absolute knowledge, such as the gods alone can possess. Of ourselves, therefore, we cannot know these Ideas; and yet, unless we admit that absolute and abstract Ideas exist, all discussion—nay, all philosophy—is at an end.
These objections, so skilfully put by Parmenides, are not answered by Plato in this, or indeed in any other Dialogue; and he thus makes out a strong case against his own favourite theory. Socrates himself is lectured by Parmenides on his defective mental training. His enthusiasm (says the old philosopher), which makes him "keen as a Spartan hound" in the quest of truth, is a noble impulse in itself; but it will be useless unless he, so to speak, reads his adversary's brief, and studies a question in all its bearings, tracing all the consequences which may follow from the assumption or denial of some hypothesis. Above all, Socrates should cultivate "Dialectic,"[1] which alone can enable him to separate the ideal from the sensible, and is an indispensable exercise, although most people regard it as mere idle talking.
Parmenides is then prevailed upon himself to give an example of this "laborious pastime;" though, as he says, he shakes with fear at the thought of his self-imposed task, "like an old race-horse before running the course he knows so well." He selects for examination his own Eleatic theory, and traces the consequences which follow from the contradictory assumptions that "One is," and "One is not." We need not follow him
- ↑ The process by which the definitions of Logic are attained.
