It seems to me that Heraclitus, is as you say, about "ceaseless change/ impermanence."Are you denying that, in the aforementioned quote in my O.P., Heraclitus is maintaining that a person or self, a “man” (in his words), cannot exist for more than a moment or instant? — aRealidealist
Your enthusiasm here is understandable, but I thought Heraclitus was a Greek. My point being that translation is problematic.)the quote in my O.P. is literally in Heraclitus’ own words, — aRealidealist
“No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man.” — Heraclitus’ primary claim, as it’s generally expressed in the manner above, of absolute change or impermanence (of either things, or the self) is inherently flawed.
His assertion as such can be rebutted in multiple ways; for now, though, I’ll respectfully choose to only express one way that specifically pertains to the self: (1) by exposing the contradiction of being able to demonstrate or know for a fact that no “man” ever steps in the same river twice (emphasis on the word ‘twice’).
1.) If one claims to know or have demonstrated that, “No man ever steps in the same river twice,” then, in some respect, one has already presupposed the permanence of their self, since one cannot know or demonstrate that a given “man” didn’t continue to be the same person after they stepped in a given river once, without their own self having had endured this very transition of that given “man“ not remaining the same person after they stepped in a given river. — aRealidealist
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.