Intuitionism and Formalism: Zeno's Definition of Geometry in a Fragment of L. Calvenus Taurus

Abstract

Wachsmuth omitted Plato's and Aristotle's definitions as well as the final part of the Taurus 'fragment'. With reference to Wachsmuth, Pearson2 printed this text in precisely the same shape (Zeno fr. 28). Pearson's text, in its turn, was printed by von Arnim as SVF 1 70. Pearson commented: It is barely credible that Zeno can have defined geometry in the same words by which Herillus certainly and he himself possibly defined knowledge. There is doubtless some mistake in the tradition: possibly X1LaRr tLx(Av has dropped out. I cannot find any evidence to illustrate Stoic views on mathematics. Von Arnim3 is more resolute: 'constat hanc esse E&TTLUT%iLs definitionem, non geometriae. Cf. [SVF I] n. 68, [SVF I] 411. His references are Pearson's, with some additions. At SVF 1 68, his fifth text is a sentence from Diog. Laert. VII 47:

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 68 citations exist upstream.