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

Aristotle- The Politics Book 1

The Politics is a book dedicated to concepts of state, political communities. Aristotle starts his writing by defining state as a community of communities. All communities  aim for a good. The state is the largest community and embraces the rest. Because of this relationship, it aims at a deeper and larger good. Aristotle debunks the qualifications and conceptions people have for rulers of a certain community (king, statesman, householder, master). The mistake he identifies is people differentiating between rulers by the number of their subjects. Aristotle suggests politics should not be viewed this way but rather as a compound composed of elements. This statement sets the tone for book 1. His mission now is to reveal these elements.  According to Aristotle, looking at the origin will reveal "the clearest view" of the essence of a state. Family is first elements identified. Family is the union of people, starting with that of man and woman, who need each...

Studying the Beginning of Philosophy through the Milesians

Learning about the first philosophers like the Milesians was important to me for understanding the characteristics of the history of philosophy. The school of thought of the Milesians taught that the explanation to their questions and inquiries were found in the principles of matter. The three Milesians Patricia Curd talks about in her book A Presocratics Reader are Thales (the founder), Anaximander (his pupil), Anaximenes (the youngest). It was helpful for me to compare them to understand the nature of the beginnings of philosophy. Previously, it was implied that philosophy surged from the mytho-poetic traditions that inspired the earliest philosophers. Can we say that this is true from Thales, the “founder of philosophy”? The three Milesians knew that the question to all their answers relied on a principle. The principle is differently defined per each philosopher. Thales’ principle is that water is the basic unit of life, the arkhÄ“, the beginning and origin. This sounds like ...

Xenophanes a Reformer?

As we progress on our studies of the Presocratics, I am starting to see a deviation from the traditional thinking of the greeks. Homer presents us with gods who are human like and to some extent mundane, that do the same things as humans. I have a feeling that the Milesians' quest for an arche  based on matter, physical things that are unique and "pure" like the water, air, and infinity, reflects the search for an origin different than the Homeric gods. An origin that is different from the human nature, savage and mundane. According to A Presocratic Reader , Xenophanes rejected the Homeric Olympian gods. Although the book suggests that it is unclear if he agreed on one god or a god superior to all gods, he is the first philosopher to suggest a non-anthropomorfic god. A god that is unique for itself. Was he inspired by Anaximander's principle of the apeiron, that which is the boundless and mystical? I feel the he was indeed, because Anaximander's principle is the...