DEBATE: Featuring Heraclitus and Parmenides

In class today, we were divided into two groups: one that would argue the opinions and beliefs of Heraclitus, and the other arguing those of Parmenides. Here's a little bit of background:

Parmenides lived aroud 540-480 B.C. and is considered one of the "Eleatics", who were philosophers interested in the "problem of change."(35) He believed that everything in this world had always existed, and always would. On top of this, he saw any sensory form of change as an illusion and did not believe anything that he saw, heard, felt, tasted, or smelled (36). In contrast, Heraclitus trusted his senses more than his reason, because he thought that humans rejected their "universal reason" for one of their own (37). His primary belief was that change was the only constant in nature and that opposites within the world is what allows us to exist (36). 

Today, I was put on Heraclitus' team. The other people in my group were Karen, Laurie, Anne, Nomka, Mora, Alex, and Riley. I think that's everyone, but I might have forgotten someone. Both teams presented strong arguments near the middle of the debate, but near the end, started to lose ground and repeat ideas. Our homework assignment is to come up with a counterargument to one of the points I used to support Heraclitus' side. I definitely think the easiest way to go about disproving Heraclitus claims would be to simply address the broader, larger aspects of life such as the Earth itself and nature. This is because, as a whole, the world (naturally) has not changed very much throughout time. Beneath the cement and infrastructure, there is still the same soil and land that existed millions of years ago. The oceans have been changed by things being dumped in them, but the water still repeats cycles, the world still follows certain laws, and the world appears permanent when looked at in a broader context. This would be my primary support for Parmenides' side, and a rebuttal to the statement my team made about how change can be seen in everything. Some things really do appear permanent; it is whether we trust in our senses or not that makes the difference. thanks -j

This is a link I find somewhat helpful (if you can follow the narrator's fast speech) in explaining the differences between the philosophies of Heraclitus and Parmenides.