We have words that distinguish night and day, hours, time, places, future, past, and present; so I think that because we have the ability to use these terms and we do all the time, they clearly do exist. Parmenides and Zeno refute that there is any change, time or motion. I do not agree. We as human beings continue to move forward Zeno spent his time figuring out how to keep proving Parmenides right. He says motion is an illusion and tries to prove pluralism of existing things. One could say based on the decision makings that we do, something different could happen. Let us use a chair as an example, if I walk into a room and see a chair I had a number of options for what to do; I could sit on it, I could kick it and knock it over, I could ignore it and keep walking. But the chair is still the chair no matter what I decide to do. The chair does not just …show more content…
It just has a different outcome, which could also be called a “future”.
“If place exists, where is it? For everything that exists is in a place. Therefore if place exists, then place is in a place. This goes on to infinity. Therefore, place does not exist” (70). Yes I can pinpoint my location, or any location for that matter exactly, yes it can keep going for a very long time, however, would it not make more sense that it makes the place all the more real? I think that because of how exact we can pinpoint things it would make them all the more real. If I leave my room and go to class is it going to still continue to be my room while I am gone. It will still hold all of my belongings and when class is over and I walk back to my room and of my things will be there and nothing would have been changed. It is not possible for it to just disappear into thin air while I am