The "Parmenides" Again

Abstract

IN VIEW of the great bulk of writings already in existence on Parmenides yet another article may seem unnecessary. Unfortunately, disputes about the meaning of the dialogue are as great as ever. An interesting review of the main attitudes of modern commentators has been produced by W. G. Runciman,' who has both attempted to point out their weaknesses and provided a new theory of his own. I shall add nothing to his remarks on the parody theory,2 nor to those on the Neoplatonic account of the eight hypotheses,3 nor to those on the views of Scoon and Ryle.4 All these ingenious interpretations need no further comment; Runciman's rejection of them adequately summarizes the difficulties in them that have frequently been pointed out. I accept, too, Runciman's rejection of the logical gymnastics theory as expounded by Grote, Robinson, and Ross.5 My own interpretation is indebted to some extent to the unfashionable position of Cornford6 and to that of Dr. Peck.' Before expounding it, however, I must take issue with Runciman himself, whose own explanation depends on the belief that the One of the second part of the dialogue is the supposedly Platonic Form of Unity. At first sight Runciman has a good case. In several passages in the earlier part of the dialogue Unity is mentioned in the same breath as other etb5 (129D, 129E, 130B). The most convincing is 130B, for Socrates here expresses his conviction that there are dtai of likeness, unity, 1W. G. Runciman, Plato's Parmenides, HSCP 64 (1959) 89-120. Runciman does not examine every attempt to explain the Parmenides. He has however treated the main schools of thought in the persons of some of their most distinguished representatives. Among other works that have appeared since his article was published are: W. F. Lynch, An Approach to the Metaphysics of Plato through the Parmenides (Georgetown 1959); R. Brumbaugh, Plato on the One (Yale 1961). 2This view is to be found in A. E. Taylor, Plato, the Man and His Work (London 1927) 349-370 and The Parmenides of Plato (Oxford 1934). 3The Neoplatonic interpretation has found several supporters in modern times, e.g., J. Wahl, Etude sur le Parminide de Platon (Paris 1926) and M. Wundt, Platons Parmenides, Tiibinger Beitrdge zur Altertumswissenschaft (Stuttgart-Berlin 1935). 4R. Scoon, Plato's Parmenides, Mind n.s. 51 (1942) 115-133. G. Ryle, Plato's Parmenides, Mind n.s. 48 (1939) 129-151, 302-325. 6G. Grote, Plato and the Other Companions of Socrates2 (London 1867) 2. 263-318. R. Robinson, Plato's Parmenides, CP 37 (1942) 51-76, 159-186. W. D. Ross, Theory of Ideas2 (Oxford 1953) 98-101. 6F. M. Cornford, Plato and Parmenides (London 1939). 7A. L. Peck, Plato's Parmenides; Some Suggestions for its Interpretation, CQ n.s. 3 (1953) 126-150 and CQ n.s. 4 (1954) 31-45.