  Even if Diogenes’ report happens to be reliable, we still must rely  on Aristotle in trying to reconstruct the argument that, as in  Diogenes’ report, what moves does not move in the place where it is.  (We get no indication from him of any argument of Zeno’s to show that what moves does not move where it is not; perhaps that was thought  self-evident.) And Aristotle’s evidence in this instance is an even  more meager basis for reconstruction than usual. Thus, according to  Aristotle, the moving arrow (A) is actually standing still.  The argument for this conclusion seems to be as follows: What moves  is always, throughout the duration of its motion, in the now, that is to say, in one instant of time after another. So, throughout its  flight, A is in one instant of time after another. At any  particular instant during its flight (t), A  occupies a place exactly equivalent to its length, that is,  A is “against what is equal.” But whatever is  against what is equal is resting. So A is resting at  t. But t is no different than the other instants  during A‘s flight, so that what is the case with  A at t is the case with A at every other  instant of its flight. Thus A is resting at every instant of its flight, and this amounts to the moving arrow always being  motionless or standing still.