Parmenides' Effect (Η επίδραση του Παρμενίδη)

-From my text on the Logos (The Word).

Philosophers have for centuries sought the answers to the question of being. What does it imply or represent in the ontological sense and order of the Logos? To better understand this question, we must first recognise the state of being. There is being and non-being. Essentially, a thing cannot be existential and nonexistential at the same time.

Thus eliminating any assumed contradiction. This is where we study what is known in Meleticism as the Parmenides' effect. Reality does not unify these states of contrast, because it is more a perception than truth. It is matter that proposes the validity of its substance.

What we cannot dismiss however is the fact that reality permits existence to develop and evolve. Existence is not conditioned to reality. It is conditioned to the state of being. The Logos is the order of existential things. We are not the result of a creator god.

We cannot measure existence in a quantifiable manner, nor can we measure existence to be applicable to mere time. When we examine through our meticulous observation the state of being compared to non-being, we should include in our consideration, the introduction of the state of actuality or the state of potentiality.

Being is equivalent to the physical or metaphysical state of transcendence. It can co-exist with either state. This is reflected in the presence and dynamic of the Enas. The One is not about proving if it is of a superior nature or a simplicity that is witnessed in the design of the cosmos.

Instead, it is the source to universal existence. The cosmos is compelled by a single substance, which is called the One. It is eternal, unchanging and indivisible, underlying all that exists in the cosmos.

The true nature of being is demonstrated by the One. It cannot become non-being. We as human beings function in the necessity of the body, but our ousia or essence transcends the body with our consciousness. It is like matter in the cosmos that can take shape in different states of being, but remains matter.

Once we have established the undeniable relevance of being compared to non-being than we can proceed to understand how they should be determined in accordance to their perception. Existence is replete and tangible. It does not necessarily require physicality. Nonexistence is depleted and intangible.

We could assume one is a void or vacuum and the other a totality in their contrasting natures, but in reality, nothing can derive from nothing, as Parmenides once explained. There has to be something that exists in one form or another. Thus, non-being should be construed as nonviable. We could argue that it is mostly nothing of substance. There is no paradox in that assumption.

What is being discussed is the effect of something that exists and something that does not. We should not confuse existence with possibility or probability. Possibility is something that can occur, whilst probability is something that likely will occur.

Mathematical equations and theories of physics can attempt to explicate the difference between being and non-being. We can use the example of linear time to define in this instance being. The past is a vestige of the present. An occurrence of a sequence of an event and the future is the probability of the finality of that event unfolding, reshaping the being of its reality. Being would no longer be present. It would be altered.

The Enas is immeasurable. It is not quantifiable in the physical sense. To answer the question of being, we must realise and accept that it means existing, but at the same time, it is eternal in its state. What is not eternal are the things that result from it of multiplicity, with the exception of the One.

Recommend Write a ReviewReport