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
    Zeno's argument exploits equivocation between potential i... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Therefore Zeno's paradox shows only that naive infinity concepts are confused, not that motion itself is impossible.

    Zeno's argument exploits equivocation between potential infinity (conceptual) and actual infinity (mathematical), conflating epistemological confusion with ontological impossibility.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Key Terms

    Conflating
    Conflating means mixing together or treating two different things as if they were the same thing, when they're actually distinct. It's a logical error where someone blurs important differences between concepts, ideas, or situations to make an argument seem stronger than it is. For example, conflating "being critical of a policy" with "being disloyal to your country" wrongly equates two separate things.
    Epistemological(Describing what type of criterion Descartes's test is)
    Having to do with how we know things and what counts as real knowledge, rather than questions about what actually exists.
    Equivocation(Lewis diagnoses the ontological argument as equivocating on 'a being than which nothing greater can be conceived is possible'.)
    A fallacy in which a key term or phrase is used in two different senses within the same argument, making an invalid inference appear valid.
    Ontological
    "Ontological" refers to questions about what actually exists or is real. It's concerned with the fundamental nature of being—asking "What kinds of things are there?" rather than "How do we know about them?" For example, an ontological question might be whether numbers, ideas, or God actually exist as real things, or if they're just human inventions.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    Zeno(the philosopher behind the paradox)
    An ancient Greek philosopher (around 490-430 BCE) famous for creating puzzles and paradoxes that challenge our everyday understanding of motion, space, and time.
    actual infinity(Contrasted with 'potential infinity'; generally rejected by intuitionists)
    An infinity treated as a completed, existing totality rather than an ongoing process
    potential infinity(Contrasted with 'actual infinity'; intuitionists typically accept only potential infinities in the Aristotelian tradition)
    An infinity understood as an ongoing, never-completed process of extension, as opposed to a completed totality

    Connections

    1 linked claim

    Therefore Zeno's paradox shows only that naive infinity concepts are confused, n...

    Related

    Therefore Zeno's paradox shows only that naive infinity concepts are confused, n...

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective