  It appears that all of the Arguments in D7 are valid. Like the Arguments of the first six Deductions, the Arguments of D7 rest on a number of independent premises, including premises of every Deduction other than D4 and the Appendix. Again, it appears that most of the premises are, at least from Plato’s point of view, either definitionally true or just plain obvious. Thus it appears that, from Plato’s point of view, D7 establishes, without reliance on Purity-F or any other potentially problematic assumption, that if the one is not, then the others appear to have a host of contrary properties. (Thus D7 does not conform exactly to Parmenides’ earlier description of the method of the Deductions. What we would expect from that description is not that D7 would establish that if the one is not then the others appear to have contrary properties, but rather that D7 would establish that if the one is not then the others actually have contrary properties. This discrepancy remains something of a mystery.)