Zeno's arguments and paradoxes are \textit{not against} motion and multiplicity \textit{but for} the separation of true beings from sensibles

DOI10.4171/IRMA/34/37MaRDI QIDQ6150795zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors S. Negrepontis

Publication date 7 March 2024

Published in Essays in Geometry (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://doi.org/10.4171/irma/34/37

zbMATH Keywords

AristotleAristotle's physicsParmenidesPlatoPlato's ParmenidesProclusPythagoreanssimpliciusZeno of EleaZeno's paradoxes and arguments

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Philosophy of mathematics (00A30) History of Greek and Roman mathematics (01A20)

Review text

Summary: Zeno's arguments and paradoxes, mentioned by Plato (mainly in the \textit{Parmenides}), Aristotle (mainly in \textit{Physics}) and the commentators Proclus and Simplicius, have fascinated and scandalized for centuries philosophers, mathematicians, logicians, physicists, poets, and everyone else. The dominant interpretation of these Arguments and Paradoxes, in modern times, based to a large extent on the related interpretation of the \textit{Parmenides} introduction, that Zeno does not mean his true Beings to satisfy properties of the Compresence of Opposites type, such as Infinite \& Finite, One \& Many, Motion \& Rest, has been that Zeno presents paradoxes against Motion and arguments against Multiplicity. In this paper I propose a new interpretation of Zeno's arguments and paradoxes, based (a) on the ancient sources, which are in clear disagreement with the dominant interpretation, (b) on a reconstruction of the original Pythagorean proof of incommensurability by means of infinite anthyphairesis and Proposition X.2 of Euclid's \textit{Elements}, a proof that served as the model for Zeno's arguments, and (c) on my interpretation of Plato's philosophy in terms of periodic anthyphairesis, which was heavily influenced by Zeno's arguments. Thus Zeno's arguments aim to prove that true Beings are separate and different from the sensibles and Zeno's paradoxes of Motion aim to prove that the motion of true Beings is different from the motion of the sensibles. For the entire collection see [Zbl 1519.57002].

Recommendations

• Zeno's paradoxes in Plato's Parmenides
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1858076
• An epistemological use of nonstandard analysis to answer Zeno's objections against motion
• On a possible relation between Greek mathematics and Eleatic philosophy
• The three arrows of Zeno. Cantorian and non-Cantorian concepts of the continuum and of motion

Cited in

(1)

• Pythagorean Book II of the \textit{Elements} restored and Pythagorean incommensurabilities reconstructed

This page was built for publication: Zeno's arguments and paradoxes are \textit{not against} motion and multiplicity \textit{but for} the separation of true beings from sensibles

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q6150795)