Abstract

The question about justification of pluralism in post-Parmenidean doctrines is frequently discussed by scholars. Some of them argue that successors of Parmenides accepted their pluralism without any arguments. This paper demonstrates that B 17 DK of Empedocles can be interpreted as three sequential arguments for plurality: metaphysical, ontological and pro-Eleatic. Also we can read the passage as an intertextual argument, that is to say an argument which receives its persuasive force only in the context of another, original argument from the previous doctrine on which it is based. This is why the justification of plurality in Empedocles becomes clear only in the context of the Parmenidean B 8 DK.