For him time is static, the arrow of time is present at all points, always, the future and the past are as extant as the present. Opposed to Hercalitus's perspective is that of Parmenides. Heraclitus said that time flows ( panta rhei), thereby kickstarting what would come to be known as the dynamical perspective on time, the so call A-series or Presentism. That said this would have to be the best source on Parmenides possible, unlike other works it doesn’t just provide one translation, it provides multiple variant translations and discussion on their differences which is invaluable for works as fragmented and unclear as this. From these foundations all kinds of arguments are spawned from the perfection of everything to movement not being possible.

For Parmenides if all that exists is what is, then this “is” must have always existed – because it cant have come from nothing (as otherwise that nothing would actually be a something, eg something that can give existence to what is) and if what is doesnt have a beginning there cant be an end – therefore all the change and death we see is literally an illusion. With “nothing” not existing, only that which “is” exists, now this seems innocent enough but naturally it doesnt stop there. In antiquity his verse style was criticized as obscure and dry, reading ‘more like prose than poetry,’ as Proclus remarksĪs for ideas the core of his ideas they boil down to the consequences of what happens when nothing is literally no thing and hence - doesnt exist. His syntax is replete with multiple ambiguities, that are often so teasing as to argue wilful obscurantism, or at least a certain perversity, on their author’s part. Not only that but these ideas aren't expressed directly but poorly, in a poem, and its not just a modern issue even the ancients with the complete text had problems with it. Parmenides is a philosopher who uses incredibly pedantic analysis of the definitions of words/concepts to come to radically bizarre and pointless conclusions that are nevertheless difficult to refute. The genesis of everything hated in philosophy can be found in these roughly 2500 year old fragments. The volume also includes an extensive bibliography, a glossary of key terms in the poem, and a section on sources and authorities. In an extended introductory essay, Gallop offers guidance on the background of the poem, and a continuous exposition of it, together with a critical discussion of its basic argument. Alternative renderings are provided for passages whose meaning is disputed or where major questions of interpretation hinge upon the text or translation adopted. All of the fragments have been translated in full and are arranged in the order that has become canonical since the publication of the fifth edition of Diels-Rranz's Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. He also includes the first complete translation into English of the contexts in which the fragments have been transmitted to us, and of the ancient testimonia regarding Parmenides' life and thought. David Gallop provides a Greek text and a new facing-page translation of the extant fragments of Parmenides' philosophical poem.

Parmenides fragments meaning