Heraclitus attributes great importance to facts about opposites, e.g. the fact that sea-water is fine for fish but poisonous for humans (F 15), or the fact that roads are bidirectional (F 14), or that the water in a river is different at different times (F 33). One might protest that these facts are rather ordinary. Try to construct an argument on his behalf justifying his view of their philosophical importance.3) Parmenides
In Fragment 8 Parmenides seems to argue for the conclusion that there is no movement, change, or plurality. Suppose someone protested: I can refute Parmenides as follows: I shall get up from my chair and walk around the room, thus proving that movement exists. He proceeds to do just that. How would Parmenides respond? (Cite the text appropriately to justify your interpretation.)
Explanation:The main aim of this assignment is to try to extract and think through the philosophical issues raised by these passages, and to distinguish them from the various features of the writings that are specific to their time and place. There are obviously some ways in which we cannot agree with, say, Anaximander, just in virtue of the fact that we do not think earth, air, fire, and water are the basic material elements. But does this imply that what he says about the basic constituents of reality is completely irrelevant, or just a historical curiosity? It is difficult to know what is no longer relevant to our concerns and what might be, until you work through the possibilities., by trying to see what these thinkers might say to a critic. This requires a bit of imagination, guided by your reading.The paper should first present the basic outline of the view question, followed by the proposed criticism (you can use my formulation or make up your own for this). Then you should give your argument on behalf of the thinker.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.[order_calculator]