5 out of 5 points
Maintenance needs are needs associated with _.
living as a human being
5 out of 5 points
The word philosophy comes from the Greek words meaning _ and _.
"to love," "wisdom"
Here it is hardest to see what Parmenides argument might have been. Why cant there be a world of many ungenerated, unchanging, indestructible things? (Cf. atomism). Parmenides does not seem to give any argument against plurality, but the traditi
Negation and non-existence
On any interpretation, it seems that Parmenides would say that any denial (any negative statement) is a denial of existence. And it is easy to see why a Parmenidean would hold that a denial of existence cannot be both meaningful
Zenos Paradox of the Race Course 1. The Par adox Zeno argues that it is impossible for a runner to t raverse a race course. His reason is t hat motion is impossible, because an object in motion must reach the half-way point before i t gets to the end (Ari
Terminology R S G Z1 Z2 Zn the runner the starting point (= Z 0) the end point the point halfway between S and G the point halfway between Z 1 and G the point halfway between Z n -1 and G a run that takes the runner from one Z -point to the next Z -point
Zeno: Argument against Plurality 1. I nt roduction The argument is contained in 4=B1 and 3=B2 (from Simplicius commentary on A r istotles Physics). But there is a problem with the text, and some of the argument is garbled or lost. Fortunately, we can reco
> Pick any existing physical object, x.
2. x has size. [from 1 and 4] 3. x has parts. [from 2 and 5] 4. Let x' be one of those parts; then x' must be apart from the rest of x. That is, one part of x must protrude, or be in front of the rest of x, as Ze
The Race Course: Part 2
1. Our look at the plurality argument suggests that Zeno may have thought that to run all the
Z-runs would be to run a distance that is infinitely long. If this is what he thought, he was mistaken. The reason the sum of all the Z-i
This gives us an argument that can be set out like this:
a. We know that no Z-run reaches G. b. Suppose R makes all the Z-runs and no other runs. c. Then R has not reached G. [From (a). Reason: no Z-run reaches G, and R has not made
any other runs.]
Ours is a reluctant genie. He shrinks from the thought of reaching 1. In fact, being a rational genie, he shows his repugnance against reaching 1 by shrinking so that the ratio of his height at any point to his height at the beginning of the race is alway
Zenos Paradox of the Arrow A r econstruction of the a rgument (following Aristotle, Physics 239b5-7 = RAGP 10): 1. When the arrow is in a place just its own size, its at rest. 2. At every moment of i ts f light, the arrow is in a place just its own size.
A f ina l reconstruction I n this version there is no confusion between instants and intervals. Rather, there is a fallacy that logic students will recognize as the quantifier switch fallacy. The universal quantifier, at every instant, ranges over instant
T he Pluralists
1. Parmenides successors seemed to be concerned with these five central Parmenidean doctrines: 1. Monism: there is n o plu rality . 2. There is n o motion . 3. There is n o generation or destruction . 4. There is n o qualitative change or
Areas of disagreement with Parmenides a. Pluralism - the four elements: Hear first the four roots of all things: Shining Zeus [fire] and life-bringing Hera [air] and Aidoneus [earth] and Nestis [water] who with her tears moistens mortal Springs. (34=B6) b
Parmenides: Stage 2
After establishing his central thesis, that it is impossible to think or talk about what does not exist, Parmenides attempts to deduce from this thesis the following conclusions:
1. There is no coming into existence or ceasing to exist
A n a lternative account T here is another possible reason why Parmenides might have believed that i t is impossible t o talk or think about what does not exist. One might find another argument for the Central T hesis, inspired by B8, lines 34-35: Thinkin
Evaluation of the argument It is clearly a formally valid argument. But is it sound? The first premise seems plausible: how could a thing exist if it is not even possible to speak or think about it? And how could one speak or think about something that co
Like Thales, Anaximander was a monist. But he rejected Thales supposition that water is the material arch. Instead, he proposed the apeiron (the indefinite, or the infinite). Why did he do this? There is only one extant fragment (6 = B1). It w
Did Anaximenes attempt to explain qualitative differences in quantitative terms? He is often credited with having done so. See, for example, Burnet EGP 26 (endorsed by Guthrie 126-27): a theory which explains everything as a form of a single substance is
Heraclitus I nt roduction 1. Fl. 500 B.C. in Ephesus, north of M iletus in Asia M inor. He was known in antiquity as the obscure. And even today, it is very difficult to be certain what Heraclitus was talking about. As Barnes says (Presocratics, p. 57):
Barnes suggests that the unity thesis can be represented as a conjunction of the following two claims:
a. Every object instantiates at least one pair of contrary properties.
x ( x & x )
b. Every pair of contrary properties is coinstantiated in at least o
1. . the tension in the string of a bow or lyre, being exactly balanced by the outward tension exerted by the
arms of the instrument, produces a coherent, unified, stable and efficient complex. We may infer that if the balance between opposites were not m
Puzzles about Identity and Persistence The puzzling doctrine for which Heraclitus is best known is reported by Plato (Cratylus 402A): Heraclitus, you know, says that everything moves on and that nothing is at rest; and, comparing existing things to the fl
T he Flux Doctr ine 1. This is the view that everything is constantly altering; no object retains all of i ts component parts, or all of i ts qualities or characteristics, from one moment to the next. 2. Plato att ributes the Doctrine of Flux to Heraclitu
Identity, Persistence, and the Ship of Theseus Heraclituss river fragments raise puzzles about identity and persistence: under what conditions does an object persist through time as one and the same object? If the world contains things which endure, and r
Plutarch tells us that the ship was exhibited during the time [i.e., lifetime] of Demetrius Phalereus, which means ca. 350-280 BCE. (Demetrius was a well-known Athenian and a member of the Peripatetic school, i.e., a student of Aristotle. He wrote some 45
a. Unfortunately, both alternatives lead to unintuitive consequences. i.
The problem with alternative (i) is that it requires Theseus to have changed ships during the voyage. For he ends up on B, which is clearly not identical to C. But Theseus never once
Parmenides: Stage 1 I ssues among Presocratics studied so far: change vs. permanence. M ilesians looked for a permanent reality underlying change. They thought that change was real, but could be u nderstood only in terms of something permanent. Heraclitus
P relimina ry questions Before we proceed, we must answer the following questions: a. When Parmenides says I t is or It is not, what is it? What is the subject of these assertions? b. What is the sense of is here? c. What does Parmenides mean when he says