New Web Site

I have updated my website http://www.spconger.com. I hope you enjoy

The Ways that Can Be Known

After the goddess greets Parmenides, she tells him there are only two paths that are available for questioning: either things are and are not for non being, or things are not, and of necessity must not be. In other words, things either have being or they don't, either being or nothingness. Of the two, she says, only the first is truly thinkable. The second path has no report. There is nothing that can be really said about nothing.

The first path is persuasive, because it attends upon alethea, Heidegger's favorite word. Coxon translates it as "reality." If there is a fault with Coxon's excellent translation, it is that he has a tendency to too easily gloss ancient words into modern concepts. Heidegger's attempts to "think the Greek in the Greek way" may go to torturous extremes, but it would reassuring to see Coxon wrestle a bit more with the ancient terms. The Greek philosophers were at the beginning, struggling to find a language for their new concepts. To translate them into modern philosophical concepts ignores the struggle and loses some of the dynamism of their attempts.

Alethea, truth, is the unconcealed, the remembered, that which has opened itself to presence. As such, it cannot possibly be nothing. Only something can be, and to be it must be something.

That said, though, a few words about nothing. We cannot, in fact, imagine nothingness. Nothingness has no properties. Imagine a cave with no light. There is a stalagtite dripping into a black pool. Ripples run from the drop to the edges of the pool. Despite the lack of light, you image the shape of the stalagmite, the black pearl of a drop. The ripples have a slight gleam on the crest. Try harder. Even if you concentrate very hard, you will still be left with your own mind hovering over the darkness, like God over the waters. Even the empty space of the physist is not empty. It is a sea of overlapping waves of energy generating a random foam of particles and anti particles that bust into being and then are annihilated. 

Yet nothingness haunts us. The idea of not existing is the source of our deepest anxieties. We cannot truly imagine a world without us. Even when we try we imagine ourselves observing a world without us.

The goddess in Parmenides' poem is correct, that pursuing nothingness will give you nothing in return. Yet, I think, as the Buddhists have long known, there are spiritual aspects and benefits in meditating on nothingness, even if it is not something we can ever fully grasp.

Talking About Being

For the most part, it is wrong to think that a particular word has a given meaning. Dictionaries tend to perpetuate this myth, though if you look you will notice, even there, a word constitutes a cluster of associated meanings. 

Take even the simplest word like "dog." We say things like: "collies are my favorite breed of dog," "it was a dog of a day," "I am dog tired," "he was a good dog," " I worked like a dog today,"  "you're nothing but a hound dog," "don't dog me," etc.. All these phrases relate to some, essentially undefined, dogness. (One shouldn't forget, by the way, that though seemingly simple, dog is an extremely abstract word. It includes at least hundreds of breeds and billions of individuals under it single syllable designation.)

I came across this argument in Heidegger's lectures on Aristotle's Metaphysics where he (Heidegger) is discussing Aristotle's statement that being can be spoken of in many ways. He compares it to Aristotle,s dismissal of Plato's idea of "the Good." He (Aristotle) says that the good can be spoken of in many ways, but that does not imply that there is some absolute idea of the good that has a separate existence on some ideal plane. Rather, the good exists as a cluster of analogous meanings that cannot be reduced to a single meaning.

A similar argument holds for being.

An interesting aside: this is essentially the whole technique of Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigation. He asserts that philosophers are too often mislead by taking abstract words as realities. He looks at how words really work, by looking at how we actually use words, not as meaning something, but as analogous to some cluster of related meanings.

Parmenedes comes into Heidegger's discussion of Aristotle because Heidegger asserts that Aristotle is reaffirming Parmenides against Plato, asserting, in fact, that being is one, though we speak of it in many ways. We cannot give it precise definition, but it is the commonality behind every statement of existence. 

This would imply that Being can only be approached by analogy, through individual beings. 

But that is the subject of Being and Time, and I am going to continue focus on Parmenides for the time being, so to speak.

What the Prologue Might Mean

In ancient times, the prologue was treated allegorically. Each detail was assigned someprecise allegorical   significance. But, while Parmenides might have had some allegorical intent, I don't think that was his primary thrust. Mostly, I think the prologue served to provide divine sanction for his philosophical vision and to place his philosophical insight outside the "common abidence of mankind." (Heidegger, or at least his translator's phrase.) (it might be worth taking a look at Lucretius' prologue to Venus as a direct imitation of Parmenedes)

There are elements of note:

The verb in the first line is present tense. "The mares carry me. . ." The journey is not something that happened in the past, it is something that continues. (This could also play into the statement later that being is timeless, an eternal present.)

Moving through the gates of night and day places him in the fiery realm, which the physics part of the poem says surrounds all.  In general though, his physics is the least interesting part of the poem. 

There may be some significance in the idea that the daughters of Helios steer the chariot. It may also be important the the goddess justice guards the gate. What that importance might be, though, is unclear to me.

I think one of the goddess' final statements in the prologue is significant--at least for how I understand the philosophy here. She says it is necessary for P to learn all things through asking. She says she will tell him the truth (alethea) but also the common opinion of men and, this is the significant part, why it is necessary that men believe as they do. The mistaken beliefs of men are necessary--not simply ignorance.  

I will talk about this more later, but I think it helps explain why, after describing being as one, unchanging and timeless, he goes on to provide a sort of theogany that describes the origins and nature of things. It is because these beliefs are necessary for men. It is how they must believe to operate in the world.

 

The Prologue

So here is the prologue to Parmenides poem. It was written in hexameters in imitation of Homeric verse, but, after working through the Greek and Coxon's notes carefully, I have rendered it into Dante's terza rima. Why? Just because:

the mares that carry me bore me
as far as my hopes had ever aspired
they had taken me and set me
on the goddess’ path ​inspired
by innumerable discussions​     on this way
they bear me through all stages   ​​untired
to meet her face to face​​     a man who can say
he is a man of knowledge    ​in this way I
was carried   ​the clever mares  ​they
strain at the chariot steered by
maidens     ​the axel burning and singing
like pipes within the center eye
of the silver inlayed wheels​    straining
whenever the daughters of the sun
urged them to carry me​​     having
pulled back the scarves they wore on
their heads as they left the house of night
for that of light​​     between the sun
and the night​    between dark and light
stands a gate   ​a great lintel stone
seals both top and bottom​    tight
against the architrave where it shone
in the fiery realms​    the keys
which punishing justice holds    ​alone
allows the opening of these
two gates​   the maidens persuaded her
with soft words to please
push aside the locking bars
briefly     which were bound
to the gates with pegs and poles and were
designed to turn in their sockets around
the poles opening the gateway there
so the maidens having found
the way clear drove the chariot and mares
straight through the gates and along the road
and the goddess greeted me there
taking my hand in hers and told
me the following​      young man
you have arrived at our abode
in the company of deathless charioteers and
horses​​     no ill fate sent you to travel
on this path which leads to a land
far removed from the usual
places trod by man​     you must
learn everything by asking​    the dual
paths ​      both the persuasive thrust
of truth with its untrembling heart
and the beliefs of mortals which you cannot trust
but you will also learn at the start
how it is necessary that those
things men believe to be should be a part
of the general belief that goes
through all things to the end
​​

An Aside on Purpose

Although I realize I have few if any readers, never-the-less, I think I should note that this discussion has more than academic interest to me. I try to read those things that help me find some meaning in and understanding of my existence. I do not believe that we are given meaning through some external agent, some god. I believe life has an intrinsic value, because given the cold calculus of the universe and the vagaries of evolution, every individual existence is miraculous. But, beyond the simple fact of existence, I believe it is up to each of us to give our life meaning. I read books that help me find that meaning. I am not attracted to easy answers or sentimental self affirmations. I want something that looks at the whole of life and death without glossing over the uncomfortable aspects.

That being said, I have to admit that I also like tomes. I like big books that purport to hold the whole world between their covers. I like fragments in other languages, especially Ancient Greek, that can be teased for meaning, little cryptic riddles that can yield surprising images or insights. I like the scholarly, the difficult, the obscure. On the negative side, I think it gives me a slight sense of power, like some magus possessing a secret, hard to acquire knowledge. It boosts my ego. All my life I was praised for being smart. Tomes and fragments reinforce that former praise. If I can read this stuff, I must be smart. 

But I also know, I am not that smart. I am no scholar. My main insights are more emotional than intellectual, and the primary output from my reading Parmenides is a series of poems inspired by the emotions and images evoked by the process. Ultimately, it is in my poetry that I find meaning.

Still, one of the things I have learned over my 58 odd years is that one must at least entertain one's self. Working through the Greek of Parmenides' poem and writing my poems in response entertains me. 

The argument

Parmenides' poem starts with a prologue in which he is transported beyond the gates of day and night in a chariot drawn by immortal horses steered by the daughters of the sun. As Heidegger puts it, "far beyond the usual abidence of man" he is greeted by a goddess who reveals to him the truth.

She tells him there are only two ways that can be thought: either being is, or being is not. She then warns against the path of not being. How can you say that nothing is? That way leads only to paradox and confusion. The other, and correct path, is that being is. She then defines some of these properties. Being is one, because how could it be differentiated from itself. Being is whole. It has no beginning and no end. Time is an illusion. This is the gist, though the meat is in the details which I will talk about in later posts.

The final, and probably longest part, of the poem was a discussion of the common understanding of nature with its comings and goings. There is not much of this section left. But in the existing fragments he discusses the fiery essence of the universe, it's various realms, and even how progeny inherit from their parents.

Many have noted the contradictions between the elements. The prologue involves movement and a normal sense of time.  How is that possible given the changeless nature of being? And why do the third part in which the goddess imparts the common understanding of those who do not understand the true nature of being? If being I some and unchanging how can the discussion, or anything for that matter, progress or change?

I think it is actually possible to reconcile these contradictions, and actually find something of more than academic value here.