Ryan Johnson

The podcast on paradoxes featuring Peter Cave gives many examples of paradoxes that intrigue philosophers. Some are stronger than others. By this I mean that some of the examples seem to be a bit of a stretch when it comes to an idea that will take a philosopher some time to think about. The first example of Achilles and the tortoise is one of the weaker paradoxes. I understand the concept that Achilles supposedly cannot ever overtake the tortoise because by the time he gets to the point where the tortoise “was”, the tortoise “will be” somewhere else further down the line. This to me sounds just like a head start. The idea that motion cannot exist because you can never catch the tortoise is almost silly. Achilles moves because I see him move. End of story. I don’t know if there are any practical applications for any of this, but some of it is interesting to think about. The other examples- the barber who shaves himself but only shaves people who do not shave themselves, the ass who is faced with a choice between two identical options and can’t decide because one is clearly no better than the other- are the kind of stuff that people with a lot of time on their hands might fret over. My reaction to most of these are – the barber shaves himself, get over it; the ass should stick his face in some hay and just eat already. The idea that anyone can get bogged down in thinking about these issues is odd to me. Perhaps I just see the world a little more clearly. I would have thought that a philosopher would have been able to do that, but apparently they like to think for long periods of time about problems that are not exactly problems and that would never occur in the real world. The barber would naturally shave himself because that is what he does. The ass would never allow himself to starve when there is so much good food to eat. And Achilles would pass the tortoise eventually.

 out of  found this valuable. Do you find this valuable?