Plato’s Parmenides

Arguably, no other philosophical treatise has had quite the capacity of the Parmenides to make its reader feel so hopelessly lost, confused, and, indeed, witless. The work is avoided, and at times feared, by even the most seasoned among scholars. Nonetheless, as shown by Douglas Hedley’s Foreword to this present translation, the Parmenides is one of the most influential works on record, its significance reaching far beyond the austere halls of philosophical inquiry. The catechismal structure, together with some of its debatable conclusions, has found its way into a variety of theologies. Viewed by many as a rigorous dialectical exercise it has become a model for similar subsequent efforts in some ways heralding the so-called scientific approach. Its themes have become timeless, preoccupying generations of thinkers; topics such as the One and Many problem, or the proper understanding of Being, or the nature of abstracts versus physical things, or what the prerequisites are for something to be known or understood.

The biggest riddle of the Parmenides is how to make sense of it from a modern perspective. Is it a methodological exercise? A model of self-criticism and retrospection? A profound metaphysical exploration of mystical proportions, even “the greatest work of art in philosophy”? Or something else altogether—a riddle without answer, a practical joke even, played by Plato on his students? A satirical jab at philosophical argumentation gone mad? In the past two centuries, all of these positions have been argued for by scholars, adding to the difficulty of making sense of the work. Such disagreements appear strange from the point of view of antiquity. The Parmenides dialogue was not judged by the old commentators as being somehow outside of Plato’s body of work, and least of all was it considered to be antagonistic to one of his main teachings, the Theory of Forms.

Considering the profundity and timelessness of its themes, it is safe to say that the Parmenides represents a significant, unparalleled contribution to general philosophy and an equally significant landmark in Plato’s overall approach.

—From Plato’s Parmenides, Introduction, pp. 3–6

“We know from Parmenides’ life, that he stood in high respect with his fellow-citizens at Elea, whose prosperity must be chiefly ascribed to the laws which Parmenides gave them. We also find in the pinax of Cebes [. . .] ‘a Parmenidean life’ used synonymously with a moral life.”

Parmenides was a native of Elea, a Greek colony founded c. 535 B.C. on the west coast of Southern Italy. Unfortunately, we know very little of Parmenides’ life or the events surrounding it. There is some evidence that his father’s name was Pyres, yet the correct date of Parmenides’ birth is disputed, and that of his death is unknown. However, according to Plato, our most reliable source, Parmenides was around sixty-five years old when he visited Athens for the Great Panathenaea Games of 450 B.C., a famous athletic festival held every four years to honor the goddess Athena. On that occasion, Parmenides is said to have met “a very young” Socrates—perhaps still in his early twenties—and taught the aspiring philosopher a few vital lessons on the subject of speculation. Of course, there is no way to tell how much of the story is reliable fact, or whether it only serves as a dramatic set-up for one of Plato’s most ingenious dialogues. But there is not much reason to doubt his description of Parmenides as a man of distinguished appearance, with hair almost white and a calm and dignified demeanor. His characterization of Parmenides in the Theaetetus as an awe-inspiring figure of great and noble depth, whose thoughts were even more unfathomable than his words, further shows Plato’s great reverence for the Eleatic. If we can trust Plato’s time line, then Parmenides must have been born around 515 B.C.

As for his vocation, we are informed that Parmenides was active as a lawmaker and civil servant. That he composed quite a masterful code of law seems to be attested to by a uniquely Eleatic custom: The citizenry would gather together year after year to repledge all magistrates to Parmenides’ constitution. Such practice could only enhance the affluence and stability of the colony, and while the rest of Southern Italy seemed awash with war and political unrest, Elea, like a peaceful island amid a stormy sea, was, as one scholar observed, only known for its philosophers and its well-ordered legal system. Apparently, to lead the kind of ideal existence Parmenides and his fellow citizens enjoyed became eventually something of a proverbial saying, and some have called it a “Parmenidean life.”

Whether Parmenides established some sort of institution, or at least a study group, remains an open question. We only know that in antiquity, fewer than a handful of thinkers have been characterized as his immediate pupils or associates. One was Zeno of Elea (born c. 490 B.C.), his confidant and fellow citizen, and another was the Samian admiral Melissus (who defeated the Athenians in 441 B.C.). Occasionally, other Presocratics have been associated with Eleatic thought, such as the Pluralist Empedocles, the Atomist Leucippus, and the Sophist Gorgias. While it stands to reason that they have been strongly influenced by Parmenides, the nature of their relationship, if any, with him or his group is unclear.

—From To Think Like God (Schol), pp. 3–6 • See also “Opinions about Parmenides”