Motion resists ontological derivation and must be accepted as a contingent fact

Evidence

Motion is the upsurge of the exteriority of indifference at the very heart of the in-itself. This pure vacillation of being is a contingent venture of being. The For-itself can apprehend it only across the temporal ekstasis and in an ekstatic permanent identification of the moving body with itself. This identification does not suppose any operation and in particular no “synthesis of recognition;” for the For-itself it is only the unity of ekstatic being of the Past with the Present. Thus the temporal identification of the moving body with itself across the constant positing of its own exteriority causes the trajectory to reveal itself—that is, to cause space to arise in the form of an evanescent becoming. By motion space is engendered in time; motion extends the line as traced from externality to self. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 643 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Motion emerges only for the For-itself as the temporal constitution of space — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 643; Action includes tendency to motion, not just actual motion — Jeremy Bentham, The Panopticon Writings, 510; Motion alters a quality’s mode of being rather than its essence (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• Motion alters a quality’s mode of being rather than its essence #expands (0.85)
• Motion emerges only for the For-itself as the temporal constitution of space #contradicts (0.80) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 643
• A body identical at endpoints can still be transformed during motion #expands (0.80)
• Action includes tendency to motion, not just actual motion #qualifies (0.75) — Jeremy Bentham, The Panopticon Writings, 510
• Aristotle conflates passivity and activity under motion as imperfect activity #corroborates (0.75) — Catherine Malabou, The Future of Hegel, 410