Advanced search
Start date
Betweenand
Related content
(Reference retrieved automatically from Web of Science through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Contradictions in Motion: Why They're not Needed and Why They Wouldn't Help

Author(s):
Boccardi, Emiliano [1] ; Macias-Bustos, Moises [2]
Total Authors: 2
Affiliation:
[1] Univ Estadual Campinas, Campinas, SP - Brazil
[2] Univ Nacl Autonoma Mexico, Grad Program Philosophy Sci, Mexico City, DF - Mexico
Total Affiliations: 2
Document type: Journal article
Source: HUMANA MENTE-JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHICAL STUDIES; n. 32, p. 195-227, AUG 2017.
Web of Science Citations: 0
Abstract

In this paper we discuss Priest's account of change and motion, contrasting it with its more orthodox rival, the Russellian account. The paper is divided in two parts. In first one we take a stance that is more sympathetic to the Russellian view, arguing that Priest's arguments against it are inconclusive. In the second part, instead, we take a more sympathetic attitude towards Priest's objections. We argue, however, that if these objections pose insurmountable difficulties to the Russellian account (which is what one of the authors of this paper indeed thinks), then they pose the same difficulties also to Priest's favoured Hegelian account, and for the same reasons (AU)

FAPESP's process: 15/20138-2 - On the proper treatment of the notion of temporal passage
Grantee:Emiliano Boccardi
Support Opportunities: Scholarships abroad - Research Internship - Post-doctor