Aristotle And Parmenides On Change

The Free essays given on our site were donated by anonymous users and should not be viewed as samples of our custom writing service. You are welcome to use them to inspire yourself for writing your own term paper. If you need a custom term paper related to the subject of Physics or Aristotle And Parmenides On Change , you can hire a professional writer here in just a few clicks.
ARISTOTLE AND PARMENIDES ON CHANGE Looking at the arguments for change derived by Parmenides and Aristotle there are many differences, yet there are also some similarities. While Aristotle may disagree with much of Parmenides argument, he does agree with some of the strongest premises in the argument. In this paper I will present Aristotle’s rebuttal of Parmenides denial of change, as well as play the “devil’s advocate” for each of them in defending their views. At the beginning of Parmenides argument for change he asserts that not being is nothingness. Aristotle is in disagreement with this premise, because he believes that being has many meanings, and is not only existential. “Having reached this result, they make things worse by going on to say that there is no plurality, but only being itself” (Aristotle Physics 191a) However, soon in the argument Parmenides holds that nothingness does not exist, or that not-being (nothingness) is not. Aristotle agrees with this premise and it receives further support from the law of identity and the law of non-contradiction. Parmenides third premise suggests that if one can think, one can think only what is (being). This premise is partly true for Aristotle, as he feels it is necessary but not sufficient. Aristotle feels Parmenides needs to add a substrate, which would provide a composite for accidental change. The substrate would persist throughout the change. For example, if a dog grew three inches the physical size of the dog has changed, yet the substrate (dog) has remained the same. Parmenides goes on to say that one cannot think what is not (not-being, or nothingness). For Aristotle this premise holds true, but was created too vaguely. He would like to see Parmenides explain more fully his notion of change taking place between opposites. For example, if “x” had an opposite it would be not “x”. I think Parmenides would not feel the need to defend himself since the premise seems clear enough to him. Parmenides might think that Aristotle’s desire for a more fully developed premise is a matter of subjective opinion. In Parmenides next premise he asserts that if there were change it would take place between opposites. Aristotle is again in partial agreement with this premise, yet again would like to see Parmenides add the substrate. Parmenides will go on to say that if being had an opposite it would be not-being (or nothingness). By reading this sentence alone it might seem to make sense due the law of excluded middle. However, Aristotle points out that since he refuted Parmenides claim that not being is nothingness, it is not logical to accept this premise. Next, Parmenides claims that if something came into being, it should do so from not being (nothingness). Aristotle is again in partial agreement, yet he again brings up the need for a substrate in this premise. Parmenides also holds that if something went out of being, it should be into not being (nothingness). Aristotle disproves this claim again due to one of the early premises he disproved. (Not being is nothingness.) Parmenides will now argue that nothingness does not exist. This is a major point of agreement for Aristotle. This premise is built on support from a previous premise, which Aristotle also agreed with. (Nothingness does not exist.) Parmenides also argues that nothing comes into being from nothingness, or disappears (goes out of being) into nothingness. Aristotle also agrees with this premise based on the same logic used by Parmenides. (Law of sufficient reason.) In Parmenides final premise he notes that if there were change, it would be a case of something coming into being from nothingness or going out of being into nothingness. While Aristotle agrees that nothing goes in or out of nothingness “It seems impossible that something should come to be in this way from what is not.” (Aristotle Physics 191b), he does not agree that this is a prereqresite for change. He refutes this premise partially due to his refutations of two previous premises regarding change between opposites, and something going out of being into not being. That said, it is important to note that the two philosophers did share in two major ideas. They both would concur that nothingness does not exist. Similarly, they both hold that nothing can go into nothingness, or come out of nothingness. “For something comes to be from the privation, which in itself is not and which does not belong to the thing *when it has come to be*. But this causes surprise, and it seems impossible that something should come to be in this way from what is not.” (Aristotle Physics 191b) When Aristotle undertook to explain how it is that things change, a fact seemingly apparent to most persons, he had first to confront the apparently ironclad logic of Parmenides. Bound by this logic, Parmenides had been forced to the position that there is in reality no change at all. All change is mere appearance; reality is one, and this One, which only is, is unchanging. He was forced to this position because, as he understood the terms of the problem, change is logically not possible. Parmenid

Our inspirational collection of essays and research papers is available for free to our registered users

Related Essays on Physics

Quantum Physics

While researching quantum physics, I realized that I had just finished a book that was based on quantum theory. At the time, I didn t quite realize that quantum theory and quantum physics were rela...

read more
Physics - Sound And Rsonance

Resonance and Sound Physics and Music Since sound is the medium of music, most of the physics of music is the physics of sound. It's important to remember that sound waves are compression waves. Y...

read more
Theory Of Knowledge

What is Logic? Topic: "There is no scientific evidence that civilization is synonymous with Aristotelian rationality the syllogism, the negation and the abstract classification are not discoveri...

read more
What Is Physics

Physics is an ever changing description of the universe, Physics is the study of the fundamentals of everything in the universe. If you look around you and start asking questions like why does...

read more
Quantim Theory

Quantim Mechanics is abranch of mathematical physics that deals with the emission and absorption of energy by matter and with the motion of material particles. Because it holds that energy ...

read more
Albert Einstein

Albert Einstein Albert Einstein was born on March 14, 1879 in Ulm Germany. He always hated the way the lessons were taught at school. He thought they were dull and unimaginative and would often d...

read more