Zeno’s Paradoxes Today

A special issue of Philosophies (ISSN 2409-9287).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 June 2024) | Viewed by 3626

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Philosophy, Durham University, Durham DH1 3LE, UK
Interests: metaphysics; philosophy of science; ontology; change; causation; mechanisms

E-Mail Website
Co-Guest Editor
Department of Philosophy, Durham University, Durham DH1 3LE, UK
Interests: metaphysics; ancient, late antiquity and medieval philosophy; philosophy of science; philosophy of religion

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Zeno counter-attacked the critics of Parmenides' view that there is no change and no plurality in the world; to Parmenides critics, everyday experience seemed to render this view paradoxical. In a brilliant series of arguments, Zeno responded by counter-asserting the paradoxical nature of both change and plurality. The incisive quality of Zeno’s work was attested by the vast literature, continuing from ancient into contemporary times, seeking to answer, even solve, these paradoxes. The varied and original responses to Zeno’s arguments have continued to drive advances in our understanding of areas of philosophical research central to ontology, including motion, change, causation, plurality, the infinite and the continuum—amongst many others.

In this Special Issue, we seek to showcase work that continues in this creative tradition—work that advances original ideas that respond to Zeno’s paradoxes. Articles may cast light on the paradoxes, or perhaps offer novel contributions to other areas of philosophical research inspired by the paradoxes. Contributors are welcome to engage in their articles with contemporary developments in areas adjacent to philosophy, such as mathematics, physics and science.

Dr. John Pemberton
Prof. Dr. Anna Marmodoro
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Philosophies is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Zeno
  • paradox
  • contemporary
  • change
  • motion
  • plurality
  • infinite
  • continuum
  • ontology
 

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

12 pages, 256 KiB  
Article
Philosophy Untouched by Science? Zeno’s Runner, Sextus’ Epochē, and More
by Josef Mattes
Philosophies 2024, 9(4), 115; https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies9040115 - 1 Aug 2024
Viewed by 1034
Abstract
The relationship between science and philosophy is contentious. Quine saw philosophy as continuous with science (broadly understood), but many philosophers see a dichotomy between them. The present paper discusses cases where the relevance of certain scientific findings has been denied (related to Zeno’s [...] Read more.
The relationship between science and philosophy is contentious. Quine saw philosophy as continuous with science (broadly understood), but many philosophers see a dichotomy between them. The present paper discusses cases where the relevance of certain scientific findings has been denied (related to Zeno’s Dichotomy paradox and to the appeal of skeptical arguments) or overlooked (one argument related to the frame problem of artificial intelligence and Nagel’s “bat” argument). The results caution against overly quick dismissal of the import of science on philosophical questions, whether the latter be of a more theoretical or practical nature. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Zeno’s Paradoxes Today)
6 pages, 165 KiB  
Article
Achilles’ To-Do List
by Zack Garrett
Philosophies 2024, 9(4), 104; https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies9040104 - 11 Jul 2024
Viewed by 713
Abstract
Much of the debate about the mathematical refutation of Zeno’s paradoxes surrounds the logical possibility of completing supertasks—tasks made up of an infinite number of subtasks. Max Black and J.F. Thomson attempt to show that supertasks entail logical contradictions, but their arguments come [...] Read more.
Much of the debate about the mathematical refutation of Zeno’s paradoxes surrounds the logical possibility of completing supertasks—tasks made up of an infinite number of subtasks. Max Black and J.F. Thomson attempt to show that supertasks entail logical contradictions, but their arguments come up short. In this paper, I take a different approach to the mathematical refutations. I argue that even if supertasks are possible, we do not have a non-question-begging reason to think that Achilles’ supertask is possible. The justification for the possibility of Achilles’ supertask lies in the possibility of him completing other supertasks of the same kind, and the justification for the possibility of him completing these other supertasks lies in the possibility of him completing yet more supertasks ad infinitum. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Zeno’s Paradoxes Today)
Back to TopTop