I found it strange how the impossibility of coming to be which Aristotle writes about mirrors the problem philosophers had with the leaner’s paradox. Then their solution to the impossibility mirrors the way philosophers came to discredit the learner’s paradox and prove it wrong.

The impossibility of the coming to be mirrors the learner paradox by limiting reality to two options-saying it is either A or B or not at all. The paradox also limited our process of learning to two realities and said there was no other option besides you either learn it or you don’t learn it. Instead of limiting if we learn or not, however, the impossibility limits how things are created by saying what comes to be must come to be either from what it is or what it isn’t. Both arguments/beliefs don’t allow the possibility that there are options outside of it being 100% one way or 100% the other. The theories do not allow room for leeway.

I find this interesting because the way the theories run parallel to each other is an example of history repeating itself. The same patterns in philosophy come back despite being talked around before and shown to be not accurate or to be a valid argument.