ABSTRACT
Eleatic scepticism was philosophically barren; for it was fundamentally a metaphysical rather than an epistemological thesis, resting wholly upon Eleatic metaphysics and not at all upon any speculation proper to epistemology. Thus once it was believed that the foundations of Elea were undermined, there can have seemed no need to devote critical attention to the superstructure: fragment 191 of Melissus offers no challenge to the philosopher who believes that he has vindicated an Ionian world. That fact, I think, explains why it took a second attack on the possibility of objective knowledge to elicit a neo-Ionian epistemology: Democritus was spurred to thought by Protagoras; Empedocles and Anaxagoras had no such sharp incentive.
