PARMENIDES.
Character of dialogues immediately preceding--much transcendental
assertion. Opposite character of the Parmenides 56
Sokrates is the juvenile defendant--Parmenides the veteran censor
and cross-examiner. Parmenides gives a specimen of exercises to be
performed by the philosophical aspirant _ib._
Circumstances and persons of the Parmenides 57
Manner in which the doctrine of Parmenides was impugned. Manner in
which his partisan Zeno defended him 58
Sokrates here impugns the doctrine of Zeno. He affirms the
Platonic theory of ideas separate from sensible objects, yet
participable by them 60
Parmenides and Zeno admire the philosophical ardour of Sokrates.
Parmenides advances objections against the Platonic theory of
Ideas 60
What Ideas does Sokrates recognise? Of the Just and Good? Yes. Of
Man, Horse, &c.? Doubtful. Of Hair, Mud, &c.? No _ib._
Parmenides declares that no object in nature is mean to the
philosopher 61
Remarks upon this--Contrast between emotional and scientific
classification _ib._
Objections of Parmenides--How can objects participate in the
Ideas. Each cannot have the whole Idea, nor a part thereof 62
Comparing the Idea with the sensible objects partaking in the
Idea, there is a likeness between them which must be represented
by a higher Idea--and so on _ad infinitum_ 63
Are the Ideas conceptions of the mind, and nothing more?
Impossible 64
The Ideas are types or exemplars, and objects partake of them by
being likened to them. Impossible 65
If Ideas exist, they cannot be knowable by us. We can know only
what is relative to ourselves. Individuals are relative to
individuals: Ideas relative to Ideas _ib._
Forms can be known only through the Form of Cognition, which we do
not possess 66
Form of cognition, superior to our Cognition, belongs to the Gods.
We cannot know them, nor can they know us _ib._
Sum total of objections against the Ideas is grave. But if we do
not admit that Ideas exist, and that they are knowable, there can
be no dialectic discussion 67
Dilemma put by Parmenides--Acuteness of his objections 68
The doctrine which Parmenides attacks is the genuine Platonic
theory of Ideas. His objections are never answered in any part of
the Platonic dialogues _ib._
Views of Stallbaum and Socher. The latter maintains that Plato
would never make such objections against his own theory, and
denies the authenticity of the Parmenidês 69
Philosophers are usually advocates, each of a positive system of
his own 70
Different spirit of Plato in his Dialogues of Search _ib._
The Parmenidês is the extreme manifestation of the negative
element. That Plato should employ one dialogue in setting forth
the negative case against the Theory of Ideas is not unnatural
71
Force of the negative case in the Parmenidês. Difficulties about
participation of sensible objects in the world of Ideas _ib._
Difficulties about the Cognizability of Ideas. If Ideas are
absolute, they cannot be cognizable: if they are cognizable, they
must be relative. Doctrine of Homo Mensura 72
Answer of Sokrates--That Ideas are mere conceptions of the mind.
Objection of Parmenides correct, though undeveloped 73
Meaning of Abstract and General Terms, debated from ancient times
to the present day--Different views of Plato and Aristotle upon it
76
Plato never expected to make his Ideas fit on to the facts of
sense: Aristotle tried to do it and partly succeeded 78
Continuation of the Dialogue--Parmenides admonishes Sokrates that
he has been premature in delivering a doctrine, without sufficient
preliminary exercise 79
What sort of exercise? Parmenides describes: To assume
provisionally both the affirmative and the negative of many
hypotheses about the most general terms, and to trace the
consequences of each _ib._
Impossible to do this before a numerous audience--Parmenides is
entreated to give a specimen--After much solicitation he agrees
80
Parmenides elects his own theory of the _Unum_, as the topic for
exhibition--Aristoteles becomes respondent _ib._
Exhibition of Parmenides--Nine distinct deductions or
Demonstrations, first from _Unum Est_--next from _Unum non Est_
81
The Demonstrations in antagonising pairs, or Antinomies.
Perplexing entanglement of conclusions given without any
explanation _ib._
Different judgments of Platonic critics respecting the Antinomies
and the dialogue generally 82
No dogmatical solution or purpose is wrapped up in the dialogue.
The purpose is negative, to make a theorist keenly feel all the
difficulties of theorising 85
This negative purpose is expressly announced by Plato himself. All
dogmatical purpose, extending farther, is purely hypothetical, and
even inconsistent with what is declared 87
The Demonstrations or Antinomies considered. They include much
unwarranted assumption and subtlety. Collection of unexplained
perplexities or [Greek: a)pori/ai] 88
Even if Plato himself saw through these subtleties, he might still
choose to impose and to heap up difficulties in the way of a
forward affirmative aspirant 89
The exercises exhibited by Parmenides are exhibited only as
illustrative specimens of a method enjoined to be applied to many
other Antinomies 91
These Platonic Antinomies are more formidable than any of the
sophisms or subtleties broached by the Megaric philosophers
_ib._
In order to understand fully the Platonic Antinomies, we ought to
have before us the problems of the Megarics and others.
Uselessness of searching for a positive result 93
Assumptions of Parmenides in his Demonstrations convey the minimum
of determinate meaning. Views of Aristotle upon these
indeterminate predicates, Ens, Unum, &c. 94
In the Platonic Demonstrations the same proposition in words is
made to bear very different meanings 95
First demonstration ends in an assemblage of negative conclusions.
_Reductio ad Absurdum_, of the assumption--Unum non Multa 96
Second Demonstration 97
It ends in demonstrating _Both_, of that which the first
Demonstration had demonstrated _Neither_ 98
Startling paradox--Open offence against logical canon--No logical
canon had then been laid down 99
Demonstration third--Attempt to reconcile the contradiction of
Demonstrations I. and II. 100
Plato's imagination of the Sudden or Instantaneous--Breaches or
momentary stoppages in the course of time _ib._
Review of the successive pairs of Demonstrations or Antinomies in
each, the first proves the Neither, the second proves the Both
101
The third Demonstration is mediatorial but not satisfactory--The
hypothesis of the Sudden or Instantaneous found no favour 102
Review of the two last Antinomies. Demonstrations VI. and VII.
103
Demonstration VII. is founded upon the genuine doctrine of
Parmenides 104
Demonstrations VI. and VII. considered--Unwarrantable steps in the
reasoning--The fundamental premiss differently interpreted, though
the same in words 105
Demonstrations VIII. and IX.--Analysis of Demonstration VIII.
106
Demonstration VIII. is very subtle and Zenonian 107
Demonstration IX. _Neither_ following _Both_ _ib._
Concluding words of the Parmenides--Declaration that he has
demonstrated the Both and the Neither of many different
propositions 108
Comparison of the conclusion of the Parmenides to an enigma of the
Republic. Difference. The constructor of the enigma adapted its
conditions to a foreknown solution. Plato did not _ib._