<<

• Period covered: 5th Century BCE to 2nd Century CE

• Classical Period: Beginning of the 5th century BCE (Persian War) to the last quarter of the 4th century BCE (death of )‏

• Pre-socratics: , , , and

: Last quarter of the 4th century BCE (death of Alexander the Great) to end of the 1st century BCE (fall of Egypt to the Romans).

• Epicureans

• Stoics

• Sceptics

• Additions & omissions. Ancient Greek Philosophy – Why did it happen?

• Why in Greece and not Egypt, for instance?

• Social, economic, and political factors? Ancient Greek Philosophy – Why did it happen?

• Hypothesis:

Lack of natural resources in homeland ➔ forced to become seafaring merchants ➔

• Establishment of trading colonies all over the Mediterranean.

• Contact with other people and cultures.

• Upward social mobility/establishment of a merchant class.

➔ favorable conditions for the emergence of democracy ➔

• A tendency among the people to question authority.

• A market for teachers of rhetoric. Ancient Greek Philosophy – Why did it happen?

• Another Possibility: Religion not as closely linked to secular authority.

• But these are all just necessary conditions for the emergence of ancient Greek philosophy (if that). The Pre-socratics

• Parmenides • Biographical Info: • b. ~515 BCE, d. ~450 BCE • Lived in Elea Parmenides’ Poem

• 3 parts:

• The Prologue: Fragment 1

• The Way of : Fragments 2 – 8, up to line 49.

• The Way of Mortal Opinions: Fragment 8 from line 50 – end, Fragments 9 – 19 Parmenides’ Poem

• 3 parts:

• The Prologue: Fragment 1

• The Way of Truth: Fragments 2 – 8, up to line 49. Consists of 2 sub-avenues of inquiry which are “the only routes of inquiry that are for thinking” (Fragment 2, line 2):

• “The path of Persuasion” “attends upon Truth” (Fragment 2, lines 3-4)‏

• What I will call the Dead End is “a path entirely unable to be investigated” (Fragment 2, lines 5-8):

• The Way of Mortal Opinions: Fragment 8 from line 50 – end, Fragments 9 – 19 WAY OF TRUTH: 2.1 But come now, I will tell you—and you, when you have heard the story, bring it safely away— 2 PATHS OF INQUIRY: 2.2 which are the only routes of inquiry that are for thinking: PATH OF PERSUASION: 2.3 the one, that it1 is and that it is not possible for it not to be, 2.4 is the path of Persuasion (for it attends upon Truth), DEAD END: 2.5 the other, that it is not and that it is right that it not be, 2.6 this indeed I declare to you to be a path entirely unable to be investigated: C2: |2.7 For neither can you know what is not (for it is not to be | accomplished)‏ | 2.8 nor can you declare it. 3.1 ... for the same thing is for thinking and for . 4.1 But gaze upon things which although absent are securely present to the 4.2 For you will not cut off what-is from clinging to what-is, 4.3 neither being scattered everywhere in every way in order 4.4 nor being brought together. 5.1 . . . For me, it is indifferent from where I am to begin: 5.2 for that is where I will arrive back again. THAT THINGS THAT DO NOT EXIST CANNOT BE TALKED ABOUT OR OF: 6.1 C1: That which is there to be spoken and thought of must be.2 P1: For it is possible for it to be,3 6.2 P2: but not possible for to be.4 These things I bid you to ponder. 6.3 For I bar you from this first route of inquiry, ______<1> What is “it”? Whatever we inquire into. <2> Gloss: C1: Things that can be talked about or thought of exist. (Or, equivalently, things that do not exist cannot be talked about or thought of.)‏ <3> Gloss: P1: Things that can be talked about or thought of can exist. (Or, equivalently, things that cannot exist cannot be talked about or thought of.)‏ <4>Gloss: P2: Things that do not exist cannot exist. Parmenides’ Poem

• The argument may now be assembled in a more perspicuous form:

P1: Things that cannot exist cannot be talked about or thought of. P2: Things that do not exist cannot exist. C1: Therefore, things that do not exist cannot be talked about or thought of. P3 (supplied): Everything that can be known can be thought of. C2: Therefore, things that do not exist cannot be known or talked about. Parmenides’ Poem - Modern Responses

• Kant:

“'Being' is obviously not a real predicate; that is, it is not a of something which could be added to the concept of a thing. It is merely the positing of a thing, or of certain determinations, as existing in themselves. Logically, it is merely the copula of a judgment. The proposition, 'God is omnipotent', contains two , each of which has its -- God and omnipotence. The small word 'is' adds no new predicate, but only serves to posit the predicate in its relation to the . If, now, we take the subject (God) with all its predicates (among which is omnipotence), and say 'God is', or 'There is a God', we attach no new predicate to the concept of God, but only posit the subject in itself with all its predicates …” (KrV. B626, Kemp-Smith pp. 504-5)

• Gottlob Frege