Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Postulating a smallest magnitude does not resolve Zeno's dichotomy paradox but instead generates a new motion paradox

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A minimal partless body cannot transition between adjacent minimal spaces without being partly in and partly out of its original space
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A partless body cannot be partly in anything
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore motion of minimal bodies is impossible under the smallest-magnitude hypothesis
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If motion requires traversing discrete minimal units, then at any instant a body occupies exactly one minimal space, making motion a series of discontinuous jumps.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Discontinuous jumps between minimal spaces entail temporal gaps where the body exists at neither location, generating a new paradox of existence between positions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Aristotle's Physics (231a-b) establishes that discrete indivisibles cannot compose continuous motion, so atomism replaces one paradox of infinite division with one of discrete leaping.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Diodorus Cronus's Master Argument commits him to only actual present states being genuinely real, which constrains how transition between atomic positions can be described.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the passage between two minimal magnitudes is neither divisible nor occupiable, then the minimal-magnitude hypothesis cannot coherently assign any modal status to the transitional state.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A theory that cannot assign determinate possibility or impossibility to transitional states fails to resolve Zeno's paradox and instead relocates unintelligibility from infinite division to inter-atomic gaps.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.