The Incorporeality of What-Is in Melissus of Samos

Melissus’ B9 (what-is ‘must not have a body’) appears to contradict B3 (‘unlimited in magnitude’) and B7 (‘full’). How can something without a body possess magnitude and fullness? This article defends the ‘immateriality thesis’, arguing that B9 affirms the immaterial nature of what-is. By examining the terms σῶμα (body) and πάχος (thickness), along with the concepts of ‘spatial limits’ and ‘physical constitution’ in 5th–4th century BCE philosophical and medical texts, I show that their denial implies immateriality. I also propose a ‘modal analysis’ to reconcile the fragments. Despite difficulties, the thesis offers the most coherent reading of Melissus’ thought.