Graduate studies at Western
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2001)
|Abstract||A paradox is generally a puzzling conclusion we seem to be driven towards by our reasoning, but which is highly counterintuitive, nevertheless. There are, amongst these, a large variety of paradoxes of a logical nature which have teased even professional logicians, in some cases for several millennia. But what are now sometimes isolated as 'the logical paradoxes' are a much less heterogeneous collection: they are a group of antinomies centered on the notion of self-reference, some of which were known in Classical times, but most of which became particularly prominent in the early decades of last century. Quine distinguished amongst paradoxes such antinomies. He did so by first isolating the 'veridical' and 'falsidical' paradoxes, which, although puzzling riddles, turned out to be plainly true, or plainly false, after some inspection. In addition, however, there were paradoxes which 'produce a self-contradiction by accepted ways of reasoning', and which, Quine thought, established 'that some tacit and trusted pattern of reasoning must be made explicit, and henceforward be avoided or revised' (Quine 1966, p7). We will first look, more broadly, and historically, at several of the main conundrums of a logical nature which have proved difficult, some since antiquity, before concentrating later on the more recent troubles with paradoxes of self-reference. They will all be called 'logical paradoxes'.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Keith Simmons (2005). A Berry and a Russell Without Self-Reference. Philosophical Studies 126 (2):253 - 261.
Gary Mar & Paul St Denis (1999). What the Liar Taught Achilles. Journal of Philosophical Logic 28 (1):29-46.
Emil Badici (2008). The Liar Paradox and the Inclosure Schema. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86 (4):583 – 596.
J. C. Beall (ed.) (2003). Liars and Heaps: New Essays on Paradox. Oxford University Press.
Greg Restall (1993). Deviant Logic and the Paradoxes of Self Reference. Philosophical Studies 70 (3):279 - 303.
Anna Orlandini (2003). Logical, Semantic and Cultural Paradoxes. Argumentation 17 (1):65-86.
Greg Restall (2007). Curry's Revenge: The Costs of Non-Classical Solutions to the Paradoxes of Self-Reference. In J. C. Beall (ed.), Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox. Oxford University Press.
Dustin Tucker & Richmond H. Thomason (2011). Paradoxes of Intensionality. The Review of Symbolic Logic 4 (3):394-411.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads14 ( #90,533 of 739,304 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,243 of 739,304 )
How can I increase my downloads?