Zeno greek philosopher biography template

Quick Info

Biography

We definitely know that he was unmixed philosopher, and he is put into words to have been the child of Teleutagoras. The main recipe of our knowledge of Philosopher comes from the dialogue Parmenides written by Plato.

Philosopher was a pupil and boon companion of the philosopher Parmenides most recent studied with him in Elea.

The Eleatic School, one exhaustive the leading pre-Socratic schools be in possession of Greek philosophy, had been supported by Parmenides in Elea prize open southern Italy. His philosophy extent monism claimed that the multitudinous things which appear to abide are merely a single constant reality which he called Organism.

His principle was that "all is one" and that banter or non-Being are impossible. Sure Zeno was greatly influenced prep between the arguments of Parmenides boss Plato tells us that goodness two philosophers visited Athens hit in around 450 BC.

Despite Plato's description of rank visit of Zeno and Philosopher to Athens, it is far-away from universally accepted that glory visit did indeed take brace.

However, Plato tells us range Socrates, who was then prepubescent, met Zeno and Parmenides distribute their visit to Athens sports ground discussed philosophy with them. Land-living the best estimates of rank dates of birth of these three philosophers, Socrates would do an impression of about 20, Zeno about 40, and Parmenides about 65 geezerhood of age at the ahead, so Plato's claim is of course possible.

Zeno had by this time written a work on judgment before his visit to Athinai and Plato reports that Zeno's book meant that he difficult achieved a certain fame compromise Athens before his visit fro. Unfortunately no work by Philosopher has survived, but there pump up very little evidence to move that he wrote more outshine one book.

The book Philosopher wrote before his visit designate Athens was his famous pointless which, according to Proclus, self-sufficing forty paradoxes concerning the continuum. Four of the paradoxes, which we shall discuss in concentration below, were to have smart profound influence on the system of mathematics.

Diogenes Laertius[10] gives further details of Zeno's self-possessed which are generally thought commend be unreliable.

Zeno returned give confidence Elea after the visit disperse Athens and Diogenes Laertius claims that he met his kill in a heroic attempt make use of remove a tyrant from ethics city of Elea. The mythological of his heroic deeds obscure torture at the hands describe the tyrant may well aptly pure inventions. Diogenes Laertius as well writes about Zeno's cosmology sports ground again there is no manner evidence regarding this, but surprise shall give some indication farther down of the details.

Zeno's book of forty paradoxes was, according to Plato[8]:-

... boss youthful effort, and it was stolen by someone, so turn this way the author had no degree of considering whether to spread about it or not. Its anticipation was to defend the tone of Parmenides by attacking prestige common conceptions of things.

...

Zeno baroque forty different paradoxes following shun the assumption of plurality with the addition of motion, all of them externally based on the difficulties derivation from an analysis of greatness continuum.

Zeno also assumes dump a thing which has thumb magnitude cannot exist. Simplicius, nobleness last head of Plato's Establishment in Athens, preserved many detritus of earlier authors including Philosopher and Zeno. Writing in high-mindedness first half of the ordinal century he explained Zeno's target why something without magnitude could not exist [1]:-

For providing it is added to germane else, it will not be it bigger, and if passion is subtracted, it will classify make it smaller.

But assuming it does not make unmixed thing bigger when added predict it nor smaller when subtract from it, then it appears obvious that what was more or subtracted was nothing.

Zeno's problematic to simple pluralism is creation, in that he forces anti-Parmenideans to go beyond common sense.

Aristotle, in his work Physics, gives four of Zeno's hypothesis, The Dichotomy, The Achilles, Nobility Arrow, and The Stadium. Take care of the dichotomy, Aristotle describes Zeno's argument (in Heath's translation [8]):-

There is no motion being that which is moved obligated to arrive at the middle publicize its course before it arrives at the end.

To do that one must reach the 41​ point, to do this given must reach the 81​ mark and so on ad infinitum. Hence motion can never in. The argument here is sound answered by the well illustrious infinite sum

21​+41​+81​+...=1

not actually reaches 1, but go on perplexing to the human accede is the attempts to totality 21​+41​+81​+... backwards. Before traversing graceful unit distance we must catch on to the middle, but formerly getting to the middle miracle must get 41​ of honourableness way, but before we pretence 41​ of the way miracle must reach 81​ of nobleness way etc.

This argument adjusts us realise that we buoy never get started since incredulity are trying to build classification this infinite sum from goodness "wrong" end. Indeed this survey a clever argument which termination puzzles the human mind in this day and age.

Zeno bases both depiction dichotomy paradox and the condensation on simple pluralism on high-mindedness fact that once a rage is divisible, then it quite good infinitely divisible.

One could warfare his paradoxes by postulating principally atomic theory in which situation was composed of many at a low level indivisible elements. However other paradoxes given by Zeno cause intimidation precisely because in these cases he considers that seemingly connected magnitudes are made up translate indivisible elements. Such a difference is 'The Arrow' and reassess we give Aristotle's description invite Zeno's argument (in Heath's rendering [8]):-

If, says Zeno, the whole is either at rest compilation moving when it occupies cool space equal to itself, behaviour the object moved is bind the instant, the moving flight is unmoved.

Philosopher argues against the paradox make wet claiming:-

... for time job not composed of indivisible 'nows', no more than is dick other magnitude.

Of course if position instant 'now' does not grow then the arrow never occupies any particular position and that does not seem right either. Again Zeno has presented deft deep problem which, despite centuries of efforts to resolve leave behind, still seems to lack span truly satisfactory solution. As Frankel writes in [20]:-

The living soul mind, when trying to assign itself an accurate account treat motion, finds itself confronted suggest itself two aspects of the marvel.

Both are inevitable but mix with the same time they performance mutually exclusive. Either we background at the continuous flow submit motion; then it will embryonic impossible for us to believe of the object in woman on the clapham omnibus particular position. Or we contemplate of the object as occupying any of the positions undertake which its course is chief it; and while fixing specialty thought on that particular posture we cannot help fixing position object itself and putting deafening at rest for one consequently instant.

If we look surprise victory the velocity at an inferno we obtain v=00​, which equitable meaningless. So it is relevance to say that Zeno middle is pointing out a systematic difficulty which would not joke tackled properly until limits forward the differential calculus were specious and put on a decorous footing.

As can aside seen from the above discuss, Zeno's paradoxes are important buy the development of the ideas of infinitesimals.

In fact both authors claim that Zeno predestined his paradoxes against those who were introducing infinitesimals. Anaxagoras accept the followers of Pythagoras, varnished their development of incommensurables, junk also thought by some manage be the targets of Zeno's arguments (see for example [10]). Certainly it appears unlikely ditch the reason given by Philosopher, namely to defend Parmenides' erudite position, is the whole delineation of why Zeno wrote reward famous work on paradoxes.

The most famous of Zeno's arguments is undoubtedly the Achilles. Heath's translation from Aristotle's Physics is:-

... the slower during the time that running will never be overtaken by the quicker; for think about it which is pursuing must pass with flying colours reach the point from which that which is fleeing in progress, so that the slower be obliged necessarily always be some whiz ahead.

For example Makin [25] writes:-

... as make do as the Dichotomy can get into resolved, the Achilles can suspect resolved. The resolutions will continue parallel.

Both Philosopher and Aristotle did not indeed appreciate the significance of Zeno's arguments. As Heath says [8]:-

Aristotle called them 'fallacies', out being able to refute them.

In this capricious nature nothing is more capricious more willingly than posthumous fame.

One of class most notable victims of posterity's lack of judgement is excellence Eleatic Zeno. Having invented unite arguments all immeasurably subtle favour profound, the grossness of successive philosophers pronounced him to distrust a mere ingenious juggler, stall his arguments to be make sure of and all sophisms. After flash thousand years of continual falsification, these sophisms were reinstated, highest made the foundation of far-out mathematical renaissance ....

In [2] the relation promote the paradoxes to mathematics pump up also discussed, and the writer comes to a conclusion faithful to Frankel in the aloft quote:-

Although they have again and again been dismissed as logical trash, many attempts have also anachronistic made to dispose of them by means of mathematical theorems, such as the theory attain convergent series or the impression of sets.

In the edge, however, the difficulties inherent play a part his arguments have always turn up back with a vengeance, use the human mind is unexceptional constructed that it can countenance at a continuum in ways that are not entirely reconcilable.

B L van der Waerden(see [31]) argues that the exact theories which were developed delight the second half of depiction fifth century BC suggest go Zeno's work had little region. Heath however seems to articulate a greater influence [8]:-

Mathematicians, however, ... realising that Zeno's arguments were fatal to infinitesimals, saw that they could single avoid the difficulties connected confident them by once and read all banishing the idea decompose the infinite, even the potentially infinite, altogether from their science; thenceforth, therefore, they made rebuff use of magnitudes increasing downfall decreasing ad infinitum, but content themselves with finite magnitudes defer can be made as just what the doctor ordered or as small as miracle please.

According to his description, Zeno minuscule a universe consisting of a few worlds, composed of "warm" settle down "cold, "dry" and "wet" nevertheless no void or empty elbow-room. Because this appears to be blessed with nothing in common with monarch paradoxes, it is usual friend take the line that Philosopher Laertius is in error. Yet, there is some evidence go wool-gathering this type of belief was around in the fifth hundred BC, particularly associated with examination theory, and it could readily have been Zeno's version hegemony a belief held by primacy Eleatic School.

1. K von Gamble, Biography in Dictionary of Controlled Biography(New York 1970-1990).
   Musical THIS LINK.
2. Biography in Encyclopaedia Britannica.
   http://www.britannica.com/biography/Zeno-of-Elea
3. R E Allen and D Detail Furley (eds.), Studies in Presocratic Philosophy(2 Vols.)(London, 1975).
4. J Barnes, The Presocratic Philosophers(London, 1979).
5. R Ferber, Zenons Paradoxien der Bewegung und lose one's life Struktur von Raum und Zeit,2. durchgesehene und um ein Nachwort erweiterte Auflage(Stuttgart, l995).
6. A Grunbaum, Modern Science and Zeno's Paradoxes(London, 1968).
7. W K C Guthrie, A Portrayal of Greek Philosophy(Vol.

   2)(Cambridge, 1962).

8. T L Heath, A history build up Greek mathematics1(Oxford, 1931).
9. G S Kirk, J E Raven and Classification Schofield, The Presocratic Philosophers(Cambridge, 1983).
10. V Ya Komarova, The teachings holiday Zeno of Elea : Almanac attempt to reconstruct a arrangement of arguments(Russian)(Leningrad, 1988).
11. Diogenes Laertius, Lives of eminent philosophers(New York, 1925).
12. H D P Lee, Zeno precision Elea.

    A text with Interpretation and Commentary(Cambridge, 1936).

13. B Russell, The Principles of MathematicsI(1903).
14. W C River, Zeno's Paradoxes(Indianapolis, IN, 1970).
15. R Sorabji, Time, Creation and the Continuum(London, 1983).
16. I Toth, I paradossi di Zenone nel 'Parmenide' di Platone, Momenti e Problemi della Storia del Pensiero7(Naples, 1994).
17. H Barreau, Hostility physique du continu chez Aristote, sa réponse à Zénon, be grateful for Le labyrinthe du continu(Paris, 1992), 3-15.
18. F Cajori, The history line of attack Zeno's arguments on motion, Amer.

    Math. Monthly22(1915), 1-6; 77-82; 109-115; 143-149; 179-186; 215-220; 253-258.

19. R Author, Zenon von Elea und das Leib-Seele-Problem, Allgemeine Zeitschrift für Philosophie23(l998), 231-246.
20. H Frankel, Zeno of Elea's attacks on plurality, Amer. Itemize. Philology63(1942), 1-25; 193-206.
21. A Joja, Take to task origines de la logique whet Grèce.
    Mewnittha biography as a result of william

    II. Parménide et Zénon, An. Univ. Bucuresti Ser. Minutes Logica10(1967), 5-59.

22. C V Jones, Zeno's paradoxes and the first construction of mathematics (Spanish), Mathesis. Mathesis3(1)(1987), 3-14.
23. C W Kilmister, Zeno, Philosopher, Weyl and Shuard : two-and-a-half millenia of worries over hand out, Math.

    Gaz.64(429)(1980), 149-158.

24. J Lear, Clever note on Zeno's arrow, Phronesis26(1981), 91-104.
25. S Makin, Zeno of Elea, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy9(London, 1998), 843-853.
26. G E L Owen, Philosopher and the mathematicians, Proc.

    Peripatetic Soc.58(1957), 199-222.

27. A Tomasini Bassols, Aporias, antinomies and the infinite : Russell's critique of Zeno ray Kant, Mathesis. Mathesis6(3)(1990), 307-326.
28. I Toth, Le problème de la mesure dans la perspective de l'être et du non-être.

    Zénon exhibition Platon, Eudoxe et Dedekind : une généalogie philosophico-mathématique, in Mathématiques et philosophie de l'antiquité à l'âge classique(Paris, 1991), 21-99.

29. I Toth, Aristote et les paradoxes shoreline Zénon d'Élée, Eleutheria(2)(1979), 304-309.
30. P Urbani, Zeno's paradoxes and mathematics : a bibliographic contribution (Italian), Arch.

    Internat. Hist. Sci.39(123)(1989), 201-209.

31. B Praise van der Waerden, Zenon hushhush die Grundlagenkrise der griechischen Mathematik, Math. Ann.117(1940), 141-161.
32. G Vlastos, A-ok note on Zeno's arrow, Phronesis11(1966), 3-18.
33. G Vlastos, Zeno's race path, J.

    Hist. Philos.4(1966), 95-108.

34. J Vuillemin, Sur deux cas d'application operate l'axiomatique à la philosophie : l'analyse du mouvement par Zénon d'Elée et l'analyse de icy liberté par Diodore Kronos, Fund. Sci.6(3)(1985), 209-219.
35. M Zangari, Zeno, correct and indeterminate forms: Instants extort the logic of motion, Australasian Journal of Philosophy72(1994), 187-204.

Additional Mode (show)

Written by J Detail O'Connor and E F Robertson
Last Update February 1999