Ontology and Doxa. On Parmenides’ Dual Strategies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47661/afcl.v14i28.38766Palavras-chave:
Parmenides, Monismo, Dualismo, Ontologia, Verdade, DoxaResumo
A partir das diretivas interpretativas de Reinhardt de levar em conta ambas as partes do poema de Parmênides para conseguir uma compreensão suficiente de sua filosofia, esse artigo quer avaliar novamente o estado da produção acadêmica recente e propor uma abordagem que revele a “metodologia dualística” no coração da filosofia de Parmênides. O monismo ontológico da Verdade emerge com base na projeção dualística dos conceitos de Ser e Nada. O dualismo da Doxa, estruturado sobre as formas de Luz e Noite, evolui na produção de uma dualidade ulterior: as opiniões erradas que separam as duas formas devem ser substituídas por uma apropriada e cosmológica ordem-do-mundo de suas misturas. Finalmente, o poema como um todo, em duas partes, reflete uma dualidade mais profunda, que significa a profunda distância que separa o humano do divino. A importância de todas essas estruturas binárias nos obriga a examinar novamente a consideração de Parmênides como campeão do monismo cego.
Referências
Barnes, J., “Parmenides and the Eleatic One,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philo¬so¬phie 61 (1979) 1-21.
Bredlow, L.A., “Parmenides and the Grammar of Being,” Classical Philology 106 (2011) 283-298.
Burnet, J., Early Greek Philosophy (London: Adam & Charles Black, 1930, 4th ed.).
Cherubin, R., “Light, Night, and the Opinions of Mortals: Parmenides B8.51-61 and B9,” Ancient Philosophy 25 (2005) 1-23.
Cherubin, R., “Mortals Lay Down Trusting to be True,” Epoché 21 (2017) 251-271.
Clark, R.J., “Parmenides and Sense-perception,” Revue des Études Grecques 82 (1969) 14-32.
Cordero, N.-L., Les deux chemins de Parménide (édition critique, traduction, études et bibliographie) (Paris: J. Vrin & Bruxelles: Editions Ousia, 1997, 2nd ed.).
Cordero, N.-L., By being, it is: The thesis of Parmenides (Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing, 2004).
Cordero, N.-L. et al., Eleatica 2006: Parmenide scienziato? (a cura di Livio Rossetti e Flavia Marcacci) (Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag, 2008).
Cordero, N.-L., “The ‘Doxa of Parmenides’ Dismantled,” Ancient Philosophy 30 (2010) 231-246.
Cordero, N.-L., “Parmenidean ‘Physics’ is not Part of what Parmenides calls ‘δόξα’,” in N.-L. Cordero (ed.), “Parmenides, Venerable and Αwesome” (Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing, 2011) 95-113.
Cordero, N.-L., “Il y a, évidemment, un ‘Parménide phusikós,’ mais… (A propos de Livio Rossetti, Un altro Parmenide, 2017),” Archai 25 (2019) e02507.
Cosgrove, M.R., “What Are ‘True’ Doxai Worth to Parmenides? Essaying a fresh look at his Cosmology,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 46 (2014) 1-32.
Curd, P., The Legacy of Parmenides. Eleatic Monism and Later Presocratic Thought. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998).
Falus, R.: “Parmenides-Interpretationen,” Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 8 (1960) 267-294.
Fratticci, W.: “Apeonta, pareonta. On fragment B4 DK”. Anais de Filosofia Clássica 27 (2020) 246-270.
Graham, D.W., “Empedocles and Anaxagoras: Responses to Parmenides,” in A.A. Long (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 159-180.
Graham, D.W., Explaining the Cosmos. The Ionian Tradition of Scientific Philosophy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006).
Graham, D.W., Science Before Socrates: Parmenides, Anaxagoras, and the New Astronomy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013).
Granger, H., “The Cosmology of Mortals,” in V. Caston & D.W. Graham (eds.), Presocratic Philosophy. Essays in Honour of Alexander Mourelatos (Aldershot & Burlington: Ashgate, 2002) 101-116.
Gregory, A., “Parmenides, Cosmology and Sufficient Reason,” Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science 47 (2014) 16-47.
Hölscher, U., Parmenides. Vom Wesen des Seienden (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1986, 2nd ed.).
Johansen, T.K., “Parmenides' Likely Story,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 50 (2016) 1-29.
Kahn, C.H. (2002): “Parmenides and Plato Once More (For Alex Moureatos),” in Essays on Being (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009) 192-217.
Kurfess, Ch., “The Truth about Parmenides’ Doxa,” Ancient Philosophy 36 (2016) 13-45.
Lesher, J.H., “Early Interest in Knowledge,” in A.A. Long (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 225-249.
Mansfeld, J., “Parmenides from Right to Left,” in Studies in Early Greek Philosophy (Leiden: Brill, 2018).
McKirahan, R., “Signs and Arguments in Parmenides B8,” in P. Curd & D. Graham (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Early Greek Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 189-229.
McKirahan, R., “An Aristotelianizing Parmenides,” Philosophia [Academy of Athens] 49, II (2020) 60-74.
Miller, M.H., “Parmenides and the Disclosure of Being,” Apeiron 13 (1979) 12-35.
Miller, M., “Ambiguity and Transport: Reflections on the proem to Parmenides' poem,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 30 (2006) 1-47.
Mourelatos, A.P.D., “Determinacy and Indeterminacy, Being and Non-Being in the Frag-ments of Parmenides,” Canadian Journal of Philosophy (Suppl. Vol. 2, 1976) 45-60.
Mourelatos, A.P.D., “Some Alternatives in Interpreting Parmenides,” The Monist 62 (1979) 3-14.
Mourelatos, A.P.D., “Parmenides, Early Greek Astronomy, and Modern Scientific Realism,” in J. McCoy (ed.), Early Greek Philosophy (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2013) 91-112.
Nehamas, A. (2002): “Parmenidean Being / Heraclitean Fire,” in V. Caston & D.W. Graham (eds.), Presocratic Philosophy. Essays in Honour of Alexander Mourelatos (Aldershot & Burlington: Ashgate, 2002) 45-64.
Owen, G.E.L., “Eleatic Questions,” [1960] revised and reprinted in Logic, Science, and Dialectic. Collected Papers in Greek Philosophy (London: Duckworth, 1986) 3-26.
Palmer, J., Parmenides and Presocratic Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).
Palmer, J., Review of: M.V. Wedin, Parmenides’ Grand Deduction: A Logical Reconstruction of the Way of Truth. Ancient Philosophy 36 (2016) 209-214.
Pulpito, M., “Parmenides and the forms,” in N.-L. Cordero (ed.), “Parmenides, Venerable and Αwesome” (Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing, 2011) 191-212.
Pulpito, M., “Il crocevia ontologico e i due volti della Doxa. Un’apologia della terza via in Parmenide,” Peitho. Examina Antiqua 6 (2015) 285-293.
Rapp, C., “Eleatischer Monismus,” in G. Rechenauer (ed.), Frühgriechisches Denken (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005) 290-315.
Reinhardt, K., Parmenides und die Geschichte der griechischen Philosophie [1916] (Frankfurt: Klostermann, 1985, 4th ed.).
Rossetti, L. & Marcacci, F., “Introduzione,” in N.-L. Cordero et al., Eleatica 2006: Parmenide scienziato? (Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag, 2008) 7-30.
Rossetti, L., “La structure du poème de Parménide,” Philosophie Antique 10 (2010) 187-226.
Ruggiu, L., Parmenide (Venezia & Padova: Marsilio, 1975).
Sisko, J. E. & Weiss, Y., “A Fourth Alternative in Interpreting Parmenides,” Phronesis 60 (2015) 40-59.
Thanassas, P., Die erste “zweite Fahrt”. Sein des Seienden und Erscheinen der Welt bei Parmenides (München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1997).
Thanassas, P., “Doxa revisitata,” in G. Rechenauer (ed.), Frühgriechisches Denken (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2005) 270-89.
Thanassas, P., “How Many Doxai Are There in Parmenides?,” Rhizai 3 (2006) 199-218.
Thanassas, P., Parmenides, Cosmos, and Being. A Philosophical Interpretation (Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 2007).
Thanassas, P., “Parmenidean Dualisms,” in N.-L. Cordero (ed.), “Parmenides, Venerable and Αwesome” (Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing, 2011) 289-308.
Tor, S., “Parmenides’ epistemology and the two parts of his poem,” Phronesis 60 (2015) 3-39.
Trépanier, S., Review of: M.V. Wedin, Parmenides’ Grand Deduction: A Logical Reconstruction of the Way of Truth. Revue Philosophique de Louvain 114 (2016) 129-133.
Vogel, C.J. de, Greek Philosophy. A Collection of Texts with Notes and Explanations. Volume I: Thales to Plato (Leiden: Brill, 1969, 4th ed.).
Wedin, M.V., Parmenides’ Grand Deduction: A Logical Reconstruction of the Way of Truth (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).
