Everything changes and nothing stands still — Heraclitus
All change is illusion — Parmenides
Everything changes and nothing stands still — Heraclitus
I am pretty sure the sculptor would know it was the same stuff. The geologist would have, in a certain way, more information about what that stuff is. Though the sculptor would know it better in other ways. But I don't think sculptor would think he changed the substance, just the form of the substance.Another way to look at it is the both the sculptor and the geologist would be able to perceive the marble block changing into a statue but only the geologist would know that despite the transformation in shape the marble is still marble — TheMadFool
I disagree. I think we are talking about two kinds of knowledge and I can't see where the skills to make a portion into what one intends is not a knowledge of the world. And I'd much rather be friends with a local hunter gatherer over an ecologist if society collapses, precisely because the former has more (useful) knowledge of the world.On the other hand a sculptor, despite requiring great talent and years of practice, is unfortunately more "ignorant" of the world — TheMadFool
I disagree. I think we are talking about two kinds of knowledge and I can't see where the skills to make a portion into what one intends is not a knowledge of the world. — Coben
There were likely indigenous people who understood the connection between predator mammals and prey animals, and again, I'd want their knowledge over either of those guys in many situations. Further both of them can be wrong, and what would Darwin say to Parminides about the changes necessary to get to diverse mammals? — Coben
You're welcome. (if you'd said either Parminides or Heraclitis was wrong I would likely have come in to their defense) — Coben
I like Zeno's paradoxes. I am not convinced there is no motion. Perhaps it's a quantized universe. The fractions add up to one. Those are two rebuttals.What do you make of Zeno's paradoxes? Zeno of Elea was a student of Parmenides and his paradoxes are supposed to demonstrate his teacher's position that change is an illusion — TheMadFool
Either one or both. Though potentially both. IOW there could be third positions that deny both. Such as 'really there is a degree of change and a degree of things staying the same' which actually is probably what most people believe. And since that position goes against both of their positions, if someone had defended that ontology, the mixed one, both Heraclitus and Paremendies are being denied.I suppose there really is a true contradiction between Parmenides and Heraclitus and that makes it odd why you would want to "come into their defense". — TheMadFool
Heraclitus was a great philosopher but it appears Parmenides did more research and gave more thought on the matter.
What say you? — TheMadFool
I myself see Zeno’s paradoxes as a cautionary tale on how our observations and rationale can be both wrong and that we ought not to expect that either should concur. — Happenstance
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.