Reconstruction of Aristotle's Argument from Physics Book 2, Chapter 8.

In this article we resubmitted Aristotle's argument from Chapter 8 of Physics Handbook 2, 199 a 9. Aristotle in this chapter is trying to infer the nature and behavior to decide that it has finished both nature and behavior. The development of this argument is a response to natural philosophers who believe that the result of the natural / natural process occurs only by chance, not by termination (198b 16). Aristotle believes that incidents and results will occur only a few times.

The source of all Xeno's argument is his opponent's job. The paradox of Achilles was reconstructed from Aristotle (Physical Book VI, Chapter 8, 239 b 14 - 16) and several sections of the 5 th century of Sin Prius. There is no evidence that Zeno uses turtles instead of late humans. The turtle is a complement to the commentator afterwards. Aristotle talked about "runner" which simply competed with Achilles. It does not react, and the solution to the paradox is the biological limit on how small Achilles is. Achilles' feet are not obliged to stop or resume at each of the above places. Therefore, there is no limit on the distance between one and the other of these places. A more powerful version of his paradox will ask us to think about the Achilles center of gravity movement. It is best to change Achilles as a continuous movement from one place to another. It is not a stepwise step that you need to stop and start over from the beginning.

Aristotle discussed in the Opening Ceremony of Physics Ph.D. 8 Since the occurrence of the change is based on the process of the previous change, movement and change in the universe may not start. With this argument, Aristotle can establish a chain of eternal movements, and can argue against people who believe there may be states of the universe that had previously been stationary. Aristotle believes that such an eternal chain needs to rely on reasons to ensure its sustainability. do not exist. In fact, in the world, at some point it no longer exists. Aristotle, however, insisted that a series of causal events also occurred.

The most important but ambiguous discussion throughout this book is probably a partial immortal argument against Aristotle's human soul, which can also be seen in Chapter 5. From his physics he has reached the premise that it is such as an act He believes that it does not have a body because the heart does not have a body organ. Even if it exists outside the substance, it will not be destroyed. Therefore, human thought is immortal. In the late stages of the ancient times, the text of Aristotle was reinterpreted from the viewpoint of neoprogenicism. Surviving the tradition of Arabia, there is an explanation of De Anima reflecting such a new platonic design. The text was translated into Persian in the 13th century. It seems that it is based on Greek originals that it no longer exists and is further integrated into the heterogeneous process adopting early Arab literature.