Analysis and Critique of “Zeno causality” in J. Hawthorne
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47850/RL.2022.3.2.5-22Keywords:
Zeno causality, J. Hawthorne, Benardete Dichotomy, N. Shackel, paradox of logical causalityAbstract
We intend to point out a flaw in J. Hawthorne’s method of overcoming the paradoxicality in gedanken experiments that have the form of J. Benardete’s Dichotomy. First, we will point out a way to change J. Hawthorne’s solution in such a way as to take into account E. V. Borisov’s criticism, and then we will give a counterexample showing the unacceptability of both J. Hawthorne’s original solution and the corrected solution. We come to the conclusion that there is still no universal way to solve paradoxes affined to J. Benardete’s Dichotomy.
References
Берестов, И. В. (2021a). Содержит ли современный анализ затруднений с зеноновскими последовательностями решение Дихотомии? Respublica Literaria. Т. 2. № 1. С. 28-36. DOI: 10.47850/RL.2021.2.1.28-36
Berestov, I. V. (2021a). Does Contemporary Analysis of Difficulties with Zeno Sequences Contain a Solution to the Dichotomy? Respublica Literaria. Vol. 2. no. 1. pp. 28-36. (In Russ.)
Берестов, И. В. (2021b). Анализ действенности Дихотомии Зенона Элейского. Respublica Literaria. Т. 2. № 4. С. 27-42. DOI: 10.47850/RL.2021.2.4.27-42
Berestov, I. V. (2021b). A Soundness Analysis of Zeno’s of Elea Dichotomy. Respublica Literaria. Vol. 2. no. 4. рр. 27-42. (In Russ.)
Борисов, Е. В. (2022). Дихотомия Зенона и парадокс логической причинности. ΣΧΟΛΗ (Schole). Т. 16. Вып. 2. С. 563-574. DOI: 10.2505/1995-4328-2022-16-2
Borisov, E. V. (2022). Zeno’s Dichotomy and the Paradox of Logical Causality. ΣΧΟΛΗ (Schole). Vol. 16. no. 2. pp. 563-574. (In Russ.)
Benardete, J. A. (1964). Infinity: An Essay in Metaphysics. Oxford. Clarendon Press. x.
Hawthorne, J. (2000). Before-Effect and Zeno Causality. Noûs. Vol. 34. no. 4. pp. 622-633.
Laraudogoitia, P. J. (1996). A Beautiful Supertask. Mind. Vol. 105. pp. 81-83.
Priest, G. (1999). On a Version of One of Zeno’s Paradoxes. Analysis. Vol. 59. no. 1. pp. 1-2.
Shackel, N. (2005). The Form of the Benardete Dichotomy. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. Vol. 56. no. 2. pp. 397-417.
Yablo, S. (2000). A Reply to New Zeno. Analysis. Vol. 60. pp. 148-52.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
https://oc.philosophy.nsc.ru/remote.php/webdav/%D0%94%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%80%20%D1%81%20%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BC%20RL-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2.doc
