Brief account of the history of 'imaginary numbers'?

[Leoreth]

Yeah, but Zeno's arguments clearly fall flat, because his paradoxes have long been resolved. But that's not really his fault, because he can't be blamed for not knowing calculus.

 

[Kyriakos]

Yeah, but Zeno's arguments clearly fall flat, because his paradoxes have long been resolved. But that's not really his fault, because he can't be blamed for not knowing calculus.

No. They haven't.

It is not the same to resolve the problem one posed, and to resolve a version of it the solver projected onto it (along with all the 'lol if we assume Zeno even realised that' stuff ).

FWIW/FYI even Aristotle himself was of the view he 'resolved' those paradoxa.

 

[Leoreth]

They clearly have. Most of Zeno's paradoxes revolve around restatements of problems that are basically equivalent to infinite sums, which is something that is trivially covered in every intro to calc course.

Now mind that I'm not saying that Zeno's philosophy has been disproven or anything. I'm saying that his paradoxes are not a great illustration of it, because, well they fail at being paradoxes.

 

[Kyriakos]

They clearly have. Most of Zeno's paradoxes revolve around restatements of problems that are basically equivalent to infinite sums, which is something that is trivially covered in every intro to calc course.

Now mind that I'm not saying that Zeno's philosophy has been disproven or anything. I'm saying that his paradoxes are not a great illustration of it, because, well they fail at being paradoxes.

They fail at being paradoxes cause they are not themselves paradoxes!

Do you think Zeno claimed that his own statements are 'paradoxes'?

He states that there are likely even more paradoxes stemming from a view against Eleatic philosophy (Parmenides/Zeno etc), than those the other philosophers made fun of Parmenides for, calling Eleatic philosophy as filled with paradoxes (ie false or even irrational).

The core argument in the Eleatics is that our concept of infinity, and the distinctness in our idea of integers (including the 'singular point') lead to our sense of the world being at the same time argued to be finite, and also to be paradoxically distinct when comprising supposedly of volumes that end somewhere (and therefore many volumes, not just One, cause if all is One there there doesn't need to be an end or a space either). Eg Zeno notes that if something has an edge, that edge too must have an edge else the edge has no volume and thus is not part of something. It is an argument about notions, and ties to senses, and the main point is that our human senses and thought likely are causing us to be outside anything non-false, and live in an illusion.