| Title | Digging up a Paradox: A Philological Note on Zeno's Stadium |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 1982 |
| Journal | Rheinisches Museum für Philologie |
| Volume | 125 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 1-24 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Mansfeld, Jaap |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| Of Zeno's four arguments against the reality of motion transmitted by Aristotle, the fourth, the so-called Stadium (Vors. 29 A 28), is perhaps the most difficult. The difficulties in- volved are of two sorts: philological problems on the one hand, questions of a philosophical nature on the other. In the present paper, I am concerned with the first sort, not the second, al- though I shall perhaps not be successful in keeping the latter out altogether. A study of the philosophical discussions to be found in the learned literature, however, has convinced me that the first problem to be solved is that of the interpretation of Ari- stotle's text. There is a general feeling that Aristotle, in reporting and arguing against Zeno's argument, somehow failed. I believe his report is sufficiently clear; although Aristotle's argument contra Zeno is not, perhaps, satisfactory in every respect, Zeno's original paradox can be found in his text. I shall attempt to show that, in order to find it, we must begin by taking both the topo- graphy of the stadium and the position of the bodies in it into account, which several recent reconstructions, however satis- factory they may appear to be in other respects, fail to do. [Introduction, p. 1] |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/EF1mJnrpjw148o7 |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"1108","_score":null,"_source":{"id":1108,"authors_free":[{"id":2070,"entry_id":1108,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":29,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","free_first_name":"Jaap","free_last_name":"Mansfeld","norm_person":{"id":29,"first_name":"Jaap","last_name":"Mansfeld","full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119383217","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Digging up a Paradox: A Philological Note on Zeno's Stadium","main_title":{"title":"Digging up a Paradox: A Philological Note on Zeno's Stadium"},"abstract":"Of Zeno's four arguments against the reality of motion transmitted by Aristotle, the fourth, the so-called Stadium (Vors. 29 A 28), is perhaps the most difficult. The difficulties in- volved are of two sorts: philological problems on the one hand, questions of a philosophical nature on the other. In the present paper, I am concerned with the first sort, not the second, al- though I shall perhaps not be successful in keeping the latter out altogether. A study of the philosophical discussions to be found in the learned literature, however, has convinced me that the first problem to be solved is that of the interpretation of Ari- stotle's text. There is a general feeling that Aristotle, in reporting and arguing against Zeno's argument, somehow failed. I believe his report is sufficiently clear; although Aristotle's argument contra Zeno is not, perhaps, satisfactory in every respect, Zeno's original paradox can be found in his text. I shall attempt to show that, in order to find it, we must begin by taking both the topo- graphy of the stadium and the position of the bodies in it into account, which several recent reconstructions, however satis- factory they may appear to be in other respects, fail to do. [Introduction, p. 1]","btype":3,"date":"1982","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/EF1mJnrpjw148o7","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":29,"full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":1108,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Rheinisches Museum f\u00fcr Philologie","volume":"125","issue":"1","pages":"1-24"}},"sort":[1982]}
| Title | Three Thêtas in the "Empédocle de Strasbourg" |
| Type | Article |
| Language | English |
| Date | 2001 |
| Journal | Mnemosyne, Fourth Series |
| Volume | 54 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 78-84 |
| Categories | no categories |
| Author(s) | Algra, Keimpe A. , Mansfeld, Jaap |
| Editor(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
[Conclusion, p. 81]: ies of books that do not sell fast enough. We conclude that we cannot, merely on the basis of the Strasbourg fragments, confidendy assign to (book two of?) the physical poem the grue- some fragment (now plus its new context) Stein and Diels assigned to the Purifications. Until further evidence turns up, only a non liquet is feasible, and we should keep open the possibility that we are dealing with 'Z?y Empedocle de Strasbourg'. And the 6s in the papyrus fragments discussed above are simply wrong. The slighdy bizarre interpretation based on them may be abandoned. |
| Online Resources | https://uni-koeln.sciebo.de/s/boL2U41aTbpaPuO |
{"_index":"sire","_type":"_doc","_id":"779","_score":null,"_source":{"id":779,"authors_free":[{"id":1143,"entry_id":779,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":28,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Algra, Keimpe A.","free_first_name":"Keimpe A.","free_last_name":"Algra","norm_person":{"id":28,"first_name":"Keimpe A.","last_name":"Algra","full_name":"Algra, Keimpe A.","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/115110992","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}},{"id":1144,"entry_id":779,"agent_type":null,"is_normalised":null,"person_id":29,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","free_first_name":"Jaap","free_last_name":"Mansfeld","norm_person":{"id":29,"first_name":"Jaap","last_name":"Mansfeld","full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":null,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/119383217","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":null}}],"entry_title":"Three Th\u00eatas in the \"Emp\u00e9docle de Strasbourg\"","main_title":{"title":"Three Th\u00eatas in the \"Emp\u00e9docle de Strasbourg\""},"abstract":"[Conclusion, p. 81]: ies of books that do not sell fast enough. \r\nWe conclude that we cannot, merely on the basis of the Strasbourg \r\nfragments, confidendy assign to (book two of?) the physical poem the grue- \r\nsome fragment (now plus its new context) Stein and Diels assigned to the \r\nPurifications. Until further evidence turns up, only a non liquet is feasible, \r\nand we should keep open the possibility that we are dealing with 'Z?y \r\nEmpedocle de Strasbourg'. And the 6s in the papyrus fragments discussed \r\nabove are simply wrong. The slighdy bizarre interpretation based on them \r\nmay be abandoned.","btype":3,"date":"2001","language":"English","online_url":"","online_resources":"https:\/\/uni-koeln.sciebo.de\/s\/boL2U41aTbpaPuO","doi_url":null,"categories":[],"authors":[{"id":28,"full_name":"Algra, Keimpe A.","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}},{"id":29,"full_name":"Mansfeld, Jaap","role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"}}],"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":779,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Mnemosyne, Fourth Series","volume":"54","issue":"1","pages":"78-84"}},"sort":["Three Th\u00eatas in the \"Emp\u00e9docle de Strasbourg\""]}