Titlebook: Being and Not-Being; An Introduction to P Paul Seligman Book 1974 Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands 1974 Parmenides.Plato.dialogue.i

心胸开阔

调味品

遍及

pacific

agitate

coagulate

,Being — Materialists and Idealists: 245E–248A,d have to answer the first question in terms of an indefinite plurality of things that are, and this would be a sufficient reason for Plato to affirm that their account is not exact. Their significance lies in their answer to the second question: what is the nature, the essence of things that are.

异端邪说下

,The Communion of Forms and the “Late Learners”: 251A–252E,hat is-not, . Parmenides, can neither be thought nor be uttered, so that all statements must be true. Thus it became necessary to challenge Parmenides’ canon. In order to tackle the Sophist we must show

aphasia

,The very great Kinds — Part 1: 254D–255E, both, for both motion and rest are. The incompatibility of motion and rest — “cannot mingle with one another” — is here reaffirmed. At this point the Stranger seems to accord equal status to the three kinds. He now continues:

hematuria

Approach to Plato, A large section of contemporary philosophy is concerned with logical and linguistic analysis, and there can be little doubt that the . raises problems in these areas which are of considerable relevance even to-day. As a consequence, it is the logical and linguistic aspects of the dialogue that have

感情脆弱

,Absolute Not-being: 237B–239C,ntually his own non-Parmenidean interpretation of not-being. The Stranger begins by noting that we do not hesitate to utter the expression, but to what can it be applied? Surely not to anything that is, and therefore not to “something” For we use the word “something” of something that is, not in “na