Identifying the Aporetic Contrasts

Aporias are basically either negative aporiai or positive ones, though the aporiai in Physics IV.10 IV.10 mostly are negative ones. The structure of the aporias may be understood in different ways, either as two or three aporias, or even as one large aporia. They may also be understood as three-step rocket, building on one another. Neat, clearcut aporias are rare; in Physics IV.10 only the third aporia may be categorised as such. Even though the text practically speaking can be divided into three aporias, several aporetic contrasts can be identified across them, where a claim in one aporia contrasts with or connects to a claim in another aporia. A number of aporetic contrasts may be identified, as follows. Aporetic contrast 1: Aristotle’s questioning of time’s existence, listing several persuasive arguments, is contrasted against the endoxa, the opinion of the general public or the opinion of the informed elites. Aporetic contrast 2: The location of existing time would either have to be in past or future time, or in the ‘now,’ but Aristotle outright rejects both these proposals. Aporetic contrast 3: Implied in the aporetic material is the contrast between a cognitive-subjective perspective on time and one that is more mathematical and matter-of-fact. Time is, on the one hand, always perceived, whether empirically or cognitively, and dependent on a subjective perceiver for its passing, or even existence. On the other hand, past and future time and the ‘now’ are at the same time approached as units in a logical and mathematical economy. Aporetic contrast 4: A major issue in Aristotle’s discussion on time is the relation of time to substance, that is, whether time is able to be a partaker of substance or not. This is a key issue in view of the fact that time is part of Aristotle’s physics. Time’s connection to ‘being,’ and therefore potentially to substance, is implied at the same time as it is suggested that non-existents (past and future time) may not be able to take part in substance. Aporetic contrast 5: The ‘now’ may either be taken to be a part of time or not; its potential parthood is suggested but mostly denied. Aporetic contrast 6: ‘Nows’ are presented as multiple tokens of a type, following one another, and, in contrast, a single ‘now’ is posited as the one and same ‘now’ that expands and for ever continues. Since ‘nows’ cannot occur in a series back-to-back, and since a ‘now’ cannot be the same in the sense of including all events throughout history, thus nullifying the notion of a ‘before’ and an ‘after,’ Aristotle rejects both options.