The Motionless Arrow: Aristotle's Thoughts on Zeno's Arror Argument
Aristotle's thoughts on Zeno's Arrow Argument as represented in Chapter
9 of Aristotle's Physics: A Guided Study can be understood in such a way that it might not be "next door to madness". In this chapter, Aristotle interprets
Zeno's argument of the Flying Arrow as "missing the mark". There are four premises for this argument, and in Aristotle's opinion, premise three can be rejected. He does not believe that time is composed of indivisible nows, which he proves with laws of science. However, by evaluating the falsity of premise three, you will find that premises one and two are also false. Almost all opinions can be argued, however, and by evaluating the philosophy of both men, many points can be reached about the validity and soundness of the argument.
Though, by finding the premises false, the argument is not sound, and therefore,
Zeno's argument leaves much to be said.
Deciphering from what we know of the argument by what Aristotle tells us in Chapter 9, the premises are sketched out:
1. Everything is at rest when at a place equal to it;
2. The Flying arrow is at rest when at a place equal to it;
3. Time is composed of indivisible nows (instants).
4. Everything that changes place is doing so in the now.
5. Conclusion: The flying arrow doesn't move.
According to Zeno, time is composed of many indivisible nows, or instants.
Aristotle disagrees, stating in line 210 that no magnitude, including time, is composed of indivisible nows. Exactly how long is an instant? Is time finite?
As you start dividing time, the smaller you get, the less movement occurs. But even when you do divide it smaller and smaller, is there not at least some small amount of movement occurring? When will time get so small that movement does not occur? This is Aristotle's reasoning: that time will never get to a
"smallest" point, as length will never have a "smallest" division. Therefore, he is rejecting the third premise, stating that time is not composed of indivisible segments.
Zeno, however, feels that time can be divided into a "smallest" part.
After all, in physics, you can determine an object's instantaneous velocity or acceleration at a specific point in its journey, at a specific time. Wouldn't this make time indivisible?
Velocity and acceleration are given to mean motion, which means the object is moving at this specific point in time. Therefore, according to
Aristotle, this paradox would not be so if it were not taken that time were composed of nows.
By rejecting this premise, and reevaluating the argument, you will read
In this paper, I offer a reconstruction of Aristotle’s argument from Physics Book 2, chapter 8, 199a9. Aristotle in this chapter tries to make an analogy between nature and action to establish that both, nature and action, have an end.
Aristotle, R. P. Hardie, and R. K. Gaye. Physics. Adelaide: The University of Adelaide Library, 2000. Print.
Aristotle's book The Physics, was in existence by about 350 B.C. This book is mainly concerned with change a...
Here Aristotle is attempting to explain the way in which the world is created by god. He does not want his god to act in time because he does not want god actively changing things in the world because that active change would lead to potentiality. Aristotle’s god is not an activist, the God of the Bible is much more of an activist who gets involved with human lives in a direct fashion. He believes that the final end of the universe is to attempt to be like god.
The. The "Aristotle". Home Page English 112 VCCS Litonline. Web. The Web.
The study of motion is so central to the book; motion defines nature, time and is what causes process of change. Motion is an important aspect of understanding the physics of the world because the world is constantly in motion. Because motion is mentioned in the definition of nature, any discussion of nature will rely upon the explanation of motion. So in Aristotle’s attempt to define and understand the physics of the world heavily relied on motion and is the reason it is mentioned in every book of the physics.
Kirby, Jeremy. Aristotle's Metaphysics: Form, Matter, and Identity. London: Continuum, 2008. Web. 10 Dec 2013.
Probably one of the most controversial issues in philosophy is the search for Truth. The Truth in ethics and morality are particularly important, because it determines the way of life one would choose to live for individual; for society as a whole, it is the foundation of human civilization and it is the basis for laws and orders. I believe that the Doctrine of Golden Mean developed by Aristotle has provided a plausible guide to moral goodness, for him the golden mean is the desirable middle between two extremes, one of excess and the other of deficiency, this idea was first published in his book The Nicomachean Ethics. In my opinion, the middle path of moderation is achievable for any one; one can live his or her life through moderation and it can be accomplished by developing virtue as a habit.
20.Aristotle's doctrine of the "four causes" -- material, formal, efficient and final -- may be found in
In The Metaphysics, Aristotle states, “All men by nature desire to know.” Although, this is a generalization, of this insightful statement about the nature of humans and human understanding this statement truly captures what Aristotle was trying to figure out about humans and their thinking. Everyone has a desire to know or to understand. As rational beings we tend to contemplate very simple ideas to the most complicated, like our existence, or parts of the universe, or the universe as a whole. Aristotle is known as the father of modern day psychology and biology, even though many of his ideas of these two sciences was proven incorrect. The most important concepts of Aristotle’s theory of human understanding are the notion of cause, the infinite, and the soul.
Aristotle, a name well known even now like the gods of ancient Greece such as Zeus and Poseidon, his name is well known because of the questions he asked and the way he viewed the world that would make those of a simple mind scratch their heads. People whom do not question anything think he is insane and by right he may have been a little mad, but we as humans are all a little off kilt. As this you can look at the views of Aristotle and if you are not one of a simple mind and can look at it in a critical thinking way, you can analyze his views to see if you agree or disagree that in fact he thinks that all things in this world are physical, and that everything has a purpose. Aristotle is correct in the case that all things are physical, because are matter, he also does not bring religion into his statement, yet does not discredit an artisan; he also states that all things do in fact have a purpose, and are something believable.
To know a thing, says Aristotle, one must know the thing’s causes. For Aristotle the knowledge of causes provides an explanation. It is a way to understand something. Because of the importance of causality to knowledge and understanding, Aristotle developed something like the complete doctrine of causality, distinguishing efficient, material, formal, and final causes, and later concepts of causality have been derived from his analysis by omission. Aristotle’s four causes gives answers to the questions related to the thing to help ascertain knowledge of it, such as what the thing is made of, where the thing comes from, what the thing actually is, and what the thing’s purpose is. The thing’s purpose is used to determine the former three, in addition to the purpose being basically the same thing as what the thing actually is, as the purpose of the thing is used to determine whether or not a thing is what it is.
Rather, Aristotle attempts to tackle some of the most fundamental questions of human experience, and at the crux of this inquiry is his argument for the existence of an unmoved mover. For Aristotle, all things are caused to move by other things, but the unreasonableness of this going on ad infinitum means that there must eventually be an ultimate mover who is himself unmoved. Not only does he put forth this argument successfully, but he also implies why it must hold true for anyone who believes in the ability to find truth through philosophy. Book XII of the Metaphysics opens with a clear statement of its goal in the first line of Chapter One: to explore substances as well as their causes and principles. With this idea in mind, Chapter One delineates the three different kinds of substances: eternal, sensible substances; perishable, sensible substances; and immovable substances.
Achilles and the tortoise is another paradox stated by Zeno. Zeno starts out by stating that Achilles is in a race with a...
Aristotle made contributions to logic, physics, biology, medicine, and agriculture. He redesigned most, if not all, areas of knowledge he studied. Later in life he became the “Father of logic” and was the first to develop a formalized way of reasoning. Aristotle was a greek philosopher who founded formal logic, pioneered zoology, founded his own school, and classified the various branches of philosophy.