V. P. Goran on the Difference between Parmenides’ and Zeno’ of Elea Teachings

V. P. Goran accepts the following thesis: Parmenides and Zeno agreed with the statement “the being is one”, but they gave different interpretations to the term “being” in it. I show that this thesis is compatible with an interpretation of Parmenides that is free from the controversial declaration of falsehood of propositions of the form “a is not b” (the latter interpretation is developed in detail by A. Mourelatos). I also demonstrate that this thesis has advantages over the interpretations of N. B. Booth, F. Solmsen, according to which Zeno opposed Parmenides by trying to prove that there is no such object as “the one being”. This alleged Zeno’s proof is based on the assumption “every being is something extended”.