The Motionless Arrow: Aristotles Thoughts On Zenos Arror Argument :: essays research papers

The Motionless Arrow Aristotles Thoughts on Zenos Arror Argument     Aristotles thoughts on Zenos Arrow Argument as represented in Chapter9 of Aristotles Physics A Guided Study can be understood in such a way that itmight non be "next door to madness". In this chapter, Aristotle interpretsZenos furrow of the quick Arrow as "missing the mark". There are fourpremises for this argument, and in Aristotles opinion, premise three can berejected. He does not believe that snip is composed of indivisible nows, whichhe proves with laws of science. However, by evaluating the falsity of premisethree, you exit find that premises one and devil are also false. Almost allopinions can be argued, however, and by evaluating the philosophy of both men,many points can be reached about the rigour and soundness of the argument.Though, by finding the premises false, the argument is not sound, and therefore,Zenos argument leaves much to be said.   &nbs p Deciphering from what we know of the argument by what Aristotle tells usin Chapter 9, the premises are sketched out1. Everything is at rest when at a site equal to it2. The Flying arrow is at rest when at a place equal to it3. Time is composed of indivisible nows (instants).4. Everything that changes place is doing so in the now.5. Conclusion The flying arrow doesnt move.According to Zeno, while is composed of many indivisible nows, or instants.Aristotle disagrees, stating in line 210 that no magnitude, including time, iscomposed of indivisible nows. Exactly how long is an instant? Is time mortal?As you start dividing time, the smaller you survive, the less movement occurs. But crimson when you do divide it smaller and smaller, is there not at to the lowest degree some smallamount of movement occurring? When give time get so small that movement doesnot occur? This is Aristotles reasoning that time will never get to a"smallest" point, as length will never have a & quotsmallest" division. Therefore,he is rejecting the third premise, stating that time is not composed ofindivisible segments.     Zeno, however, feels that time can be divided into a "smallest" part.After all, in physics, you can determine an objects instantaneous velocity orspeedup at a specific point in its journey, at a specific time. Wouldntthis make time indivisible?Velocity and acceleration are given to mean motion, which means theobject is moving at this specific point in time. Therefore, according toAristotle, this paradox would not be so if it were not taken that time werecomposed of nows.By rejecting this premise, and reevaluating the argument, you will read