Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Founded in 1846!

Philologus

Zeitschrift für antike Literatur und ihre Rezeption / A Journal for Ancient Literature and its Reception

Ed. by Föllinger, Sabine / Fuhrer, Therese / Reinhardt, Tobias / Stenger, Jan / Vöhler, Martin


CiteScore 2017: 0.06

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.116

Online
ISSN
2196-7008
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 158, Issue 2

Issues

Stronger Reality

The Epistemological and Theological Innovations of Melissus to Parmenides’ Philosophy

Enrico Piergiacomi
Published Online: 2014-11-08 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/phil-2014-0014

Abstract

Melissus is often considered a naïve thinker, mostly because of the famous judgment of Aristotle, who in Phys. 185a10–11 defined him as a less polished philosopher than Parmenides. But is this contempt really deserved? This paper argues that it is not. Melissus made two important and original innovations to Eleatism. Firstly, he showed that we humans fail to know reality since we do not recognize a conflict between our senses and our conventional language. Secondly, he demonstrated the non-existence of the traditional Homeric gods by arguing that divinity may be granted only to an inactive-changeless God identical with Being. Both these innovations (1) demonstrate a point which was assumed without argument by Parmenides, namely the unreliability of sensation, (2) deny the presence of a divine regulative factor in our world and (3) show how a study of the empirical world allows humans to progress in their quest for knowledge.

Keywords: Eleatic ontology; Philosophy of language; Debates about sensation; Criticism of Homer; Theological and epistemological beliefs

Bibliography

  • G. Arrighetti (a cura di), Epicuro. Opere, Torino 51973.Google Scholar

  • J. Barnes, The Presocratic Philosophers, London 41993.Google Scholar

  • P. Bicknell, Melissus’ Way of Seeming?, Phronesis 27.2, 1982, 194–201.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • L. Breglia/M. Lupi (a cura di), Da Elea a Samo. Filosofi e politici di fronte all’impero ateniese, Napoli 2005.Google Scholar

  • G. Calogero, Storia della logica antica, Bari 1967.Google Scholar

  • –, Studi sull’eleatismo, Firenze 21977.Google Scholar

  • G. Casertano, Parmenide: il metodo, la scienza, l’esperienza, Napoli 21989.Google Scholar

  • G. Cerri (a cura di), Parmenide di Elea. Poema sulla natura, Milano 1999.Google Scholar

  • W. R. Chalmers, Parmenides and the Beliefs of Mortals, Phronesis 5.1, 1960, 5–22.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • P. Curd, The Legacy of Parmenides. Eleatic Monism and Later Presocratic Thought, Princeton 1998.Google Scholar

  • J. D. Denniston, The Greek Particles, London/Indianapolis 21996.Google Scholar

  • H. Diels/W. Kranz (Hgg.), Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, I-III, Zürich/Hildesheim 61951.Google Scholar

  • F. Ferrari, Melisso e la scuola eleatica, in: L. Breglia/M. Lupi (2005) 85–94.Google Scholar

  • A. Finkelberg, Studies in Xenophanes, HSPh 93, 1990, 103–167.Google Scholar

  • –, Xenophanes’ Physics, Parmenides’ Doxa and Empedocles’ Theory of Cosmogonical Mixture, Hermes 125. 1, 1997, 1–16.Google Scholar

  • D. J. Furley, Melissus of Samos, in: K. J. Boudouris (ed.), Ionian Philosophy, Athens 1989, 114–122.Google Scholar

  • H. G. Gadamer, Parmenides oder das Diesseits des Seins, PP 43, 1988, 143–176.Google Scholar

  • L. Gianvittorio, Il discorso di Eraclito. Un modello semantico e cosmologico nel passaggio dall’oralità alla scrittura, Zürich/New York 2010.Google Scholar

  • C. H. Kahn, The Thesis of Parmenides, in: Id., Essays on Being, Oxford 2009, 143–166.Google Scholar

  • G. S. Kirk/J. E. Raven/M. Schofield, The Presocratic Philosophers: a Critical History with a Selection of Texts, Cambridge 21999.Google Scholar

  • J. H. M. M. Loenen, Parmenides, Melissus, Gorgias. A Reinterpretation of Eleatic Philosophy, Assen 1959.Google Scholar

  • S. Makin, Melissus and His Opponents: The Argument of “DK” 30 B 8, Phronesis 50.4, 2005, 263–288.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • J. Mansfeld, Die Offenbarung des Parmenides und die Menschliche Welt, Assen 1964.Google Scholar

  • D. McGibbon, The Atomists and Melissus, Mnemosyne 17.3, 1964, 248–255.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • F. D. Miller, Parmenides on Mortal Beliefs, JHPh 15.3, 1977, 253–265.Google Scholar

  • E. Mogyoródi, Xenophanes’ Epistemology and Parmenides’ Quest for Knowledge, in: M. M. Sassi (2006) 123–160.Google Scholar

  • A. P. D. Mourelatos, The Route of Parmenides, Las Vegas 22008.Google Scholar

  • G. E. L. Owen, Eleatic Questions, in: R. E. Allen/D. J. (eds.), Studies in Presocratic Philosophy. Vol. II: The Eleatics and Pluralists, London 1975, 48–81.Google Scholar

  • J. Owens, Naming in Parmenides, in: J. Mansfeld/L. M. de Rijk (eds.), Kephalaion. Studies in Greek Philosophy and its Continuation offered to Professor C. J. de Vogel, Assen 1975, 16–25.Google Scholar

  • J. A. Palmer, Melissus and Parmenides, OSAPh 26, 2004, 19–54.Google Scholar

  • –, A New Testimonium on Diogenes of Apollonia, with Remarks on Melissus’ Cosmology, CQ 51.1, 2001, 7–17.Google Scholar

  • –, On the Alleged Incorporeality of What Is in Melissus, AncPhil 23.1, 2003, 1–10.Google Scholar

  • C. Rapp, Zeno and Eleatic Anti-Pluralism, in: M. M. Sassi (2006) 161–182.Google Scholar

  • G. Reale, Melisso: testimonianze e frammenti, Firenze 1970.Google Scholar

  • C. Robbiano, Becoming Being. On Parmenides’ Transformative Philosophy, Sankt Augustin 2006.Google Scholar

  • M. M. Sassi (a cura di), La costruzione del discorso filosofico nell’età dei Presocratici, Pisa 2006.Google Scholar

  • –, Gli inizi della filosofia in Grecia, Torino 2009.Google Scholar

  • D. N. Sedley, Creationism and Its Critics in Antiquity, Berkeley 2007.Google Scholar

  • –, Parmenides and Melissus, in: A. A. Long (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy, Cambridge 1999, 113–133.Google Scholar

  • M. Serra, All’ombra di Parmenide. Considerazioni in margine al De Melisso, Xenophane et Gorgia, in: L. Breglia/M. Lupi (2005) 49–58.Google Scholar

  • D. Sider, Textual Notes on Parmenides’ Poem, Hermes 113. 3, 1985, 362–366.Google Scholar

  • L. Tarán, Parmenides. A text with translation, commentary and critical essays, Ann Arbor 21990.Google Scholar

  • H. Usener (ed.), Epicurea, Lipsiae 1887.Google Scholar

  • R. Vitali, Melisso di Samo, sul mondo o sull’essere. Una interpretazione dell’Eleatismo, Urbino 1974.Google Scholar

  • –, Per una lettura dei frammenti di Melisso di Samo, Vichiana 5, 1968, 233–250.Google Scholar

  • G. Vlastos, Parmenides’ Theory of Knowledge, TAPhA 77, 1946, 66–77.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2014-11-08

Published in Print: 2014-11-01


Citation Information: Philologus, Volume 158, Issue 2, Pages 306–319, ISSN (Online) 2196-7008, ISSN (Print) 0031-7985, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/phil-2014-0014.

Export Citation

© 2014 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/München/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in