Comparing Logical Paradoxes through the Method of Sublation

Hui Shi, Zeno and the “Flying Arrow Problem”


  • Jana S. ROŠKER University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Slovenia



Hui Shi, Zeno, transcultural sublation, frameworks of reference, form and potential, the flying arrow paradox


This article addresses some basic methodological problems in the field of transcultural post-comparative studies of ancient logic by comparing the famous flying arrow paradox of Hui Shi (370–c. 310 BCE) with an apparently similar paradox attributed to Zeno of Elea (495–430 BCE). The article proceeds from a general introduction to the basic framework of semantically determined classical Chinese logic, to an illumination of Hui Shi’s specific contributions to the field, and finally to a preliminary explanation that emerges from a contrastive analysis of Zeno’s and Hui Shi’s respective views on the problem of motion and stasis as manifested in their corresponding paradoxes. The contrastive analysis, based on an exposition of some basic problems in the field of transcultural methodology and a description of the so-called sublation method, points to the importance of considering different paradigms and frames of reference in identifying differences between apparently similar theses.


Download data is not yet available.


Cheng, Chung-Ying. 1965. “Inquiries into Classical Chinese Logic.” Philosophy East and West 15 (3–4): 195–216.

Chmelewski, Janusz. 1965. “Notes on Early Chinese Logic.” Rocznik orientalistycny 28 (2): 87–111.

Cui, Qingtian. 2021. “Researching the History of Chinese Logic: The Role of Wen Gongyi in the Establishment of New Methodologies.” Asian Studies 9 (2): 105–20.

Harbsmeier, Christoph. 1998. “Language and Logic.” In Science and Civilization in China, edited by Joseph Needham, vol. 7, part 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jin, Yuelin 金岳霖. 1997. Jin Yuelin wenji 金岳霖文集 (Collected Works of Jin Yuelin). Lanzhou: Gansu renmin chuban she.

Kurz, Joachim. 2011. The Discovery of Chinese Logic. Boston: Brill.

Lee, Henry Desmond Prichard. 1967. Zeno of Elea. A Text, with Translations and Notes. Amsterdam: Hakkert.

Lusthaus, Dan. 2022. Re: “On Huishi and Zeno—The Flying Arrow.” message to author, January 20, 2022.

Mozi. s.d. In Chinese Text Project. Pre-Qin and Han. Accessed November 23, 2021.

Rošker, Jana S. 2021. Interpreting Chinese Philosophy: A New Methodology. London: Bloomsbury.

Silius, Vytis. 2020. “Diversifying Academic Philosophy: The Post-Comparative Turn and Transculturalism.” Asian Studies 8 (2): 257–80. doi: 10.4312/as.2020.8.2.257-280.

Vrhovski, Jan. 2021. “A Few Important Landmarks in the Chinese Debates on Dialectical and Formal Logic from the 1930s.” Asian Studies 9 (2): 81–103.

Wang, Jisheng 王吉盛. 2021. Zhongguo zhexiue mingti daquan. 中国哲学的命题大全. (The Encyclopedia of Propositions in Chinese Philosophy). Accessed January 15, 2022.

Zhuangzi. s.d. In Chinese Text Project. Pre-Qin and Han. Accessed November 23, 2021.



9. 05. 2022

How to Cite

Rošker, Jana S. 2022. “Comparing Logical Paradoxes through the Method of Sublation: Hui Shi, Zeno and the ‘Flying Arrow Problem’”. Asian Studies 10 (2): 299-312.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 119

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 1 2 3 4 5 6 > >>