more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 4786

[filed under theme 27. Natural Reality / A. Classical Physics / 1. Mechanics / a. Explaining movement ]

Full Idea

To reply to Zeno's Arrow Paradox, Russell developed his 'at-at' theory of motion, which says that to move from A to B is to be at the intervening points at the intervening instants.

Gist of Idea

Russell's 'at-at' theory says motion is to be at the intervening points at the intervening instants

Source

report of Bertrand Russell (Human Knowledge: its scope and limits [1948]) by Stathis Psillos - Causation and Explanation §4.2

Book Ref

Psillos,Stathis: 'Causation and Explanation' [Acumen 2002], p.113


A Reaction

I wonder whether Russell's target was actually Zeno, or was it a simplified ontology of points and instants? The ontology will also need identity, to ensure it is the same thing which arrives at each point.


The 32 ideas with the same theme [explaining why not all things are stationary]:

Thales must have thought soul causes movement, since he thought magnets have soul [Thales, by Aristotle]
All things are in a state of motion [Heraclitus, by Aristotle]
It is feeble-minded to look for explanations of everything being at rest [Aristotle on Parmenides]
That which moves, moves neither in the place in which it is, nor in that in which it is not [Zeno of Elea]
There is no real motion, only the appearance of it [Melissus, by Diog. Laertius]
Movement can be intrinsic (like a ship) or relative (like its sailors) [Aristotle]
Movement is spatial, alteration, withering or growth [Aristotle]
Practical reason is based on desire, so desire must be the ultimate producer of movement [Aristotle]
If all movement is either pushing or pulling, there must be a still point in between where it all starts [Aristotle]
If the more you raise some earth the faster it moves, why does the whole earth not move? [Aristotle]
Motion fulfils potentiality [Aristotle]
If movement can arise within an animal, why can't it also arise in the universe? [Aristotle]
When there is unnatural movement (e.g. fire going downwards) the cause is obvious [Aristotle]
Motion can't move where it is, and can't move where it isn't, so it can't exist [Pyrrho, by Diog. Laertius]
If there were no space there could be no movement, or even creation [Lucretius]
Atoms move themselves [Lucretius]
A man walking backwards on a forwards-moving ship is moving in a fixed place [Sext.Empiricus]
Does the original self-mover push itself from behind, or pull itself from in front? [Sext.Empiricus]
If time and place are infinitely divided, it becomes impossible for movement ever to begin [Sext.Empiricus]
If all atoms, times and places are the same, everything should move with equal velocity [Sext.Empiricus]
Motion is losing one place and acquiring another [Hobbes]
Newton reclassified vertical motion as violent, and unconstrained horizontal motion as natural [Newton, by Harré]
Motion is just change of distance between two things [Locke]
Maybe motion is definable as 'change of place' [Leibniz]
All that is real in motion is the force or power which produces change [Leibniz]
Bodies are recreated in motion, and don't exist in intervening instants [Leibniz]
Russell's 'at-at' theory says motion is to be at the intervening points at the intervening instants [Russell, by Psillos]
Occupying a place and change are prior to motion, so motion is just occupying places at continuous times [Russell]
We perceive motion, and not just successive occupations of different positions [Harré/Madden]
We only see points in motion, and thereby infer movement [Rescher]
If motion is change of distance between objects, it involves no intrinsic change in the objects [Lowe]
Maybe motion is a dynamical quantity intrinsic to a thing at a particular time [Sider]