/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17751767]

If this faggot said his retard shit to me I'd beat him to death

[Anonymous No.17751786]

A thread died for this

[Anonymous No.17751790]

>>17751786
Oh fuck off

[xhe/xer No.17751795]

Sounds like toxic masculinity

[Anonymous No.17752148]

>>17751767
I shouldn't have, but I laughed

[Anonymous No.17752191]

>>17751767

[Anonymous No.17752201]

>>17751767
I can't believe a thread died for this

[Anonymous No.17752212]

>>17752148
I don't know why he makes me mad but I start seething whenever I remember his paradoxes. Hurr durr change isn't possible because you can't interact with an infinite number of things, so you're not really walking across this court :^)

I would fuck up ANY old greek PEDOPHILE that said this shit to me

[Anonymous No.17752234]

>>17752212
No need to go to ancient Greece, we're still doing this shit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomson%27s_lamp

[Anonymous No.17752259]

>>17751767
>>17752212
You're seething because you can't refute them. It makes you afraid. To be confronted with the fragility of reason.

[Anonymous No.17752265]

Did you know a thread would die when you posted this?

[Anonymous No.17752299]

>>17752259
I'll change him into a pile of pig shit when I'm finished. He's refuted by a fucking sandwich turning into muscle and fat, or are we supposed to believe that we are the same thing as a sandwich?

[Anonymous No.17752350]

>>17752234
Contemporary science is a cringe abomination

[Anonymous No.17752376]

>>17751767
It was used to prove Parmenides idea of the sameness of all being, and he's perhaps not entirely wrong. There's always this "Instance" of being, to put it in Plato's term.

[Anonymous No.17752465]

But you literally can't even move stupid retard.

[Anonymous No.17752628]

>>17751767
Imagine being remembered for thousands of years after you lived for coming up with something so simple.
He didn’t even come up with the idea of a limit or conceptualize infinity or anything like that, he just said it was a PARADOX and left it that.

[Anonymous No.17752688]

>>17752628
Cringe.

[Anonymous No.17752701]

>>17751767
Power > everything else

[Anonymous No.17752716]

Zeno was *extremely* based. Top 15 if not top 10 Great Ancients.

[Anonymous No.17752739]

>>17752701
Cringe

[Anonymous No.17752755]

"That which is in locomotion must arrive at the half-way stage before it arrives at the goal."

[Anonymous No.17752771]

>>17752688
Zenon was history’s first hack fraud.

[Anonymous No.17752784]

>>17752771
Then prove him wrong

[Anonymous No.17752801]

>>17752784

[Anonymous No.17752811]

>>17752801
>admits you need mathematics invented 2 millennia later to have a semblance of proving him wrong (which it doesn't btw)
>he was a hack

[Anonymous No.17752839]

>>17751790
Don’t you care that a thread died for this?

[Anonymous No.17752846]

>>17752811
>needs the help of a formal language like mathematics to conceptualize infinitely small things
>calls this great thinking
The invention of calculus does solve Zeno’s paradox, that’s why Zeno’s paradox is still mentioned at all since it anticipated the most important invention in human history.

[Anonymous No.17752848]

>>17752801
>>17752771
In opening, the hand can never open what is closed, since the hand must first close what is open, so that what is closed must always further open what is open.

[Anonymous No.17752859]

>>17751795
This.

[Anonymous No.17752864]

>>17752846
Here, someone was kind enough to put in some effort to educate you on this https://mathpages.com/rr/s3-07/3-07.htm

[Anonymous No.17752892]

>>17752848
God. Just kill them

[Anonymous No.17752906]

>>17751786
It saddens me as well.

[Anonymous No.17752927]

>>17752906
>>17751786
>>17752201
>>17752265
Go back to r*ddit retard

[Anonymous No.17752947]

>>17752864
>We can't be sure how the historical Zeno intended his arguments to be taken, since none of his writings have survived. We know his ideas only indirectly through the writings of Plato, Aristotle, Simplicus, and Proclus, none of whom was exactly sympathetic to Zeno's philosophical outlook. Furthermore, we're told that Zeno's arguments were a "youthful effort", and that they were made public without his prior knowledge or consent.
>It's conceivable that he intended them as satires of (what he viewed as) the fallacious arguments that had been made against Parmenides' ideas.
>Thus, we haven't debunked Zeno, we've merely conceded his point – a point which is not, in itself, paradoxical. It simply indicates that at some level the physical world must have an absolute scale and be regarded as consisting of finite indivisible entities. We arrive at Zeno's paradox only when these arguments against infinite divisibility are combined with the complementary set of arguments (The Arrow and The Stadium) which show that a world consisting of finite indivisible entities is also logically impossible, thereby presenting us with the conclusion that physical reality can be neither continuous nor discontinuous (i.e., discrete).

>it’s just a prank, bro!
Sounds like Zenon cope to me.

[Anonymous No.17752974]

>>17752947
The article is not relying on understanding Zeno as satire at all.

[Anonymous No.17753019]

>>17752974
It doesn’t contradict the author’s interpretation of Zenon to imply Zenon’s thought experiments were intended as satire though. The author is interpreting it in a way that is meant to imply that Zenon ultimately knew that the physical world isn’t infinitely divisible and that the paradoxes are meant to show this.

You can interpret it that way, but there’s nothing definitive one way or the other about this.

[Anonymous No.17753020]

>>17752234
The lamp would break from being switched on/off too quickly. So off at 2 mins. Next please.

[Anonymous No.17753021]

>>17752739
The weak say the powerful are cringe as they are resigned to lifelong wage slavery. You are cringe.

[Anonymous No.17753028]

>>17753019
>>17752811
>>17752801
meaningless. mathematics does not philosophise.

[Anonymous No.17753044]

>>17753019
So? The point is that Zeno showed people need more advanced models to explain reality. Problems challenge others to provide solutions. Whatever his intentions were, he challenged people of his time as well as people millennia later to innovate and think better.
>>17753028
Yes, Zeno was not a philosopher. So?

[Anonymous No.17753070]

>>17753020
>the lamp would break from being switched on/off too quickly
Wrong
>So off at 2 mins
Right

[Anonymous No.17753081]

>>17752927
no

[Anonymous No.17753082]

>>17751767
Doubtful, as your fists would never hit his face.

[Anonymous No.17753083]

>>17752947
'Satire' implies Zeno was being facetious and didn't think of these as real problems. Presumably he was aware that he wasn't describing the world as it is, but rather, asking why it isn't

[Anonymous No.17753087]

>>17753021
You need to be 18 to post here

[Anonymous No.17753099]

>>17751767
Zeno's arguments are still valid and not even Calculus can help defeat them. If you don't see that you just don't understand at least one of them. Seethe, cope, dilate etc.

[Anonymous No.17753105]

>>17753087
You need to not be such a coping loser.

[Anonymous No.17753118]

>>17753105
No you

[Anonymous No.17753126]

>>17753083
You can address real problems with satire. We don’t know his intention.
>>17753099
It was either debunked by calculus and the development of the concept of convergence of infinite series, or it was confirmed by particle physics if you take the interpretation that the paradox was meant to show the physical world cannot be infinitely divisible.
There is no going outside these things.

[Anonymous No.17753136]

>>17753126
>particle physics
It's not the 20th century anymore sweaty do try to keep up

[Anonymous No.17753140]

>>17753126
>the physical world cannot be infinitely divisible
We have no hope of ever proving that. The planck length is not the minimal length, contrary to what some believe. It just means that there are no photon wavelength shorter than that, but there could be other particles and different interactions.

[Anonymous No.17753167]

>>17753126
>It was either debunked by calculus
Go through the steps of "debunking" with calculus and see for yourself that the paradoxes hold.

[Anonymous No.17753173]

>>17753136
I’m saying it would have been confirmed with the advent of modern physics.
>>17753140
We know the physical world is not infinitesimally recursive. There’s not another universe inside the smallest particle and another universe inside that universe’s smallest particle and so on, which would be an apt analogy for Zeno’s infinite series paradox.

[Anonymous No.17753176]

>>17753173
>We know the physical world is not infinitesimally recursive.
Wrong.

[Anonymous No.17753191]

>>17753167
???

[Anonymous No.17753199]

>>17753191
Go through the steps of Zeno's argument and see what he actually says, because the convergence of infinite series has fuckall to do with it.

[Anonymous No.17753213]

>>17753191
>tends to 1
So it's never equal to it then

[Anonymous No.17753238]

>>17753213
It doesn’t diverge though, which I think is the more pertinent point for the paradox.

[Anonymous No.17753245]

>>17753238
Still not equal to 1, which is the essence of the paradox

[Anonymous No.17753253]

>>17753176
Step away from the LSD!

[Anonymous No.17753263]

>>17753245
poppycock

[Anonymous No.17753267]

>>17753263
Filtered & upset by Based Zeno, many such cases throughout history

[Anonymous No.17753289]

>>17753191
>>17753199
>>17753245
Note that the paradox comes from the fact that you have to go through an infinite number of steps, not that you have to run an infinite distance.

[Anonymous No.17753309]

>>17753289
>go through infinite number of steps
>still not there

[Anonymous No.17753468]

>>17752848
kek

[Anonymous No.17753567]

>>17753118
Very nice.

[Anonymous No.17753569]

>>17753289
>Note that the paradox comes from the fact that you have to go through an infinite number of steps

[Anonymous No.17754533]

>>17753309
>>17753569
did I accidentally trigger some r9k meme or something?

[Anonymous No.17754547]

>>17751767
what specific works of literature are you hoping to discuss in this thread?

[Anonymous No.17754634]

>>17754533

[Anonymous No.17754684]

>>17753289
>>17753191
The steps can be finite, it doesn't matter. It's not about the sum of an infinite series (Achilles and the tortoise obviously meet at some point, even Achilles isn't nimble enough to take increasingly small steps after a certian point). The question Zeno is asking is
>how does anything occur
The answer is it doesn't, we don't live in a world with discrete bodies, everything is continuous and intertwined. Nothing "occurs" as such, as there is nothing to do and nothing to be acted upon.

[Anonymous No.17754706]

>>17751767
The point of the paradoxes was to show that much of the logic structure of the time was deeply flawed, which indeed it was

[Anonymous No.17756483]

>>17754547
The fragments of Zeno, Parminides, Anaxagoras, complete dialogues of Plato, works of Aristotle, and the subsequent philosophical literature written in response that spans all of subsequent western thought.

[Anonymous No.17756686]

>>17753289
Except that we can assign a set amount of time to each step. If the first distance is 1 miles, and it takes 10 minutes to walk, the second distance of half a mile will take 5 minutes to walk. Both will keep reducing to infinitesimally small units, but they will keep happening.