Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Revising Benardete’s Zeno

  • Published:
Journal of Philosophical Logic Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The majority of disucssions of Benardete’s Paradox conclude that the traveller approaching the infinite series of gods will be mysteriously halted despite none of the gods erecting any barriers. Using a revision-theoretic analysis of Benardete’s puzzle, four distinct possible outcomes that might occur given Benardete’s set-up are distinguished. This analysis provides additional insight into the puzzle at hand, via identifying heretofore unnoticed possible outcomes, but it also serves as an example of how the revision theoretic framework can be used to construct exhaustive taxonomies of potential outcomes in apparently contradictory situations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Benacerraf, P. (1962). Tasks, super-tasks, and the modern eleatics. Journal of Philosophy, 59(24), 765–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Benardete, J. (1964). Infinity: an essay on metaphysics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gupta, A., & Belnap, N. (1993). The revision theory of truth. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hawthorne, J. (2000). Before-effect and Zeno causality. Noûs, 34(4), 622–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Linebo, Ø. (2017) In Zalta, E. (Ed.), Plural quantification. Standford: Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

  6. Priest, G. (1999). On a version of one of zeno’s paradoxes. Analysis, 59, 1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Prosser, S. (2006). The eleatic non-stick frying pan. Analysis, 66, 187–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Shackel, N. (2005). The form of the Benardete DIchotomy. British Journnal for the Philosophy of Science, 56, 397–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Thompson, J. (1954). Tasks and super-tasks. Analysis, 15(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Uzquiano, G. (2012). Before-effect without Zeno causality. Noûs, 46(2), 259–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yablo, S. (2000). A reply to new zeno. Analysis, 60(2), 148–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks are owed to Russell Nelson and two anonymous referees for suggestions that immensely improved this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Roy T. Cook

Authors
  1. Roy T. Cook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roy T. Cook.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cook, R.T. Revising Benardete’s Zeno. J Philos Logic 48, 37–56 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-018-9476-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-018-9476-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation