Parmenidész igazolása

The paper begins with a brief rebuttal of a central tenet of the literature, viz. that P. had to reject all negative existential propositions. Instead we propose an overall distinction between the quantifier 3 and a predicate of the language, E, which expresses existence. [For relentless enemies to a predicate of existence: E can be defined as E = dfAx • x = x.] Now negative sentences of the existential quantifier may be true, there are true sentences of the form ~Vx.Fx where F is a predicate, whereas there is no individual in the universe which could be asserted not to exist, no sentence of structure ~ Ea is true. [I.e. V x. Ex is valid. Notice that it is equivalent to ~ 3 x. ~ Ex and P' wording in the second half of B2,3 is clearly parallel to this formula containing the ne-gation of an existential quantifier.) After examining the fragments leading up to the core of Aletheia, we proceed to B8. First a new operator, H is introduced into our language — Hx. Fx is the name of the class of the objects (within the universe) which are F. Then we show that Hx. Ex is a suitable formal equivalent of то EÓV — with a number of trivial meaning postulates all the oiinctxa. of B8 (with the sole exception of the sphere-simile) can be formally proved. This semantical reconstruction not only sheds new light on the problematical relationship between Aletheia and Doxa, it also gives P. a new setting in Greek philosophy. He ceases to be the odd one and gets reintegrated into the mainstream of subsequent Greek speculation. A final paragraph delineates the broad outlines of connexions between our P. and Anaxagoras, Democritus, Plato and Aristotle, respectively.