I've wondered whether Parmenides was only concerned about reason being a matter of logical argument. I thought his concern was that if reason is thought to be a matter of logical argument, then we would not be able to rely on reason to resolve conflicts because logical argumentation makes us have certain problems with truth. If we cannot appeal to truth, as Parmenides argument suggests, then we cannot resolve conflicts between the Americans under Bush and the Iranian government, for example. However, in considering some of the things that Don Levi has said about both rhetorical and logical arguments, I am wondering whether I have inaccurately limited the scope of what concerned Parmenides. Might he be interested in more than just logic, but in any account of argument that involves the form/content distinction.