Philosophy I / Parmenides
Practice question · Multiple choice

Why does Parmenides conclude that motion is impossible?

Hints
  1. Trace the argument back to the ban on what-is-not.
  2. Moving requires somewhere empty to move into, and emptiness is precisely what-is-not.
Show the answer

D. Motion requires empty space to move into, and empty space would be what-is-not

Why

Motion needs somewhere empty to move into, and emptiness is what-is-not, which cannot be. The unreliability of the senses is a separate strand, the argument against motion is purely a priori.

Read the lesson: Parmenides →

Practise Parmenides

The app has 5 more questions on this lesson, and keeps your place in the course. Philosophy I is free to start.

More questions on Parmenides