Document Type : Research

Authors

• Seyyed Mohammad Ali Hodjati ¹
• kasra Farsian ²

¹ member of philosophy Dept.Tarbiat Modares University

² Dept. of Philosophy, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

It is obvious that things are subject to change in our world. For example, the nib of a pencil may be broken; however, the pencil is the same pencil as before, with the only change that its nib is now broken. However, the problem is not so simple. During the history of metaphysics, there have been those- such as Parmenides, Melissus, Zenon, McTaggart, Geach, Russell- who rejected change and motion in such a customary sense. On the other hand, philosophers’ mainstream has tried to represent views and sound arguments for the existence of motion and change, for instance, Aristotelian-Avicennian approach is one of the most important of them. The peripatetic account relies on the distinction of essence and accidence and develops its theory of motion. In this paper we try to show that both positive and negative approaches mentioned above are defeated; their defeat is not due to the weakness of their arguments but is rooted in the wrong logic selected for the base of their metaphysics. This paper is an endeavor to show the advantage of paraconsistent logic relative to classical logic in explaining the problem of change.

Keywords

• metaphysics of change
• identity over time
• peripatetic theory of motion
• paraconsistency
• contradiction

Main Subjects

• Philosophy of Logic