Authors
James Harrington
Loyola University, Chicago
Abstract
This paper will argue that the puzzles about instantaneous velocity, and rates of change more generally, are the result of a failure to recognize an ambiguity in the concept of an instant, and therefore of an instantaneous state. We will conclude that there are two distinct conceptions of a temporal instant: (i) instants conceived as fundamentally distinct zero-duration temporal atoms and (ii) instants conceived as the boundary of, or between,temporally extended durations. Since the concept of classical instantaneous velocity is well- defined only on the second conception of instants, we will conclude that this distinction allows us to avoid the above dilemma. If instantaneous velocity is well-defined then the states of a system at various instants are not logically distinct and thus we cannot generate Zeno’s paradox. However, if we assume that the instants are metaphysically distinct, then instantaneous velocity is not well-defined and thus the second horn of the dilemma about the causal-explanatory role of instantaneous velocity cannot be generated.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2011
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 53,784
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

What is a Law of Nature?D. M. Armstrong - 1983 - Cambridge University Press.
Kant and the Exact Sciences.Michael FRIEDMAN - 1992 - Harvard University Press.
Critique of Pure Reason.I. Kant - 1787/1998 - Philosophy 59 (230):555-557.

View all 36 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Why Physics Uses Second Derivatives.Kenny Easwaran - 2014 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 65 (4):845-862.
Dynamic Events and Presentism.Francesco Orilia - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 160 (3):407-414.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Instantaneous Motion.John W. Carroll - 2002 - Philosophical Studies 110 (1):49 - 67.
The Rotating Discs Argument Defeated.Jeremy Butterfield - 2006 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (1):1-45.
How Can Instantaneous Velocity Fulfill its Causal Role?Marc Lange - 2005 - Philosophical Review 114 (4):433-468.
On Instantaneous Velocity.David Sherry - 1986 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 3 (4):391 - 406.
Defining ‚Exdurance'.Yuri Balashov - 2007 - Philosophical Studies 133 (1):143 - 149.
Are Instantaneous Velocities Real and Really Instantaneous?: An Argument for the Affirmative.Sheldon R. Smith - 2003 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 34 (2):261-280.
Are Instantaneous Velocities Real and Really Instantaneous?: An Argument for the Affirmative.R. S. - 2003 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 34 (2):261-280.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
84 ( #113,443 of 2,350,111 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #188,058 of 2,350,111 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes