按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
370 BC
PARMENIDES
by Plato
translated by Benjamin Jowett
PARMENIDES
PERSONS OF THE DIALOGUE： CEPHALUS； ADEIMANTUS； GLAUCON； ANTIPHON；
PYTHODORUS； SOCRATES； ZENO； PARMENIDES； ARISTOTELES。 Cephalus
rehearses a dialogue which is supposed to have been narrated in his
presence by Antiphon； the half…brother of Adeimantus and Glaucon； to
certain Clazomenians。
We had come from our home at Clazomenae to Athens； and met
Adeimantus and Glaucon in the Agora。 Welcome； Cephalus； said
Adeimantus； taking me by the hand； is there anything which we can do
for you in Athens？
Yes； that is why I am here； I wish to ask a favour of you。
What may that be？ he said。
I want you to tell me the name of your half brother； which I have
forgotten； he was a mere child when I last came hither from
Clazomenae； but that was a long time ago； his father's name； if I
remember rightly； was Pyrilampes？
Yes； he said； and the name of our brother； Antiphon； but why do
you ask？
Let me introduce some countrymen of mine； I said； they are lovers of
philosophy； and have heard that Antiphon was intimate with a certain
Pythodorus； a friend of Zeno； and remembers a conversation which
took place between Socrates； Zeno； and Parmenides many years ago；
Pythodorus having often recited it to him。
Quite true。
And could we hear it？ I asked。
Nothing easier； he replied； when he was a youth he made a careful
study of the piece； at present his thoughts run in another
direction； like his grandfather Antiphon he is devoted to horses。 But；
if that is what you want； let us go and look for him； he dwells at
Melita； which is quite near； and he has only just left us to go home。
Accordingly we went to look for him； he was at home； and in the
act of giving a bridle to a smith to be fitted。 When he had done
with the smith； his brothers told him the purpose of our visit； and he
saluted me as an acquaintance whom he remembered from my former visit；
and we asked him to repeat the dialogue。 At first he was not very
willing； and complained of the trouble； but at length he consented。 He
told us that Pythodorus had described to him the appearance of
Parmenides and Zeno； they came to Athens； as he said； at the great
Panathenaea； the former was； at the time of his visit； about 65
years old； very white with age； but well favoured。 Zeno was nearly
40 years of age； tall and fair to look upon； in the days of his
youth he was reported to have been beloved by Parmenides。 He said that
they lodged with Pythodorus in the Ceramicus； outside the wall；
whither Socrates； then a very young man； came to see them； and many
others with him； they wanted to hear the writings of Zeno； which had
been brought to Athens for the first time on the occasion of their
visit。 These Zeno himself read to them in the absence of Parmenides；
and had very nearly finished when Pythodorus entered； and with him
Parmenides and Aristoteles who was afterwards one of the Thirty； and
heard the little that remained of the dialogue。 Pythodorus had heard
Zeno repeat them before。
When the recitation was completed； Socrates requested that the first
thesis of the first argument might be read over again； and this having
been done； he said： What is your meaning； Zeno？ Do you maintain that
if being is many； it must be both like and unlike； and that this is
impossible； for neither can the like be unlike； nor the unlike like…is
that your position？
Just so； said Zeno。
And if the unlike cannot be like； or the like unlike； then according
to you； being could not be many； for this would involve an
impossibility。 In all that you say have you any other purpose except
to disprove the being of the many？ and is not each division of your
treatise intended to furnish a separate proof of this； there being
in all as many proofs of the not…being of the many as you have
composed arguments？ Is that your meaning； or have I misunderstood you？
No； said Zeno； you have correctly understood my general purpose。
I see； Parmenides； said Socrates； that Zeno would like to be not
only one with you in friendship but your second self in his writings
too； he puts what you say in another way； and would fain make
believe that he is telling us something which is new。 For you； in your
poems； say The All is one； and of this you adduce excellent proofs；
and he on the other hand says There is no many； and on behalf of
this he offers overwhelming evidence。 You affirm unity； he denies
plurality。 And so you deceive the world into believing that you are
saying different things when really you are saying much the same。 This
is a strain of art beyond the reach of most of us。
Yes； Socrates； said Zeno。 But although you are as keen as a
Spartan hound in pursuing the track； you do not fully apprehend the
true motive of the composition； which is not really such an artificial
work as you imagine； for what you speak of was an accident； there
was no pretence of a great purpose； nor any serious intention of
deceiving the world。 The truth is； that these writings of mine were
meant to protect the arguments of Parmenides against those who make
fun of him and seek to show the many ridiculous and contradictory
results which they suppose to follow from the affirmation of the
one。 My answer is addressed to the partisans of the many； whose attack
I return with interest by retorting upon them that their hypothesis of
the being of many； if carried out； appears to be still more ridiculous
than the hypothesis of the being of one。 Zeal for my master led me
to write the book in the days of my youth； but some one stole the
copy； and therefore I had no choice whether it should be published
or not； the motive； however； of writing； was not the ambition of an
elder man； but the pugnacity of a young one。 This you do not seem to
see； Socrates； though in other respects； as I was saying； your
notion is a very just one。
I understand； said Socrates； and quite accept your account。 But tell
me； Zeno； do you not further think that there is an idea of likeness
in itself； and another idea of unlikeness； which is the opposite of
likeness； and that in these two； you and I and all other things to
which we apply the term many； participate…things which participate
in likeness become in that degree and manner like； and so far as
they participate in unlikeness become in that degree unlike； or both
like and unlike in the degree in which they participate in both？ And
may not all things partake of both opposites； and be both like and
unlike； by reason of this participation？…Where is the wonder？ Now if a
person could prove the absolute like to become unlike； or the absolute
unlike to become like； that； in my opinion； would indeed be a
wonder； but there is nothing extraordinary； Zeno； in showing that
the things which only partake of likeness and unlikeness experience
both。 Nor； again； if a person were to show that all is one by
partaking of one； and at the same time many by partaking of many；
would that be very astonishing。 But if he were to show me that the
absolute one was many； or the absolute many one； I should be truly
amazed。 And so of all the rest： I should be surprised to hear that the
natures or ideas themselves had these opposite qualities； but not if a
person wanted to prove of me that I was many and also one。 When he
wanted to show that I was many he would say that I have a right and
a left side； and a front and a back； and an upper and a lower half；
for I cannot deny that I partake of multitude； when； on the other
hand； he wants to prove that I am one； he will say； that we who are
here assembled are seven； and that I am one and partake of the one。 In
both instances he proves his case。 So again； if a person shows that
such things as wood； stones； and the like； being many are also one； we
admit that he shows the coexistence the one and many； but he does
not show that the many are one or the one many； he is uttering not a
paradox but a truism。 If however； as I just now suggested； some one
were to abstract simple notions of like； unlike； one； many； rest；
motion； and similar ideas； and then to show that these admit of
admixture and separation in themselves； I should be very much
astonished。 This part of the argument appears to be treated by you；
Zeno； in a very spirited manner； but； as I was saying； I should be far
more amazed if any one found in the ideas themselves which are
apprehended by reason； the same puzzle and entanglement which you have
shown to exist in visible objects。
While Socr