Skip to main content

The way of the Truth

Parmenides differs from the rest of the pre-socratics previously studied (the Milesians, Xenophanes, Heraclitus and Pythagoras) in that his thought transcend the material into the abstract, asking questions about our existence and reality, essentially a start to the arena of metaphysics. Parmenides  is an example of the way we should elevate our minds into the abstract. It is an invitation to live in a more contemplative way, contemplating using logic and reasoning.

Through his poem and the imagery of roads and paths, he describes our reality as having two ways the way of the Truth and the way of Opinion. The way of the Truth is the road less traveled by regular people, they go for the way of Opinion. The way of Opinion is based on the experiences that we live day to day, what we see right in front of our eyes. The way of the Truth is the one you want to be in to live well. To live in this way you have to understand the concepts of the "what is" and "what is not". The "what is" is essentially what composes the way of the Truth. Parmenides describes it as:  "ungenerated and imperishable, a whole single kind, unshaken, and complete. Nor it is ever, nor will it be, since it is now, all together one, holding together." The "what is not" does not even exist because for the "what is" to be complete nothing else can be except for the "what is". Therefore, it is the way of the Truth that allows you to see everything, reality,  as part of that one, complete, ungenerated Truth, in unity with it.  If you are immersed in the way of Opinion you start seeing the multiplicity of reality, what you are looking at is a manifestation of the physical world, which is a deception of what the Truth really is.

Just as this philosopher influenced Plato and other philosophers, I believe that we should also let him influence us too. In fact, I must say that his ideas are necessary to help us achieve that mental exercise needed to ensure we do not take our lives for granted. The more I get to understand Parmenides the more I think about Christianity, or the nature of God. One day I was asked by my priest, who by the way is really into philosophy, "Does God exist?" I said of course He does. The priest said that it is not that He exists, He is. Now that I have read Parmenides I can say that I support the priest's view. the "it" of Parmenides is all and was not generated. By saying that God exists we are saying that He did not exists at some point. Therefore I can see how by thinking of the "it" and its characteristics can lead us to the way of the Truth.

Below Parmenides as depicted by Sanzio in "The School of Athens" looking over Pythagoras on the left.

Comments

  1. You not only seem to have a really strong grasp on Parmenides, but you do an excellent job of relating Parmenides view of the One to the Judaeo -Christian view of God!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What we value, truth or knowledge?

Last time I ended class with this thought: Xenophanes changed the Homeric views on god. It helps us question if religions define god for what it truly is. With the progression of their theories, I see the Milesians and Xenophanes and think that maybe the mind needs to be constantly evolving to get closer to the truth. Reading Pythagoras made me think about the relationship between truth and knowledge. Curd shows us a fragment were Plato makes a parallel between Homer and Pythagoras. They look alike in the fact that they both had people that followed them. The major distinction is Pythagoras striving for knowledge, his followers the mathematikoi and akousmatikoi both looking to gain knowledge in what they each venerated, while Homer convinced his followers by   his stories that reflected some of the truth about their society.   Curd mentions this fragment “Much learning does not teach insight. Otherwise it would have taught Hesiod and Pythagoras and moreover Xenphane...

What is teachable?- 1st Protagoras dialogue

This blog is inspired by Socrates questioning if wisdom of word can be taught, in other words if being a good citizen can be taught? We find this in his first dialogue with Protagoras, the sophist. Socrates first critiques Hippocrates for wanting to pay money to Protagoras to teach him how to become better. He then confronts Portagoras himself and asks him why he is teaching the not teachable.  For socrates the non teachable is something that can't "be imparted from one human being to another" (Plato, Prot. 319b). For him it is clear that knowledge is not something to purchase. Protagoras' reason for teaching wisdom, specifically the art of politics which requires reason, is because human beings were not made with this type of talent when the gods were making them, they ran out of talents for human beings and had to borrow from the gods, so they borrowed from Athena and Hephaestus wisdom of the practical arts.  Human beings were being killed by wild animals because ...