Search

A brewery wanted to know how a new beer they were launching would be received by consumers. It was therefore decided to organize an event during which the author of this contribution conducted research. The aim of the research was to find out whether the new product, a low alcohol beer, will attract consumers with its taste, whether its price was set correctly, and whether the targeting and marketing communication tools used were appropriate. The results of the research confirmed that the taste of the new product as well as its price corresponded to the imagination of consumers and that the communication mix was appropriate, but required adjustment to make it even more precise.

This article focuses on the age-old problems connected with the wording and interpretation of the verses attributed to Parmenides that are listed as DK 28 B 16. In the fi rst part, it is argued that the verses do not fi t lexically or meaningfully into the authentic doctrine of Parmenides. In addition, all standard interpretations of the fragment are very unsatisfactory: according to them, reason and thought are based on a mixture of two “material” forms (i.e. “night” and “fi re”), but this concept cannot be reconciled with the concept of νόος and νοεῖν in other fragments. In the second part of the article, the hypothesis is offered that the true author of B 16 was Empedocles, whose theory of thought resulting from a ratio of four “roots” is well documented. These four elements are divine and gifted with thought, and therefore their mixing and separating enables to explain the thought dispositions (persistent as well as transient) and the individual differences in thinking that cannot be meaningfully interpreted within Parmenides’ doctrine. The study also includes new interpretations of some of the fragments of Empedocles (esp. B 108, B 106, B 103, B 105, B 107, B 109, B 134, B 8, B 110). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]