the key here is that 0.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
not really a paradox as the "paradox" contradicts itself. On the one hand it states that space is infinitely divisible (objects can never reach their targets) but at the same time specifies information that can never be known if space was infinitely divisible - sich as the exact location of things, the distance between them and the half-way point.. So in conclusion - you can't have it both ways.
this is bullshit!!!! obviously he would catch him as long an achilles is faster he would not travel 1/2 the distance everytime..... nor does this prove anything about motion.
i get it now...he has to reach a halfway point before he can get to the sheep...but since ther r infinite halfway points he'll always be behind the turtle thats wat logic says but he gets in front off the sheep...i mean turtle
Zeno's paradoxes are complete dog shit, it can be easily disproven by easy physics or easy math that
Achilles reaches the tortoise in
1+1/10+1/100+... seconds (which can be calculated as 10/9 by easy math) if we think that the tortoise is 1 m away from Achilles at the start and Achilles' speed is 1 m/s and the tortoise's is 1/10 m/s.
Let´s assume there is a system, where Zeno´s argument is valid, you as a part of this system can never prove a paradox. If you are watching the clock during the race, the hand of the clock will never reach the next second, because it first has to reach half a second, then another quarter and so on. So the clock and even you and your consciousness as a part of this system are subject to the same rules, and time and space is still linear within this system, and Achilles eventually wins the race.
@itreyderby But here's the thing. Why does the turtle get to REACH his goal and Achillese is subjected to this arbitrary limit of zero? Also, how is the turtle 1/4 ahead when A. is 3/4 ahead? The turtle could be really slow. A. could be .99 and the turle only .01 ahead. And continue this until you can get to zero. I suppose the point is you can never get to zero. But these are just human made numbers. I don't think it proves anything.
k i understand that but if we think like that then think about it, how could we shoot a bow and arrow, cuz the arrow must REACH the target right, and so it does, but when we think about this paradoxically, it doesn't, the arrow must reach a midway point, which must reach a midway point of that and so on right, how can the arrow ever move right, arrows do move, things move, but paradoxically they do not move. where is the flaw?
@itreyderby I think that is the paradox. Because, logically (with OUR math assumptions), it shouldn't move. But realistically, it does. Since the only thing that really matters in life is whether something WORKS, I don't really care about this paradox. I don't care if the math says one thing, but reality says another. But somehow, our math works in the real world most of the time!!
c you can never really move according to paradoxes but in reality you can, you can never really begin time according to paradoxes but in reality time is real, time and space are real and the big bang was the creation of those two things, and it sounds counterintuitive right, like something always exists out of something, or there is always something before something that happens, well according to that logic where did it all come from, how could we even exist today?
say right now something existed before right now cuz i WAS doing something before right now replying back to you and if you continue in this fashion something came before forever towards negative infinity this is stupid cuz there is no beginning and no end towards postive infinity, but yet we exist. Zeno shows us that the nature of the universe is one.
And yes i have had a billion of thoughts on these ideas, trust me i have some idea of what is going on in my brain, i have very out there theories but they are more like imaginations, like what if everything already happend right like a movie, a movie is my scientific term for a series of sequences that is in the order of like the begining, the middle, and end, for example, and so if it all happend already but the universe was put back into rewind to the beginning, is there a
isnt there a reason why its called a paradox? like there are an infinite amount of halfway points between the runner and the tortoise, right? so logically, its possible that the runner never passes the tortoise. but, like some of you have said, it really isnt that hard to outrun someone thats slower than you.
@Pyromaniac429 wasn't zeno trying to defame the Pythagoreans who did not distinguish between the geometrical and physical world. In the geometrical world i can easily see how nothing moves, but in the physical world, Achilles does pass the turtle, and we do move, so how is this possible? How can we, who exist in the physical world, be subject that of axioms in the geometrical world? Can someone please explain this to me, i've only just begun my study of philosophy and i'm already confused
Whatta??? Are you for real??? This paradox is the most stupid thing ive ever heard. There's no problem. He just outruns the turtle!!!!! This proves how blindly people belive in respected men.......*sigh*..........Zeno was wrong.
@weirdscience81 ... You're stupid. The point is that, logically, he SHOULDN'T be able to outrun the turtle because of the halfway points, which are infinite.
@AnonymousBAD well now looking at it a second time, and please correct me if my assumption is incorrect, but to me it seems like in this paradox Zeno almost makes rationalists seem irrational. I'm not sure if he tried to target rationalists in addition to Pythagoreans but It makes sense in a logical sense, and then you bring it to the material world and suddenly it's totally impossible, so would anyone else say that it almost shows why we can't use absolute rationalism?
@666Anata To me, it's more about the failings of trying to understand the world through math and theory alone- It's not saying, in my mind, that movement is an illusion, but that our labeling of "halfway points" and trying to quantify things in this manner is incorrect. This logic is absolutely sound, so it leads me to believe that there is some function of space and time that we do not understand.
Movement doesn't make much sense if you remove all references to time, so what? Each halving of the distance to the tortoise takes half as much time. The total time it takes is just a convergent, geometric sum.
The problem is setup so there is no winning move. Which is why its not a paradox. It is assumed that purely travelling faster will cause you to win negating the structure of the race that is involved i.e "all other things being equal".
"in a RACE" i.e. its inferred both parties are aiming to win but whats actually happening(either because they're too stupid to realise or intentionally) that they've both chosen strategies that cause a stalemate. i.e. if we put infinity on the finishing line.
This paradox only exists due to Zeno's apparent ignorance of time. Zeno neatly forgets that the turtle will not advance the same distance as Achilles is advancing his half-distance. So, essentially, the paradox here is that Zeno is an idiot, yet people still care what he says.
i think there is much missing here..... like if you were to fist state its reasonable to say the man is 2x faster than sheep-thing , that might fill in some holes to your disgrace, but i could be wrong
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
this is simple Algebra.
If they are going the same speed they will never catch up. No matter how long the headstart, and if Achilles can run faster than the Turtle. He will catch up eventually. If you don't believe me here's an example:
Lets say that the Turtle goes 2 mph and Achilles goes 3 mph. The Turtle also has a 30 minutes head start.
In this construction the time narrows to realy small proportions as you keep halving the distance and pointing at the middle of the line, the time it takes to reach that half is half it's previous one. How this way the distance becomes zero? When molecules collide :p
He said that. That's why it's a paradox. The point of the riddle in ancient times was to demonstrate the inaccuracy of dividing the IS-ness of reality into separate conceptual units of space and time. This follows from the poem of Parmenides. Also, notice that they knew already 2,500 years ago that space and time were inseparable aspects of a continuum.
so if i was running away from a mugger with a gun and lets say i was 60 metters away when he fired, the bullet will surely travel but it'll be impossible for it to hit me for each time it reaches a half way point it'll continually present the bullet a new challenge of reaching a new half way point.. so while the bullet is busy signing paperworks®istrations for an infinite amount of half way points.. the mugger is already locked in jail for 3 months complete with courtdates and hearings?
One day when Zeno was giving an oration about his paradoxes he got carried away with his rhetoric and flinging wide his arms dislocated his shoulder. He fell to the floor in agony. A doctor came forward and started to put his arm back but then he said, "In order to put your arm back I would first have to put it half way, and before I could do that ..." "Just F***ing do it!" screamed Zeno. (True story.)
If you were to walk a yard, you would have to go half that distance to reach the other half, if you weren't walking at all. For an example, 1/16, 1/8, 1/4, 1/2. You do not move, you are basically breaking a certain point to move a single point. I think Zeno was trying to say is that you can move in infinite spaces but will never reach the destination.
The answer to this paradox is simple. There is no material universe. Everything exists only in the mind. Zeno logically proves the non-existence of a material universe.
I don't like the idea that he proved the non-existence of a material universe. If that were true it would only bring up the question of if the material universe was an illusion how then do we all perceive the same thing?
Not exactly. All you ever witness is 2 subjective images in your mind. But in your mind you see in frames, exactly 36 frames, or still pictures per second. In a mind Zeno's paradox fails because nothing is really moving at all just disappearing and reappearing with the illusion of movement. But a material universe can not exist because Zeno's paradoxes logically disprove it.
Mathematics doesn't destroy his principal, it only says WHEN Achilles will pass the turtle never actually HOW Achilles can do it in the first place. The whole idea was "how is motion possible if there is an infinite number of points between two places" which mathematics didn't even acknowledge when trying to solve the paradox thus it is still unresolved. I have my own theory of resolving the paradox but it's kind of hard to explain within the finite character limit.
It doesn't say WHEN, it just says that Achilles passes the line. That's all. That's like saying this message will never be read since there's an infinite amount of time (sub-seconds of you will) before right now and when I press the send button. So you'll never even get this message since there are infinitely many sub-seconds in your way. email me your explaination at joesquills@yahoo.
Theoretically he never passes the line; mathematically he does. In reality he does as well.
Motion is concerned with displacment and that is a measurement of distence. within an inch on a ruler there are an infinite number of points but only two of those points are relevent to the displacement we call an inch (the two end points of the line segment known as "an inch" determine the unit of measure). The error in this paradox is that it cant disprove motion, it is better as a question of the measurability of motion using infinitely small units of displacement.
I don't think Zeno was calling movement an illusion, I think he was calling logic bullshit, showing that one could derive that the world was impossible. As a cynic, however, I don't think he took that as a final judgement on the world, but rather, about philosophers and their tendency to believe they knew deeper truths... deeper truths which for him lead to incoherency.
No, he was. Read Parmenides by Plato or the parts where Aristotle talks about the Paradoxes. Zeno said change, motion, and everything was all one. He made up the paradoxes to defend his teacher, Parmenides. He seemed perfectly ok defending the proposition that many of these things are seen to be illusions by logic.
ok, I'll refresh myself but I do recall that interpretation. My impression was different, the difficulty of accepting literally descriptions of ancient philosophers is part of why I made my interpretation... but perhaps I was in error. I.e. these guys said similar things about skeptics, tagging them nihilistic which they clearly did not take themselves to be.
the key here is that 0.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
and 1 are the same number.
braydos100 2 months ago
"I suppose I should trust a philosopher"
Good one!
canadianbacon007 3 months ago
not really a paradox as the "paradox" contradicts itself. On the one hand it states that space is infinitely divisible (objects can never reach their targets) but at the same time specifies information that can never be known if space was infinitely divisible - sich as the exact location of things, the distance between them and the half-way point.. So in conclusion - you can't have it both ways.
makatozi 3 months ago
this is bullshit!!!! obviously he would catch him as long an achilles is faster he would not travel 1/2 the distance everytime..... nor does this prove anything about motion.
saber1992 4 months ago
Horribly explained.
Samueljspencer 5 months ago
Because you have to travel half the distance before reaching the full distance.
Peter1992t 7 months ago
But why does he HAVE to ravel 1/2 the distance?
JimmyPaigeIsGod36 7 months ago
Because your not always traveling half the distance?
mlgrd 10 months ago
terribly explained :/
twattythirky 10 months ago
Zeno - your argument is invalid
davoisakoollord 10 months ago
nice video what is the name of the musics
giaky3876 1 year ago
Ohh god, this 'paradox' again! This is not even a paradox
batitombo 1 year ago
zeno arrow moves in space only and not in time.
TimeEinstein 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
are you all stupid?
Kevin4779 1 year ago
Yes, but that's only providing that Archillies is moving at the same speed as the Tortoise.
DimzzyA 1 year ago
i get it now...he has to reach a halfway point before he can get to the sheep...but since ther r infinite halfway points he'll always be behind the turtle thats wat logic says but he gets in front off the sheep...i mean turtle
tellemscrappy 1 year ago
Zeno sucks cock on a daily basis, 1/2+1/4+1/8+..=1
Everyone with simple mathematical knowledge can prove that, but I'll prove that here anyways:
If we assume that 1/2+1/4+1/8+..=S, we can calculate that 2S=1+1/2+1/4+..=1+S, so S=1.
drrobertoboogie97 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Zeno's paradoxes are complete dog shit, it can be easily disproven by easy physics or easy math that
Achilles reaches the tortoise in
1+1/10+1/100+... seconds (which can be calculated as 10/9 by easy math) if we think that the tortoise is 1 m away from Achilles at the start and Achilles' speed is 1 m/s and the tortoise's is 1/10 m/s.
drrobertoboogie97 1 year ago
Comment removed
drrobertoboogie97 1 year ago
It's the same as the archer's paradox. I think its more of a Philosophical argument than a logical one.
StylemasterKaze 1 year ago
considering that when that paradox was thinked, they didnt knew about velocity.... hmm its a fail now?
xXxDiukexXx 1 year ago
zeno is complete bullshit, if you run faster than the slower person, you will eventually overtake them,
SPAZZY1912 1 year ago 4
the velocity is different.... sorry zeno
muranyiii 1 year ago 4
this is awsome!!
SseBb 1 year ago
Comment removed
itreyderby 1 year ago
Let´s assume there is a system, where Zeno´s argument is valid, you as a part of this system can never prove a paradox. If you are watching the clock during the race, the hand of the clock will never reach the next second, because it first has to reach half a second, then another quarter and so on. So the clock and even you and your consciousness as a part of this system are subject to the same rules, and time and space is still linear within this system, and Achilles eventually wins the race.
netzweltler 1 year ago 3
Comment removed
itreyderby 1 year ago
Ugh, no. It still doesn't make sense.
quitejaded 1 year ago
Comment removed
itreyderby 1 year ago
@itreyderby But here's the thing. Why does the turtle get to REACH his goal and Achillese is subjected to this arbitrary limit of zero? Also, how is the turtle 1/4 ahead when A. is 3/4 ahead? The turtle could be really slow. A. could be .99 and the turle only .01 ahead. And continue this until you can get to zero. I suppose the point is you can never get to zero. But these are just human made numbers. I don't think it proves anything.
quitejaded 1 year ago
@quitejaded
k i understand that but if we think like that then think about it, how could we shoot a bow and arrow, cuz the arrow must REACH the target right, and so it does, but when we think about this paradoxically, it doesn't, the arrow must reach a midway point, which must reach a midway point of that and so on right, how can the arrow ever move right, arrows do move, things move, but paradoxically they do not move. where is the flaw?
itreyderby 1 year ago
@itreyderby I think that is the paradox. Because, logically (with OUR math assumptions), it shouldn't move. But realistically, it does. Since the only thing that really matters in life is whether something WORKS, I don't really care about this paradox. I don't care if the math says one thing, but reality says another. But somehow, our math works in the real world most of the time!!
quitejaded 1 year ago
@quitejaded
c you can never really move according to paradoxes but in reality you can, you can never really begin time according to paradoxes but in reality time is real, time and space are real and the big bang was the creation of those two things, and it sounds counterintuitive right, like something always exists out of something, or there is always something before something that happens, well according to that logic where did it all come from, how could we even exist today?
itreyderby 1 year ago
@quitejaded
say right now something existed before right now cuz i WAS doing something before right now replying back to you and if you continue in this fashion something came before forever towards negative infinity this is stupid cuz there is no beginning and no end towards postive infinity, but yet we exist. Zeno shows us that the nature of the universe is one.
itreyderby 1 year ago
@quitejaded
And yes i have had a billion of thoughts on these ideas, trust me i have some idea of what is going on in my brain, i have very out there theories but they are more like imaginations, like what if everything already happend right like a movie, a movie is my scientific term for a series of sequences that is in the order of like the begining, the middle, and end, for example, and so if it all happend already but the universe was put back into rewind to the beginning, is there a
itreyderby 1 year ago
@quitejaded
a chance of diverging from that way, without believing in parallel universes theory
itreyderby 1 year ago
@quitejaded hey um this is a kewl site it is called truthawakens
itreyderby 1 year ago
isnt there a reason why its called a paradox? like there are an infinite amount of halfway points between the runner and the tortoise, right? so logically, its possible that the runner never passes the tortoise. but, like some of you have said, it really isnt that hard to outrun someone thats slower than you.
Pyromaniac429 1 year ago
@Pyromaniac429 wasn't zeno trying to defame the Pythagoreans who did not distinguish between the geometrical and physical world. In the geometrical world i can easily see how nothing moves, but in the physical world, Achilles does pass the turtle, and we do move, so how is this possible? How can we, who exist in the physical world, be subject that of axioms in the geometrical world? Can someone please explain this to me, i've only just begun my study of philosophy and i'm already confused
666Anata 1 year ago
@666Anata From what I have learnt, he was trying to show that logically movement/change is impossible.
badboyfrvr 1 year ago
Whatta??? Are you for real??? This paradox is the most stupid thing ive ever heard. There's no problem. He just outruns the turtle!!!!! This proves how blindly people belive in respected men.......*sigh*..........Zeno was wrong.
weirdscience81 1 year ago
@weirdscience81 ... You're stupid. The point is that, logically, he SHOULDN'T be able to outrun the turtle because of the halfway points, which are infinite.
AnonymousBAD 1 year ago
@AnonymousBAD well now looking at it a second time, and please correct me if my assumption is incorrect, but to me it seems like in this paradox Zeno almost makes rationalists seem irrational. I'm not sure if he tried to target rationalists in addition to Pythagoreans but It makes sense in a logical sense, and then you bring it to the material world and suddenly it's totally impossible, so would anyone else say that it almost shows why we can't use absolute rationalism?
666Anata 1 year ago
@666Anata To me, it's more about the failings of trying to understand the world through math and theory alone- It's not saying, in my mind, that movement is an illusion, but that our labeling of "halfway points" and trying to quantify things in this manner is incorrect. This logic is absolutely sound, so it leads me to believe that there is some function of space and time that we do not understand.
AnonymousBAD 1 year ago
Movement doesn't make much sense if you remove all references to time, so what? Each halving of the distance to the tortoise takes half as much time. The total time it takes is just a convergent, geometric sum.
soylentgreenb 1 year ago
The problem is setup so there is no winning move. Which is why its not a paradox. It is assumed that purely travelling faster will cause you to win negating the structure of the race that is involved i.e "all other things being equal".
"in a RACE" i.e. its inferred both parties are aiming to win but whats actually happening(either because they're too stupid to realise or intentionally) that they've both chosen strategies that cause a stalemate. i.e. if we put infinity on the finishing line.
DarkKnightBob1o1 1 year ago
My fist accelerates towards zeno and punches him in the face. Equation disproven!
DarkKnightBob1o1 1 year ago
I AM DEF A why PERSON
etechjoe 2 years ago
NO MATTER HOW MANY PUPPETS I WATCH OF THIS DEMONSTARTION i dont get it
DAMN MY DYSLEXIA
etechjoe 2 years ago
The paradox exists because our intuition can't handle infinity. If you know a little bit calculus,
then you know you can achieve seemingly infinitely steps in finite time, e.g.
1 + 1/2+1/4+ 1/8 + .... = 2
jiandongg 2 years ago
This paradox only exists due to Zeno's apparent ignorance of time. Zeno neatly forgets that the turtle will not advance the same distance as Achilles is advancing his half-distance. So, essentially, the paradox here is that Zeno is an idiot, yet people still care what he says.
xyleborus 2 years ago 3
i think there is much missing here..... like if you were to fist state its reasonable to say the man is 2x faster than sheep-thing , that might fill in some holes to your disgrace, but i could be wrong
Poisonfrogg 2 years ago
ZENO sucks balls. his paradoxes were shit.
rationalopposer 2 years ago 19
FLOAM!
Selendomono 2 years ago
OMG people you don't understand the complexity of this argument
yes, it is possible to move and catch up ... yes, the paradox is solved later on
it falls under the principles of calculus and the concept of infinity ... read a book people
sasukecraz 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this is simple Algebra.
If they are going the same speed they will never catch up. No matter how long the headstart, and if Achilles can run faster than the Turtle. He will catch up eventually. If you don't believe me here's an example:
Lets say that the Turtle goes 2 mph and Achilles goes 3 mph. The Turtle also has a 30 minutes head start.
So... lets use the distance formula.
2T= 3 (T-30)
2T = 3T - 90
-1T=-90
It would take an hour for Achilles to catch up.
Blarger222 2 years ago
Its a paradox. We know that in actuality Achilles will catch up.
ConnorShovel 2 years ago 2
LOL you're an idiot
RYNO2511 2 years ago
In this construction the time narrows to realy small proportions as you keep halving the distance and pointing at the middle of the line, the time it takes to reach that half is half it's previous one. How this way the distance becomes zero? When molecules collide :p
88Cortex 2 years ago
Well, this paradox doesen't work in real life.
lovemyverybestloving 2 years ago
He said that. That's why it's a paradox. The point of the riddle in ancient times was to demonstrate the inaccuracy of dividing the IS-ness of reality into separate conceptual units of space and time. This follows from the poem of Parmenides. Also, notice that they knew already 2,500 years ago that space and time were inseparable aspects of a continuum.
Barklord 2 years ago
hmm.
so if i was running away from a mugger with a gun and lets say i was 60 metters away when he fired, the bullet will surely travel but it'll be impossible for it to hit me for each time it reaches a half way point it'll continually present the bullet a new challenge of reaching a new half way point.. so while the bullet is busy signing paperworks®istrations for an infinite amount of half way points.. the mugger is already locked in jail for 3 months complete with courtdates and hearings?
Neotrigunnerx 2 years ago
One day when Zeno was giving an oration about his paradoxes he got carried away with his rhetoric and flinging wide his arms dislocated his shoulder. He fell to the floor in agony. A doctor came forward and started to put his arm back but then he said, "In order to put your arm back I would first have to put it half way, and before I could do that ..." "Just F***ing do it!" screamed Zeno. (True story.)
mikelheron20 2 years ago 34
LMao!!!! thnx bro that made my day xD
Neotrigunnerx 2 years ago
@mikelheron20 lol
WavesOfTrolls 1 year ago
If you were to walk a yard, you would have to go half that distance to reach the other half, if you weren't walking at all. For an example, 1/16, 1/8, 1/4, 1/2. You do not move, you are basically breaking a certain point to move a single point. I think Zeno was trying to say is that you can move in infinite spaces but will never reach the destination.
pashion4dance 2 years ago
awesomeness!
carpeinfinitum 2 years ago
The answer to this paradox is simple. There is no material universe. Everything exists only in the mind. Zeno logically proves the non-existence of a material universe.
agnostic79 2 years ago
I don't like the idea that he proved the non-existence of a material universe. If that were true it would only bring up the question of if the material universe was an illusion how then do we all perceive the same thing?
RiotRant 2 years ago
Its a Shadow World
Crunchybear1 2 years ago
we already know that this series converges to 1, so we could ignore zeno on this one.
joesquills 2 years ago
Not exactly. All you ever witness is 2 subjective images in your mind. But in your mind you see in frames, exactly 36 frames, or still pictures per second. In a mind Zeno's paradox fails because nothing is really moving at all just disappearing and reappearing with the illusion of movement. But a material universe can not exist because Zeno's paradoxes logically disprove it.
agnostic79 2 years ago
You're not in my mind, so you don't know what I see. Therefore, by Joesquills paradox, zeno can again be ignored.
joesquills 2 years ago
If you're going to that level of skepticism, everything has to be ignored.
agnostic79 2 years ago
Better to be socrates dissatisfied rather than a pig satisfied
joesquills 2 years ago
Touche figment.
agnostic79 2 years ago
oooo. DIdn't I disprove his paradox using a power series. Mathematics destroyed his principal. Discussion over. Take a calculus class
joesquills 2 years ago
Is this really another mind contacting me or am I dreaming this?
agnostic79 2 years ago
Maybe it is a dream, for it would be hard to prove that it wasn't. Unlike Zeno's paradox, somethings are hard to prove. We have to agree somewhere.
joesquills 2 years ago
Mathematics doesn't destroy his principal, it only says WHEN Achilles will pass the turtle never actually HOW Achilles can do it in the first place. The whole idea was "how is motion possible if there is an infinite number of points between two places" which mathematics didn't even acknowledge when trying to solve the paradox thus it is still unresolved. I have my own theory of resolving the paradox but it's kind of hard to explain within the finite character limit.
RiotRant 2 years ago
It doesn't say WHEN, it just says that Achilles passes the line. That's all. That's like saying this message will never be read since there's an infinite amount of time (sub-seconds of you will) before right now and when I press the send button. So you'll never even get this message since there are infinitely many sub-seconds in your way. email me your explaination at joesquills@yahoo.
Theoretically he never passes the line; mathematically he does. In reality he does as well.
joesquills 2 years ago
Motion is concerned with displacment and that is a measurement of distence. within an inch on a ruler there are an infinite number of points but only two of those points are relevent to the displacement we call an inch (the two end points of the line segment known as "an inch" determine the unit of measure). The error in this paradox is that it cant disprove motion, it is better as a question of the measurability of motion using infinitely small units of displacement.
joness105639 2 years ago
man, It's really weird, logic tells you it's sure that bigger speed will get in front of it, but thuis is really strange
LosKeshusos 2 years ago
Great animation and explanation. Well done.
itsabomberscope 3 years ago
I don't think Zeno was calling movement an illusion, I think he was calling logic bullshit, showing that one could derive that the world was impossible. As a cynic, however, I don't think he took that as a final judgement on the world, but rather, about philosophers and their tendency to believe they knew deeper truths... deeper truths which for him lead to incoherency.
pyrrho314 3 years ago 3
No, he was. Read Parmenides by Plato or the parts where Aristotle talks about the Paradoxes. Zeno said change, motion, and everything was all one. He made up the paradoxes to defend his teacher, Parmenides. He seemed perfectly ok defending the proposition that many of these things are seen to be illusions by logic.
JoshL11185 3 years ago 4
ok, I'll refresh myself but I do recall that interpretation. My impression was different, the difficulty of accepting literally descriptions of ancient philosophers is part of why I made my interpretation... but perhaps I was in error. I.e. these guys said similar things about skeptics, tagging them nihilistic which they clearly did not take themselves to be.
pyrrho314 3 years ago
hehe
simeonlong 3 years ago