Competing Roles of Aristotle’s Account of the Infinite

Robby Finley
{"title":"Competing Roles of Aristotle’s Account of the Infinite","authors":"Robby Finley","doi":"10.1515/apeiron-2023-0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There are two distinct but interrelated questions concerning Aristotle’s account of infinity that have been the subject of recurring debate. The first of these, what I call here the interpretative question, asks for a charitable and internally coherent interpretation of the limited pieces of text where Aristotle outlines his view of the ‘potential’ (and not ‘actual’) infinite. The second, what I call here the philosophical question, asks whether there is a way to make Aristotle’s notion of the potential infinite coherent and rigorous with modern tools that can stand as a rival to the widely-accepted view of the infinite as characterized in a mathematical theory of sets. In this paper, I argue that the theoretical roles that Aristotle intends his account of the potential infinite to fulfill lead to a deep and irresoluble tension that can help explain the persistence of debates on both of these questions. I do so by turning to the places where Aristotle attempts to argue for or against the existence of particular infinite processes to show that he slides between different underlying notions of when changes are possible. Making these underlying notions clear can help us better understand the role of Aristotle’s account in the history of philosophy, the possible pitfalls for a contemporary theory of the potential infinite, and what each of these debates might learn from each other.","PeriodicalId":42543,"journal":{"name":"Apeiron-A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science","volume":"57 10","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Apeiron-A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/apeiron-2023-0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract There are two distinct but interrelated questions concerning Aristotle’s account of infinity that have been the subject of recurring debate. The first of these, what I call here the interpretative question, asks for a charitable and internally coherent interpretation of the limited pieces of text where Aristotle outlines his view of the ‘potential’ (and not ‘actual’) infinite. The second, what I call here the philosophical question, asks whether there is a way to make Aristotle’s notion of the potential infinite coherent and rigorous with modern tools that can stand as a rival to the widely-accepted view of the infinite as characterized in a mathematical theory of sets. In this paper, I argue that the theoretical roles that Aristotle intends his account of the potential infinite to fulfill lead to a deep and irresoluble tension that can help explain the persistence of debates on both of these questions. I do so by turning to the places where Aristotle attempts to argue for or against the existence of particular infinite processes to show that he slides between different underlying notions of when changes are possible. Making these underlying notions clear can help us better understand the role of Aristotle’s account in the history of philosophy, the possible pitfalls for a contemporary theory of the potential infinite, and what each of these debates might learn from each other.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
亚里士多德对无限的描述的竞争角色
关于亚里士多德关于无限的解释,有两个截然不同但又相互关联的问题,这两个问题一直是反复辩论的主题。其中第一个问题,我在这里称之为解释性问题,要求对亚里士多德概述他对“潜在”(而不是“实际”)无限的观点的有限文本片段进行仁慈和内部连贯的解释。第二个问题,我在这里称之为哲学问题,问是否有一种方法,可以使亚里士多德关于潜在无限的概念,与现代工具相一致和严格,可以与被广泛接受的,以数学集合理论为特征的无限观点相抗衡。在本文中,我认为,亚里士多德意图实现他对潜在无限的描述的理论角色导致了一种深刻而无法解决的紧张关系,这有助于解释对这两个问题的辩论的持久性。为此,我将转向亚里士多德试图论证或反对特定无限过程存在的地方,以表明他在不同的潜在概念之间滑动,即什么时候变化是可能的。弄清楚这些潜在的概念可以帮助我们更好地理解亚里士多德在哲学史上的角色,当代潜在无限理论可能存在的陷阱,以及这些争论可以相互借鉴的东西。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
Competing Roles of Aristotle’s Account of the Infinite Poetic Imitation: The Argument of Republic 10 The Suspicious Substrate: Calcidius on Grasping Matter Frontmatter Frontmatter
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1