Zeno's Paradoxes. A Cardinal Problem 1. On Zenonian Plurality

In this paper the claim that Zeno's paradoxes have been solved is contested. Although no one has ever touched Zeno without refuting him (Whitehead), it will be our aim to show that, whatever it was that was refuted, it was certainly not Zeno. The paper is organised in two parts. In the first part we will demonstrate that upon direct analysis of the Greek sources, an underlying structure common to both the Paradoxes of Plurality and the Paradoxes of Motion can be exposed. This structure bears on a correct - Zenonian - interpretation of the concept of division through and through. The key feature, generally overlooked but essential to a correct understanding of all his arguments, is that they do not presuppose time. Division takes place simultaneously. This holds true for both PP and PM. In the second part a mathematical representation will be set up that catches this common structure, hence the essence of all Zeno's arguments, however without refuting them. Its central tenet is an aequivalence proof for Zeno's procedure and Cantor's Continuum Hypothesis. Some number theoretic and geometric implications will be shortly discussed. Furthermore, it will be shown how the Received View on the motion-arguments can easely be derived by the introduction of time as a (non-Zenonian) premiss, thus causing their collapse into arguments which can be approached and refuted by Aristotle's limit-like concept of the potentially infinite, which remained - though in different disguises - at the core of the refutational strategies that have been in use up to the present. Finally, an interesting link to Newtonian mechanics via Cremona geometry can be established.Comment: 41 pages, 7 figure

Newton vs. Leibniz: Intransparency vs. Inconsistency

We investigate the structure common to causal theories that attempt to explain a (part of) the world. Causality implies conservation of identity, itself a far from simple notion. It imposes strong demands on the universalizing power of the theories concerned. These demands are often met by the introduction of a metalevel which encompasses the notions of 'system' and 'lawful behaviour'. In classical mechanics, the division between universal and particular leaves its traces in the separate treatment of cinematics and dynamics. This analysis is applied to the mechanical theories of Newton and Leibniz, with some surprising results

Infinity and the Sublime

In this paper we intend to connect two different strands of research concerning the origin of what I shall loosely call "formal" ideas: firstly, the relation between logic and rhetoric - the theme of the 2006 Cambridge conference to which this paper was a contribution -, and secondly, the impact of religious convictions on the formation of certain twentieth century mathematical concepts, as brought to the attention recently by the work of L. Graham and J.-M. Kantor. In fact, we shall show that the latter question is a special case of the former, and that investigation of the larger question adds to our understanding of the smaller one. Our approach will be primarily historical.Comment: 29 pages and 3 figure

On what Ontology Is and not-Is

In this paper I study the connection between logic and metaphysics in Plato's participation theory, from the structural properties of the latter. Although Plato was the first ever to formulate the contradiction principle explicitly (in the Phaedo), the logic underlying his system appears to be paraconsistent. This confirms an earlier suggestion by G. Priest. Its technical characteristics and the textual evidence supporting this interpretation are both studied in detail.Comment: 27 pages, 6 figure

Medicine, Logic, or Metaphysics? : Aristotelianism and Scholasticism in the Fight Book Corpus

We tend to study fight books in isolation, which explains why it is so difficult to understand the precise place they occupy in the sociocultural and historical fabric of their time. By doing so, we may miss the many clues they contain about their owner, local society, and intended purpose.  In order to unlock this information, we need to study them in their broader sociocultural and historical context. This requires background and research skills that are not always easily accessible to everyone. To illustrate the point, in this article we show in some detail what is required to make sense of the claim that Aristotelian philosophy and science influenced the medieval fight books in relevant ways, and that understanding this influence helps us to better understand the fight books per se. we give an outline of the general historical framework, and apply it to a test case: Talhoffer’s Thott 290 2° Ms., with some interesting results. Our hope is that this framework may be of some use to other researchers in HEMA Studies who want to dig deeper into sources of interest to them

Zeno’s Paradoxes. A Cardinal Problem. I. On Zenonian Plurality

It will be shown in this article that an ontological approach for some problems related to the interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (QM) could emerge from a re-evaluation of the main paradox of early Greek thought: the paradox of Being and non-Being, and the solutions presented to it by Plato and Aristotle. More well known are the derivative paradoxes of Zeno: the paradox of motion and the paradox of the One and the Many. They stem from what was perceived by classical philosophy to be the fundamental enigma for thinking about the world: the seemingly contradictory results that followed from the co-incidence of being and non-being in the world of change and motion as we experience it, and the experience of absolute existence here and now. The most clear expression of both stances can be found, again following classical thought, in the thinking of Heraclitus of Ephesus and Parmenides of Elea. The problem put forward by these paradoxes reduces for both Plato and Aristotle to the possibility of the existence of stable objects as a necessary condition for knowledge. Hence the primarily ontological nature of the solutions they proposed: Plato’s Theory of Forms and Aristotle’s metaphysics and logic. Plato’s and Aristotle’s systems are argued here to do on the ontological level essentially the same: to introduce stability in the world by introducing the notion of a separable, stable object, for which a ‘principle of contradiction’ is valid: an object cannot be and not-be at the same place at the same time. So it becomes possible to forbid contradiction on an epistemological level, and thus to guarantee the certainty of knowledge that seemed to be threatened before. After leaving Aristotelian metaphysics, early modern science had to cope with these problems: it did so by introducing “space” as the seat of stability, and “time” as the theater of motion. But the ontological structure present in this solution remained the same. Therefore the fundamental notion ‘separable system’, related to the notions observation and measurement, themselves related to the modern concepts of space and time, appears to be intrinsically problematic, because it is inextricably connected to classical logic on the ontological level. We see therefore the problems dealt with by quantum logic not as merely formal, and the problem of ‘non-locality’ as related to it, indicating the need to re-think the notions system, entity, as well as the implications of the operation ‘measurement’, which is seen here as an application of classical logic (including its ontological consequences) on the material world

De Ontologie van den Paradox

Since the dawn of philosophy, the paradoxical interconnection between the continuous and the discrete plays a central rôle in attempts to understand the ontology of the world, while defying all attempts at consistent formulation. I investigate the relation between (classical) logic and concepts of “space” and “time” in physical and metaphysical theories, starting with the Greeks. An important part of my research consists in exploring the strong connections between paradoxes as they appear and are dealt with in ancient philosophy, and their re-appearance in early modern natural philosophy, as well as in the foundations of contemporary science and mathematics. The way paradoxes are dealt with sheds light on a theory’s hidden metaphysical assumptions, especially with respect to matter, space, time and causation, it defines its ontological signature. This conclusion led me to the in-depth study of early modern natural philosophy, the origin of natural science, especially the influences ancient thinkers had on the new conceptions of space, time and causation developed by Newton, Huygens and Leibniz

Maître à penser: Giorgio Agamben

A concise introduction (in Dutch) to the work of Giorgio Agamben, from the perspective of the central question in his philosophy under what conditions community or society today are possible, not based on in the end always artbitrary principles of exclusion — be they historical, biological, ..

Economie als wetenschap?

An accessible overview of the (lack of) debate in France between the hegemonic neoclassical school in economics with its positivist pretenses and the more historical Marxist and Keynesian schools