Zeno's paradoxes. Zeno's arguments are perhaps the first examples of a method of proof called reductio ad absurdum also known as proof by contradiction. They are also credited as a source of the dialectic method used by Socrates.[3] Some mathematicians and historians, such as Carl Boyer, hold that Zeno's paradoxes are simply mathematical problems, for which modern calculus provides a mathematical solution.[4] Some philosophers, however, say that Zeno's paradoxes and their variations (see Thomson's lamp) remain relevant metaphysical problems.[5][6][7] The origins of the paradoxes are somewhat unclear. Diogenes Laertius, a fourth source for information about Zeno and his teachings, citing Favorinus, says that Zeno's teacher Parmenides was the first to introduce the Achilles and the tortoise paradox.
Paradoxes of motion[edit] Achilles and the tortoise[edit] Distance vs. time, assuming the tortoise to run at Achilles' half speed Dichotomy paradox[edit] Suppose Homer wants to catch a stationary bus. Fermi paradox. A graphical representation of the Arecibo message – Humanity's first attempt to use radio waves to actively communicate its existence to alien civilizations The Fermi paradox (or Fermi's paradox) is the apparent contradiction between high estimates of the probability of the existence of extraterrestrial civilization and humanity's lack of contact with, or evidence for, such civilizations.[1] The basic points of the argument, made by physicists Enrico Fermi and Michael H.
Hart, are: The Sun is a young star. There are billions of stars in the galaxy that are billions of years older;some of these stars probably have Earth-like planets[2] which, if the Earth is typical, may develop intelligent life;presumably, some of these civilizations will develop interstellar travel, a technology Earth is investigating even now, such as that used in the proposed 100 Year Starship;at any practical pace of interstellar travel, the galaxy can be completely colonized in a few tens of millions of years.
Paradoxul lui Epicur - Istorie și Cultură.ro. Paradoxul lui Epicur este o problemă teologică atât de veche încât este incredibil, că mai există oameni credincioși. Și când te gândești că unii spun că nu au existat atei în vechime. Acesta e cel mai greu paradox la care ar fi supuşi adepţii religiilor iudaice să răspundă! De ce? Păi, în primul rând acest paradox logic şi raţional, pune nişte întrebări, aparent sucite, dar în acelaşi timp esenţiale pentru a vedea care ar fi “marile argumente” ale adepţilor cultelor iudaice care ar răspunde la acest paradox. Epicurismul este doctrină morală a lui Epicur și a discipolilor săi bazată pe teoria etică a fericirii raționale a individului.
Termenul epicurianism este, etimologic, un substantiv format pornind de la numele lui Epicur. Sensul extins al termenului face referire la o căutare exclusivă și excesivă a plăcerii. Istoric Epicurianismul s-a dezvoltat în Antichitate, atât în Grecia, prin Epicur, cât și la Roma, prin Lucrețiu, în circumstanțe marcate de tulburări politice. Canonică Fizică “1. Chicken or the egg. Cultural references to the Chicken and Egg intend to point out the futility of identifying the first case of a circular cause and consequence. It could be considered that in this approach lies the most fundamental nature of the question.
A literal answer is an egg according to some people, as egg-laying species pre-date the existence of chickens. To others, the chicken came first, seeing as chickens are merely domesticated Red Junglefowls. However, the metaphorical view sets a metaphysical ground to the dilemma. An equivalent situation arises in engineering and science known as circular reference, in which a parameter is required to calculate that parameter itself. History of the dilemma[edit] A chick hatching from an egg Ancient references to the dilemma are found in the writings of classical philosophers. Aristotle (384–322 BC) was puzzled by the idea that there could be a first bird or egg and concluded that both the bird and egg must have always existed: Responses to the dilemma[edit] Grandfather paradox. The grandfather paradox is a proposed paradox of time travel first described by the science fiction writer René Barjavel in his 1943 book Le Voyageur Imprudent (Future Times Three).[1] The paradox is described as following: the time traveller went back in time to the time when his grandfather had not married yet.
At that time, the time traveller kills his grandfather, and therefore, the time traveller is never born when he was meant to be. If he is never born, then he is unable to travel through time and kill his grandfather, which means he would be born, and so on. Despite the name, the grandfather paradox does not exclusively regard the impossibility of one's own birth. Rather, it regards any action that makes impossible the ability to travel back in time in the first place. The paradox's namesake example is merely the most commonly thought of when one considers the whole range of possible actions. Scientific theories[edit] Novikov self-consistency principle[edit] See also[edit] Dasein. Dasein (German pronunciation: [ˈdaːzaɪn]) is a German word which means "being there" or "presence" (German: da "there"; sein "being") often translated in English with the word "existence".
It is a fundamental concept in the existential philosophy of Martin Heidegger particularly in his magnum opus Being and Time. Heidegger uses the expression Dasein to refer to the experience of being that is peculiar to human beings. Thus it is a form of being that is aware of and must confront such issues as personhood, mortality and the dilemma or paradox of living in relationship with other humans while being ultimately alone with oneself. Heidegger's re-interpretation[edit] In German, Dasein is the vernacular term for "existence", as in "I am pleased with my existence" (ich bin mit meinem Dasein zufrieden).
Heidegger also saw the question of Dasein as extending beyond the realms disclosed by positive science or in the history of metaphysics. Origin and inspiration[edit] Other applications[edit] Zeno's paradoxes.