Classical philosophy wasn’t any less complex or was in any way more primative but was constructed out of a smaller/slower symbolic economy
from the end of the Parmenides: “Then the one which is not, if it is to maintain itself, must have the being of not-being as the bond of not-being, just as being must have as a bond the not-being of not-being in order to perfect its own being; for the truest assertion of the being of being and of the not-being of not being is when being partakes of the being of being, and not of the being of not-being-that is, the perfection of being; and when not-being does not partake of the not-being of not-being but of the being of not-being-that is the perfection of not-being.”
fast enough to whizz by me!
Are you familiar with chapter 2 of Zhuangzhi “Equalizing assessments of things ?” It uses a similar rhetorical style
