios aner ei kai nun paren, he might
 350 Parme|    predicated of it?~Yes.~But to be (einai) is only participation of
 351 Parme|              would have furnished so elaborate an example, not of his own
 352 Parme|           mere abstraction, and then elevated into a real power or entity,
 353 Parme|              argument is intended to elicit a similar absurdity, which
 354 Parme|           the contradiction which is elicited out of the relative terms
 355 Parme|             as mathematicians do, in eliciting or discovering an unexpected
 356      | elsewhere
 357 Parme|            and mythology, then again emerging as fixed Ideas, in some
 358 Parme|              or forms which the mind employs, we cannot further criticize
 359 Parme|       metaphysical imagination which enabled Plato to go beyond himself.
 360 Parme|       whether in another which would encircle and touch the one at many
 361 Parme|              in another, it would be encircled by that in which it was,
 362 Parme|             of phenomena.~We may now endeavour to thread the mazes of the
 363 Parme|           dialogues he is constantly engaged both with the theory and
 364      | enough
 365 Parme|            any theories which may be entertained respecting the nature of
 366 Parme|           day before yesterday. Your enthusiasm is a wonderful gift; but
 367 Parme|        elevated into a real power or entity, almost taking the place
 368 Parme|    Aristoteles and the whole company entreated Parmenides to give an example
 369 Parme|          must grow or diminish or be equalized?~True.~And when being in
 370 Parme|            than it was at first; for equals added to unequals, whether
 371 Parme|            is carried on against the Eristics in all the later dialogues,
 372 Parme|              found in Plato (compare Essay on the Platonic Ideas in
 373 Parme|            the existence of absolute essences, will admit that they cannot
 374 Parme|    difficulty here thrown out is the establishment of a rational psychology;
 375 Parme|             regarded as absolute and eternal, and in others as relative
 376 Parme|         other, this very word other (eteron), which is attributed to
 377 Parme|            the Socratic universal of ethics to the whole of nature.~
 378 Parme|              seemed one, in a moment evanesces into many, as in a dream,
 379      | everywhere
 380 Parme|       discussion of these matters as evident, and consider again upon
 381 Parme|              opposed as the good and evil principle of the Persians.~
 382 Parme|          words, such as development, evolution, law, and the like, are
 383 Parme|              calculus of thought. It exaggerates one side of logic and forgets
 384 Parme|           accepted without any rigid examination of its meaning, as if the
 385 Parme|           and Philebus, and of which examples are given in the Politicus
 386 Parme|            or smallness any power of exceeding or being exceeded in relation
 387 Parme|          writing of equal length and excellence is known to be spurious.
 388 Parme|               and of this you adduce excellent proofs; and he on the other
 389 Parme|           Plato’s writings, with the exception of the Meno, the Phaedrus,
 390 Parme|           But the same and the other exclude one another, and therefore
 391 Parme|             as one, in a sense which excludes all predicates. When the
 392 Parme|             any effort of thought or exertion of faith be in and out of
 393 Parme|              Not-being are no longer exhibited in opposition, but are now
 394 Parme|          non-existence, would become existent. For not being implies the
 395 Parme|     proposition, from which we might expect that no further consequences
 396 Parme|        dialogue. He then proceeds to explain to him the sort of mental
 397 Parme|        greatness to a sail. He truly explains to Socrates that he has
 398 Parme|        literature. It seems to be an exposition or rather a ‘reductio ad
 399 Parme|     precision. The latter half is an exquisite mosaic, of which the small
 400 Parme|              are hardly aware of the extent of the task which you are
 401 Parme|     transition involves the singular extra-temporal conception of ‘suddenness.’
 402 Parme|         wonder; but there is nothing extraordinary, Zeno, in showing that the
 403 Parme|             is that of which all the extreme points are equidistant from
 404 Parme|              parts is at first sight extremely obscure; and in the latter
 405 Parme|            real criticism, but as an exuberance of the metaphysical imagination
 406 Parme|    astonished to find that the whole fabric of their ideas was falling
 407 Parme|              is limited by the human faculties. We cannot by any effort
 408 Parme|            in another way, and would fain make believe that he is
 409 Parme|               Indeed, there are very faint traces of the transcendental
 410 Parme|            40 years of age, tall and fair to look upon; in the days
 411 Parme|       because I am afraid that I may fall into a bottomless pit of
 412 Parme|     metaphysician, any more than the fallacy of ‘calvus’ or ‘acervus,’
 413 Parme|              reasoned much, and have fancied that they instinctively
 414 Parme|              sceptical, hyperlogical fancies which prevailed among the
 415 Parme|              objection is in reality fanciful, and rests on the assumption
 416 Parme|            was a power in them which fascinated the Neoplatonists for centuries
 417 Parme|             of all philosophies were fathered upon the founder of the
 418 Parme|             white with age, but well favoured. Zeno was nearly 40 years
 419 Parme|             different meanings this ‘feast’ of contradictions ‘has
 420 Parme|           the Socratic dialectic. He felt no incongruity in the veteran
 421 Parme|         places at once. It is a mere fiction; and we may observe that
 422 Parme|            numbers or of geometrical figures.~The argument is a very
 423 Parme|           pieces are with the utmost fineness and regularity adapted to
 424 Parme|              with reference to their fitness as instruments of thought
 425 Parme|           said Parmenides, if a man, fixing his attention on these and
 426 Parme|             supposed difficulty by a flash of light, which is indeed
 427 Parme|              demonstration, all that flows from them is affected, and
 428 Parme|            the degeneracy of his own followers, with whom a doctrine of
 429 Parme|      expressed their feelings in the following words:—~Socrates, he said,
 430 Parme|         divided the two spheres, and forbidden any passing from one to
 431 Parme|             of thought must first be forged, that they may be used hereafter
 432 Parme|    exaggerates one side of logic and forgets the rest. It has the appearance
 433      | forty
 434 Parme|       proceeding he must examine the foundations which he and others have
 435 Parme|           For the Parmenides is more fragmentary and isolated than any other
 436 Parme|       existence any more than we can frame a new universal language;
 437 Parme|              being one perfect unity framed out of all—of this the part
 438 Parme|             by a sort of dialectical frenzy, such as may be supposed
 439 Parme|             not only one with you in friendship but your second self in
 440 Parme|         right and a left side, and a front and a back, and an upper
 441 Parme|       pursuing the track, you do not fully apprehend the true motive
 442 Parme|    Parmenides against those who make fun of him and seek to show
 443 Parme|          smallness thus performs the function of equality or of greatness,
 444 Parme|            your treatise intended to furnish a separate proof of this,
 445 Parme|            fact of their being parts furnishes the others with a limit
 446 Parme|         carried our criticism to the furthest point, they still remain,
 447 Parme|          must attempt this laborious game, what shall be the subject?
 448 Parme|             argument; but still they gave the closest attention, and
 449 Parme|              the good, and the ideas generally, without sufficient previous
 450 Parme|     universals is illustrated by his genius; in the Phaedrus the nature
 451 Parme|           strangers like a courteous gentleman, he is impatient of the
 452 Parme|           not?) when in becoming, it gets to the point of time between ‘
 453 Parme|            enthusiasm is a wonderful gift; but I fear that unless
 454 Parme|              convince; a man must be gifted with very considerable ability
 455 Parme|         approving smiles. And we are glad to be told that Parmenides
 456 Parme|           and awful,’ and to have a ‘glorious depth of mind’? (Theaet.).
 457 Parme|            of Parmenides and Plato, ‘Gott-betrunkene Menschen,’ there still remained
 458 Parme|            for us as well as for the Greeks of the fourth century before
 459 Parme|            able to answer them, is a groundless assumption. The real progress
 460 Parme|             or less or equal it must grow or diminish or be equalized?~
 461 Parme|               and ‘Being,’ which had grown up in the pre-Socratic philosophy,
 462 Parme|       attributes to his youth. As he grows older, philosophy will take
 463 Parme|          were in constant process of growth and transmutation; sometimes
 464 Parme|          presumptuous to add another guess to the many which have been
 465 Parme|            to him the sort of mental gymnastic which he should practise.
 466 Parme|     Parmenides with another truth or half-truth of later philosophy, ‘Every
 467 Parme|            Kant’s Kritik, and of the Hamiltonian adaptation of Kant, as well
 468 Parme|             that he is going to ‘lay hands on his father Parmenides.’
 469 Parme|             appears.~I shall be very happy to do so.~We say that we
 470 Parme|               the difficulty pressed harder upon the Greek than upon
 471 Parme|           silence of Aristotle to be hastily assumed; there is at least
 472 Parme|            an absolute unity. He who hears what may be said against
 473 Parme|        overstated by those who, like Hegel himself, have tended to
 474 Parme|             Being, appears to be the height of absurdity.~Perhaps there
 475 Parme|             distinction is sometimes heightened into total opposition, e.g.
 476 Parme|             negative of time. By the help of this invention the conception
 477 Parme|           unexpected result. It also helps to guard us against some
 478 Parme|           the school of Cratylus and Heracleitus, may have seen that a contradiction
 479 Parme|    philosophy, but has now shown the hereditary disposition for horses,
 480 Parme|              controversies appear to hinge, which would not have existed,
 481 Parme|              a purely antiquarian or historical interest; and with difficulty
 482 Parme|          mere child when I last came hither from Clazomenae, but that
 483 Parme|              who appeared to him, in Homeric language, to be ‘venerable
 484 Parme|         father, whom he ‘revered and honoured more than all other philosophers
 485 Parme|             class of difficulties as hopeless or insoluble. He says only
 486 Parme|          inferences; but a spell has hung over the minds of theologians
 487 Parme|         indication of the sceptical, hyperlogical fancies which prevailed
 488 Parme|         perhaps impossible method of hypothetical consequences, negative and
 489 Parme|     metaphysics in the common sense (i.e. more a priori assumption)
 490 Parme|     philosophy. He is the founder of idealism, and also of dialectic,
 491 Parme|              is called by the vulgar idle talking, and which is often
 492 Parme|          argument blows’ he follows.~III. The negative series of
 493 Parme|      philosophy, and is due to their illogical logic, and to the general
 494 Parme|           have placed them above the illusion.~The method of the Parmenides
 495 Parme|              Plato has been using an imaginary method to work out an unmeaning
 496 Parme|           and the teacher who has to impart them will require superhuman
 497 Parme|           courteous gentleman, he is impatient of the trouble of reciting
 498 Parme|           The words which we use are imperfect expressions of His true
 499 Parme|           philosophy, but we are too imperfectly acquainted with this last
 500 Parme|           asserted, and is therefore implicitly denied in the Philebus;