Search results for 'paradoxes' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  78
    Edwin Mares & Francesco Paoli (2014). Logical Consequence and the Paradoxes. Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (2-3):439-469.
    We group the existing variants of the familiar set-theoretical and truth-theoretical paradoxes into two classes: connective paradoxes, which can in principle be ascribed to the presence of a contracting connective of some sort, and structural paradoxes, where at most the faulty use of a structural inference rule can possibly be blamed. We impute the former to an equivocation over the meaning of logical constants, and the latter to an equivocation over the notion of consequence. Both equivocation sources (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  2. Andrew Bacon (2015). Can the Classical Logician Avoid the Revenge Paradoxes? Philosophical Review 124 (3):299-352.
    Most work on the semantic paradoxes within classical logic has centered around what this essay calls “linguistic” accounts of the paradoxes: they attribute to sentences or utterances of sentences some property that is supposed to explain their paradoxical or nonparadoxical status. “No proposition” views are paradigm examples of linguistic theories, although practically all accounts of the paradoxes subscribe to some kind of linguistic theory. This essay shows that linguistic accounts of the paradoxes endorsing classical logic are (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  14
    Michael Clark (2002). Paradoxes From A to Z. Routledge.
    This essential guide to paradoxes takes the reader on a lively tour of puzzles that have taxed thinkers from Zeno to Galileo ...
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   23 citations  
  4. Peter Eldridge-Smith (2007). Paradoxes and Hypodoxes of Time Travel. In Jan Lloyd Jones, Paul Campbell & Peter Wylie (eds.), Art and Time. Australian Scholarly Publishing 172--189.
    I distinguish paradoxes and hypodoxes among the conundrums of time travel. I introduce ‘hypodoxes’ as a term for seemingly consistent conundrums that seem to be related to various paradoxes, as the Truth-teller is related to the Liar. In this article, I briefly compare paradoxes and hypodoxes of time travel with Liar paradoxes and Truth-teller hypodoxes. I also discuss Lewis’ treatment of time travel paradoxes, which I characterise as a Laissez Faire theory of time travel. Time (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  5.  21
    Johannes Stern & Martin Fischer (2015). Paradoxes of Interaction? Journal of Philosophical Logic 44 (3):287-308.
    Since Montague’s work it is well known that treating a single modality as a predicate may lead to paradox. In their paper “No Future”, Horsten and Leitgeb show that if the two temporal modalities are treated as predicates paradox might arise as well. In our paper we investigate whether paradoxes of multiple modalities, such as the No Future paradox, are genuinely new paradoxes or whether they “reduce” to the paradoxes of single modalities. In order to address this (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  6.  22
    Vincent C. Müller (1994). Review of Mark Sainsbury, Paradoxes. [REVIEW] European Review of Philosophy 1:182-184.
  7.  27
    Thomas Macaulay Ferguson (2015). Two Paradoxes of Semantic Information. Synthese 192 (11):3719-3730.
    Yehoshua Bar-Hillel and Rudolph Carnap’s classical theory of semantic information entails the counterintuitive feature that inconsistent statements convey maximal information. Theories preserving Bar-Hillel and Carnap’s modal intuitions while imposing a veridicality requirement on which statements convey information—such as the theories of Fred Dretske or Luciano Floridi—avoid this commitment, as inconsistent statements are deemed not information-conveying by fiat. This paper produces a pair of paradoxical statements that such “veridical-modal” theories must evaluate as both conveying and not conveying information, although Bar-Hillel and (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  13
    Riccardo Bruni (2013). Beppo Levi's Analysis of the Paradoxes. Logica Universalis 7 (2):211-231.
    This paper presents and comments the content of a note by Beppo Levi on logical paradoxes. Though the existence of this contribution is known, very little analysis of it is available in the literature. I put the emphasis on Levi’s usage of “elementation procedures” for solving the set-theoretical paradoxes, which is the most original part of Levi’s approach to the topic.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  9.  6
    José M. Méndez & Gemma Robles (2007). Relevance Logics, Paradoxes of Consistency and the K Rule II. A Non-Constructive Negation. Logic and Logical Philosophy 15 (3):175-191.
    The logic B+ is Routley and Meyer’s basic positive logic. We define the logics BK+ and BK'+ by adding to B+ the K rule and to BK+ the characteristic S4 axiom, respectively. These logics are endowed with a relatively strong non-constructive negation. We prove that all the logics defined lack the K axiom and the standard paradoxes of consistency.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  10.  93
    Jordi Valor Abad (2008). The Inclosure Scheme and the Solution to the Paradoxes of Self-Reference. Synthese 160 (2):183 - 202.
    All paradoxes of self-reference seem to share some structural features. Russell in 1908 and especially Priest nowadays have advanced structural descriptions that successfully identify necessary conditions for having a paradox of this kind. I examine in this paper Priest’s description of these paradoxes, the Inclosure Scheme (IS), and consider in what sense it may help us understand and solve the problems they pose. However, I also consider the limitations of this kind of structural descriptions and give arguments against (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11.  19
    Federico Pailos & Lucas Rosenblatt (2015). Solving Multimodal Paradoxes. Theoria 81 (3):192-210.
    Recently, it has been observed that the usual type-theoretic restrictions are not enough to block certain paradoxes involving two or more predicates. In particular, when we have a self-referential language containing modal predicates, new paradoxes might appear even if there are type restrictions for the principles governing those predicates. In this article we consider two type-theoretic solutions to multimodal paradoxes. The first one adds types for each of the modal predicates. We argue that there are a number (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12.  56
    Helmut Tributsch (2006). Quantum Paradoxes, Time, and Derivation of Thermodynamic Law: Opportunities From Change of Energy Paradigm. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 37 (2):287 - 306.
    Well known quantum and time paradoxes, and the difficulty to derive the second law of thermodynamics, are proposed to be the result of our historically grown paradigm for energy: it is just there, the capacity to do work, not directly related to change. When the asymmetric nature of energy is considered, as well as the involvement of energy turnover in any change, so that energy can be understood as fundamentally "dynamic", and time-oriented (new paradigm), these paradoxes and problems (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  43
    Thomas Forster & Thierry Libert (2010). An Order-Theoretic Account of Some Set-Theoretic Paradoxes. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 52 (1):1-19.
    We present an order-theoretic analysis of set-theoretic paradoxes. This analysis will show that a large variety of purely set-theoretic paradoxes (including the various Russell paradoxes as well as all the familiar implementations of the paradoxes of Mirimanoff and Burali-Forti) are all instances of a single limitative phenomenon.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  30
    Boris Čulina (2013). Logic of Paradoxes in Classical Set Theories. Synthese 190 (3):525-547.
    According to Cantor (Mathematische Annalen 21:545–586, 1883 ; Cantor’s letter to Dedekind, 1899 ) a set is any multitude which can be thought of as one (“jedes Viele, welches sich als Eines denken läßt”) without contradiction—a consistent multitude. Other multitudes are inconsistent or paradoxical. Set theoretical paradoxes have common root—lack of understanding why some multitudes are not sets. Why some multitudes of objects of thought cannot themselves be objects of thought? Moreover, it is a logical truth that such multitudes (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  41
    Xinguo Dun (2007). Queries on Hempel's Solution to the Paradoxes of Confirmation. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 2 (1):131-139.
    To solve the highly counterintuitive paradox of confirmation represented by the statement, “A pair of red shoes confirms that all ravens are black,” Hempel employed a strategy that retained the equivalence condition but abandoned Nicod’s irrelevance condition. However, his use of the equivalence condition is fairly ad hoc, raising doubts about its applicability to this problem. Furthermore, applying the irrelevance condition from Nicod’s criterion does not necessarily lead to paradoxes, nor does discarding it prevent the emergence of paradoxes. (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  13
    Joseph W. Ulatowski (2004). Review of Nicholas Rescher's Paradoxes. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 78 (3):514-517.
    In this brief article, I review Nicholas Rescher's Paradoxes.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17.  7
    Françoise Lavocat (2010). Mimesis, fiction, paradoxes. Methodos 10.
    Les théories contemporaines de la fiction, comme les poétiques de la Renaissance, privilégient une conception de la mimesis fondée sur la vraisemblance : la démonstration du profit cognitif et moral de la fiction passe toujours par une définition de l’imitation (de quelque façon qu’on la définisse) fondée sur la rationalité. L’auteur de cet article examine tout d’abord le statut des contradictions et de l’impossible chez quelques théoriciens actuels (principalement J.-M. Schaeffer, M.-L. Ryan, L. Doležel) et poéticiens du 16e siècle (L. (...)
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  14
    Manfred Kienpointner (2003). Persuasive Paradoxes in Cicero's Speeches. Argumentation 17 (1):47-63.
    The paper first presents a short survey of ancient and modern logical, rhetorical and argumentative approaches (e.g. Aristotle, Quintilian, Quine, Anscombre and Ducrot) studying the properties of paradoxical utterances. This survey is followed by a tentative definition of paradoxes as seemingly contradictory utterances triggering conversational implicatures in the sense of Grice. A specific group of paradoxes, namely, persuasive paradoxes, is further characterized by the specific implicatures which they trigger: the implicatures of persuasive paradoxes serve the interest (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19.  13
    Alessandro Garcea (2003). Paradoxes in Aulus Gellius. Argumentation 17 (1):87-98.
    The noctes Atticae of Aulus Gellius contain almost all the ancient paradoxes. Nevertheless, in comparison with his philosophical sources, the author shows a shift in the perspective of his approach. He analyses the `master argument' of Diodorus Chronus only from an ethical point of view and, among the seven paradoxes attributed to Eubulides of Milet, he quotes the `heap' as an absurdity (absurdum), the `horned one' and the `not-someone' as a trap (captio), the `liar' as a sophism (sophisma). (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20.  14
    György Darvas (2009). Can the Causal Paradoxes of Qm Be Explained in the Framework of Qed? Foundations of Science 14 (4):273-280.
    Attemts to explain causal paradoxes of Quantum Mechanics (QM) have tried to solve the problems within the framework of Quantum Electrodynamics (QED). We will show, that this is impossible. The original theory of QED by Dirac (Proc Roy Soc A117:610, 1928) formulated in its preamble four preliminary requirements that the new theory should meet. The first of these requirements was that the theory must be causal. Causality is not to be derived as a consequence of the theory since it (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21.  2
    Ionel Narita (2010). Paradoxes of Consequentialism. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 8 (23):36-47.
    Any religion has an ethical component. Thus, the examination of ethical problems is very important for religious studies. Consequentialism is an ethical doctrine according to which a fact is good only if it has good consequences. In order to avoid infinite regression, there is the need for a moral foundation in conformity with the criterion of goodness. The consequentialists proposed various criteria for goodness, such as pleasure, happiness or utility. Any fact will be judged as good only if its consequences (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  30
    Michael Clark (2007). Paradoxes From A to Z, 2nd Ed. Routledge.
    This essential guide to paradoxes takes the reader on a lively tour of puzzles that have taxed thinkers from Zeno to Galileo and Lewis Carroll to Bertrand Russell. Michael Clark uncovers an array of conundrums, such as Achilles and the Tortoise, Theseus' Ship, Hempel's Raven, and the Prisoners' Dilemma, taking in subjects as diverse as knowledge, ethics, science, art and politics. Clark discusses each paradox in non-technical terms, considering its significance and looking at likely solutions.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  9
    Dan S. Felsenthal (1995). Postulates and Paradoxes of Relative Voting Power - A Critical Re-Appraisal. Theory and Decision 38 (2):195-229.
  24. Patrick Hughes (1975). Vicious Circles and Infinity: A Panoply of Paradoxes. Doubleday.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  25.  14
    Bradley Dowden, Zeno’s Paradoxes. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  11
    Benjamín García-Hernández (2003). Paradoxes in the Argumentation of the Comic Double and Classemic Contradiction. Argumentation 17 (1):99-111.
    In the comedies of errors, and more precisely in the comedies of double, in which two identities become confused, the characters get into paradoxical situations reigned by the principle of contradiction. The classemic relationships that are based on the criterion of subjectivity are broken due to the intervention of the character appearing as the double, for the doubled and the double can appear as one subject or as two. In fact, in the added double one + one equals one (1 (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27.  3
    Dun Xinguo (2007). Queries on Hempel's Solution to the Paradoxes of Confirmation. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 2 (1):131-139.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Jesús González Fisac (2015). The Paradoxes of Enlightenment. A Rhetorical and Anthropological Approach to Kant’s Beantwortung. Studia Kantiana 18:37-58.
    This paper consists of two parts. In the first part, I shall expound the kantian concept of paradox and its three different senses, the anthropological, the rhetorical and the metaphysical. In the second part, I shall examine the presence of these senses of paradox in Kant’s texts about Enlightenment. The paradox of immaturity consists of the fact that we are responsible, as human beings, and non-responsible, as subjects of a State, of the exit from it. Another formulation of the same (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. Laureano Luna (2013). Satisfiable and Unsatisfied Paradoxes. How Closely Related? The Reasoner 7 (5):56-7.
  30. Robert M. Martin (2002). There Are Two Errors in the the Title of This Book a Sourcebook of Philosophical Puzzles, Problems, and Paradoxes.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. Raymond M. Smullyan (1980). This Book Needs No Title a Budget of Living Paradoxes.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Wim De Reu (2006). Right Words Seem Wrong: Neglected Paradoxes in Early Chinese Philosophical Texts. Philosophy East and West 56 (2):281-300.
    This article presents and interprets a number of neglected paradoxes in early Chinese philosophical texts . Looking beyond well-known paradoxes put forward by masters such as Hui Shi and Gongsun Long, it intends to complement our picture of Warring States and early Western Han paradoxical statements. The first section contrasts the neglected paradoxes with the well-known ones. It is contended here that our understanding of these latter paradoxes is hampered by a lack of context and that (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  33.  53
    Murali Ramachandran (forthcoming). A Neglected Response to the Paradoxes of Confirmation. South African Journal of Philosophy.
    Hempel‘s paradox of the ravens, and his take on it, are meant to be understood as being restricted to situations where we have no additional background information. According to him, in the absence of any such information, observations of FGs confirm the hypothesis that all Fs are G. In this paper I argue against this principle by way of considering two other paradoxes of confirmation, Goodman‘s 'grue‘ paradox and the 'tacking‘ (or 'irrelevant conjunct‘) paradox. What these paradoxes reveal, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Susanne Bobzien (2012). How to Give Someone Horns. Paradoxes of Presupposition in Antiquity. Logical Analysis and History of Philosophy 15:159-84.
    ABSTRACT: This paper discusses ancient versions of paradoxes today classified as paradoxes of presupposition and how their ancient solutions compare with contemporary ones. Sections 1-4 air ancient evidence for the Fallacy of Complex Question and suggested solutions, introduce the Horn Paradox, consider its authorship and contemporary solutions. Section 5 reconstructs the Stoic solution, suggesting the Stoics produced a Russellian-type solution based on a hidden scope ambiguity of negation. The difference to Russell's explanation of definite descriptions is that in (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  8
    R. M. Sainsbury (1995). Paradoxes. Cambridge University Press.
    A paradox can be defined as an unacceptable conclusion derived by apparently acceptable reasoning from apparently acceptable premises. Unlike party puzzles or brain teasers, many paradoxes are serious in that they raise serious philosophical problems, and are associated with crises of thought and revolutionary advances. To grapple with them is not merely to engage in an intellectual game, but to come to grips with issues of real import. The second, revised edition of this intriguing book expands and updates the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   33 citations  
  36. Landon Rabern, Brian Rabern & Matthew Macauley (2013). Dangerous Reference Graphs and Semantic Paradoxes. Journal of Philosophical Logic 42 (5):727-765.
    The semantic paradoxes are often associated with self-reference or referential circularity. Yablo (Analysis 53(4):251–252, 1993), however, has shown that there are infinitary versions of the paradoxes that do not involve this form of circularity. It remains an open question what relations of reference between collections of sentences afford the structure necessary for paradoxicality. In this essay, we lay the groundwork for a general investigation into the nature of reference structures that support the semantic paradoxes and the semantic (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  37.  20
    David Wheeler, Heike Fabig & Richard Boele (2002). Paradoxes and Dilemmas for Stakeholder Responsive Firms in the Extractive Sector: Lessons From the Case of Shell and the Ogoni. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 39 (3):297 - 318.
    This paper examines some of the paradoxes and dilemmas facing firms in the extractive sector when they attempt to take on a more stakeholder-responsive orientation towards issues of environmental and social responsibility. We describe the case of Shell and the Ogoni and attempt to draw out some of the lessons of that case for more sustainable operations in the developing world. We argue that firms such as Shell, Rio Tinto and others may well exhibit increasingly stakeholder-responsive behaviours at the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   30 citations  
  38. Rachael Briggs (2010). Decision-Theoretic Paradoxes as Voting Paradoxes. Philosophical Review 119 (1):1-30.
    It is a platitude among decision theorists that agents should choose their actions so as to maximize expected value. But exactly how to define expected value is contentious. Evidential decision theory (henceforth EDT), causal decision theory (henceforth CDT), and a theory proposed by Ralph Wedgwood that this essay will call benchmark theory (BT) all advise agents to maximize different types of expected value. Consequently, their verdicts sometimes conflict. In certain famous cases of conflict—medical Newcomb problems—CDT and BT seem to get (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  39.  52
    Igor Douven (2002). A New Solution to the Paradoxes of Rational Acceptability. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 53 (3):391-410.
    The Lottery Paradox and the Preface Paradox both involve the thesis that high probability is sufficient for rational acceptability. The standard solution to these paradoxes denies that rational acceptability is deductively closed. This solution has a number of untoward consequences. The present paper suggests that a better solution to the paradoxes is to replace the thesis that high probability suffices for rational acceptability with a somewhat stricter thesis. This avoids the untoward consequences of the standard solution. The new (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   23 citations  
  40. Christopher Menzel (1986). On the Iterative Explanation of the Paradoxes. Philosophical Studies 49 (1):37 - 61.
    As the story goes, the source of the paradoxes of naive set theory lies in a conflation of two distinct conceptions of set: the so-called iterative, or mathematical, conception, and the Fregean, or logical, conception. While the latter conception is provably inconsistent, the former, as Godel notes, "has never led to any antinomy whatsoever". More important, the iterative conception explains the paradoxes by showing precisely where the Fregean conception goes wrong by enabling us to distinguish between sets and (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  41. Eric Mandelbaum & David Ripley (2012). Explaining the Abstract/Concrete Paradoxes in Moral Psychology: The NBAR Hypothesis. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 3 (3):351-368.
    For some reason, participants hold agents more responsible for their actions when a situation is described concretely than when the situation is described abstractly. We present examples of this phenomenon, and survey some attempts to explain it. We divide these attempts into two classes: affective theories and cognitive theories. After criticizing both types of theories we advance our novel hypothesis: that people believe that whenever a norm is violated, someone is responsible for it. This belief, along with the familiar workings (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  42.  17
    Donald A. Landes (2013). Merleau-Ponty and the Paradoxes of Expression. Bloomsbury.
    Winner of the 2014 Edward Goodwin Ballard Award for an Outstanding Book in Phenomenology, awarded by the Center for Advance Research in Phenomenology. -/- Merleau-Ponty and the Paradoxes of Expression offers a comprehensive reading of the philosophical work of Maurice Merleau-Ponty, a central figure in 20th-century continental philosophy. -/- By establishing that the paradoxical logic of expression is Merleau-Ponty's fundamental philosophical gesture, this book ties together his diverse work on perception, language, aesthetics, politics and history in order to establish (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  43. Thomas Mulligan (2015). Disagreement, Peerhood, and Three Paradoxes of Conciliationism. Synthese 192 (1):67-78.
    Conciliatory theories of disagreement require that one lower one’s confidence in a belief in the face of disagreement from an epistemic peer. One question about which people might disagree is who should qualify as an epistemic peer and who should not. But when putative epistemic peers disagree about epistemic peerhood itself, then Conciliationism makes contradictory demands and paradoxes arise.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. John N. Williams (2004). Moore's Paradoxes, Evans's Principle and Self-Knowledge. Analysis 64 (284):348-353.
    I supply an argument for Evans's principle that whatever justifies me in believing that p also justifies me in believing that I believe that p. I show how this principle helps explain how I come to know my own beliefs in a way that normally makes me the best authority on them. Then I show how the principle helps to solve Moore's paradoxes.
    Direct download (14 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  45. Claudio Garola & Luigi Solombrino (1996). Semantic Realism Versus EPR-Like Paradoxes: The Furry, Bohm-Aharonov, and Bell Paradoxes. Foundations of Physics 26 (10):1329-1356.
    We prove that the general scheme for physical theories that we have called semantic realism(SR) in some previous papers copes successfully with a number of EPR-like paradoxes when applied to quantum physics (QP). In particular, we consider the old arguments by Furry and Bohm- Aharonov and show that they are not valid within a SR framework. Moreover, we consider the Bell-Kochen-Specker und the Bell theorems that should prove that QP is inherently contextual and nonlocal, respectively, and show that they (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  46.  34
    Richmond Campbell & Lanning Snowden (eds.) (1985). Paradoxes of Rationality and Cooperation: Prisoner's Dilemma and Newcomb's Problem. University of British Columbia Press.
    1 Background for the Uninitiated RICHMOND CAMPBELL Paradoxes are intrinsically fascinating. They are also distinctively ...
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   21 citations  
  47.  61
    Alex Byrne (2004). How Hard Are the Sceptical Paradoxes? Noûs 38 (2):299–325.
    The sceptic about the external world presents us with a paradox: an apparently acceptable argument for an apparently unacceptable conclusion—that we do not know anything about the external world. Some paradoxes, for instance the liar and the sorites, are very hard. The defense of a purported solution to either of these two inevitably deploys the latest in high-tech philosophical weaponry. On the other hand, some paradoxes are not at all hard, and may be resolved without much fuss. They (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  48.  97
    Francesco Paoli (2007). Implicational Paradoxes and the Meaning of Logical Constants. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (4):553 – 579.
    I discuss paradoxes of implication in the setting of a proof-conditional theory of meaning for logical constants. I argue that a proper logic of implication should be not only relevant, but also constructive and nonmonotonic. This leads me to select as a plausible candidate LL, a fragment of linear logic that differs from R in that it rejects both contraction and distribution.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  49.  56
    Eric Dietrich & Chris Fields (2015). Science Generates Limit Paradoxes. Axiomathes 25 (4):409-432.
    The sciences occasionally generate discoveries that undermine their own assumptions. Two such discoveries are characterized here: the discovery of apophenia by cognitive psychology and the discovery that physical systems cannot be locally bounded within quantum theory. It is shown that such discoveries have a common structure and that this common structure is an instance of Priest’s well-known Inclosure Schema. This demonstrates that science itself is dialetheic: it generates limit paradoxes. How science proceeds despite this fact is briefly discussed, as (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50. Noson S. Yanofsky (2003). A Universal Approach to Self-Referential Paradoxes, Incompleteness and Fixed Points. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 9 (3):362-386.
    Following F. William Lawvere, we show that many self-referential paradoxes, incompleteness theorems and fixed point theorems fall out of the same simple scheme. We demonstrate these similarities by showing how this simple scheme encompasses the semantic paradoxes, and how they arise as diagonal arguments and fixed point theorems in logic, computability theory, complexity theory and formal language theory.
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
1 — 50 / 1000