Andrew: We had the sophist pegged as some kind of imitator. Then we attended to do some kind of forking definitino hinged on the likeness maker and the appearance maker. When defining appearance wit involved a certain falseness about it. To explain what we mean by that required to discuss what even falseness even means. All along we are bullied by the sophist who uses these tricks to confuse us and escape definition by refusing to be defined in terms of something that both is and is not. And now we are looking at the claims of the presocrates, specifically Paremenides, trying to figure out what being—or oneness—even is. Also Heraclitus was mentioned as well.
TODO: trace out somewhere how exactly questioning falseness works
Comments # (0)
Comment