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

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. 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.score: 24.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Jordi Valor Abad (2008). The Inclosure Scheme and the Solution to the Paradoxes of Self-Reference. Synthese 160 (2):183 - 202.score: 24.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Bryan Frances, An Utterly Brilliant Solution to the Semantic Paradoxes?score: 24.0
    There is a certain approach to the semantic paradoxes that is highly intuitive and for that reason alone never seems to go away. Roughly put, it's the idea that the paradoxical sentences just don't really have any truth conditions at all, no matter how grammatically sound and meaningful they and their parts are. I suppose that just about anyone who spends even a relatively modest amount of time thinking about the paradoxes comes up with this idea eventually. There (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Edwin Mares & Francesco Paoli (2014). Logical Consequence and the Paradoxes. Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (2-3):439-469.score: 24.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Thomas Forster & Thierry Libert (2010). An Order-Theoretic Account of Some Set-Theoretic Paradoxes. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 52 (1):1-19.score: 24.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Boris Čulina (2013). Logic of Paradoxes in Classical Set Theories. Synthese 190 (3):525-547.score: 24.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Xinguo Dun (2007). Queries on Hempel's Solution to the Paradoxes of Confirmation. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 2 (1):131-139.score: 24.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Michael Clark (2007). Paradoxes From A to Z, 2nd Ed. Routledge.score: 24.0
    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  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Johannes Stern & Martin Fischer (forthcoming). Paradoxes of Interaction? Journal of Philosophical Logic:1-22.score: 24.0
    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 (2001) 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 (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Helmut Tributsch (2006). Quantum Paradoxes, Time, and Derivation of Thermodynamic Law: Opportunities From Change of Energy Paradigm. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 37 (2):287 - 306.score: 24.0
    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 (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Manfred Kienpointner (2003). Persuasive Paradoxes in Cicero's Speeches. Argumentation 17 (1):47-63.score: 24.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Riccardo Bruni (2013). Beppo Levi's Analysis of the Paradoxes. Logica Universalis 7 (2):211-231.score: 24.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Michael Clark (2002). Paradoxes From A to Z. Routledge.score: 24.0
    This essential guide to paradoxes takes the reader on a lively tour of puzzles that have taxed thinkers from Zeno to Galileo ...
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. György Darvas (2009). Can the Causal Paradoxes of Qm Be Explained in the Framework of Qed? Foundations of Science 14 (4):273-280.score: 24.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Alessandro Garcea (2003). Paradoxes in Aulus Gellius. Argumentation 17 (1):87-98.score: 24.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Federico Pailos & Lucas Rosenblatt (2014). Solving Multimodal Paradoxes. Theoria 80 (4).score: 24.0
    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 (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Françoise Lavocat (2010). Mimesis, fiction, paradoxes. Methodos 10.score: 24.0
    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. (...)
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. 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.score: 24.0
    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 (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Ionel Narita (2010). Paradoxes of Consequentialism. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 8 (23):36-47.score: 24.0
    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 (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Benjamín García-Hernández (2003). Paradoxes in the Argumentation of the Comic Double and Classemic Contradiction. Argumentation 17 (1):99-111.score: 22.0
    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 (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Bradley Dowden, Zeno’s Paradoxes. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.score: 21.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Dun Xinguo (2007). Queries on Hempel's Solution to the Paradoxes of Confirmation. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 2 (1):131-139.score: 21.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Dan S. Felsenthal & Mosh� Machover (1995). Postulates and Paradoxes of Relative Voting Power ? A Critical Re-Appraisal. Theory and Decision 38 (2):195-229.score: 21.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Patrick Hughes (1975). Vicious Circles and Infinity: A Panoply of Paradoxes. Doubleday.score: 21.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Laureano Luna (2013). Satisfiable and Unsatisfied Paradoxes. How Closely Related? The Reasoner 7 (5):56-7.score: 21.0
  26. Susanne Bobzien (2012). How to Give Someone Horns – Paradoxes of Presupposition in Antiquity. Logical Analysis and History of Philosophy 15:159-84.score: 20.0
    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 (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Landon Rabern, Brian Rabern & Matthew Macauley (2013). Dangerous Reference Graphs and Semantic Paradoxes. Journal of Philosophical Logic 42 (5):727-765.score: 20.0
    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 (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Bryan Frances, Introduction to the Semantic Paradoxes.score: 20.0
    In this essay (for undergraduates) I introduce three of the famous semantic paradoxes: the Liar, Grelling’s, and the No-No. Collectively, they seem to show that the notion of truth is highly paradoxical, perhaps even contradictory. They seem to show that the concept of truth is a bit akin to the concept of a married bachelor—it just makes no sense at all. But in order to really understand those paradoxes one needs to be very comfortable thinking about how lots (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. John N. Williams (2004). Moore's Paradoxes, Evans's Principle and Self-Knowledge. Analysis 64 (284):348-353.score: 20.0
    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 (13 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Christopher Gauker (2006). Against Stepping Back: A Critique of Contextualist Approaches to the Semantic Paradoxes. Journal of Philosophical Logic 35 (4):393 - 422.score: 20.0
    A number of philosophers have argued that the key to understanding the semantic paradoxes is to recognize that truth is essentially relative to context. All of these philosophers have been motivated by the idea that once a liar sentence has been uttered we can 'step back' and, from the point of view of a different context, judge that the liar sentence is true. This paper argues that this 'stepping back' idea is a mistake that results from failing to relativize (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. David Makinson (2012). Logical Questions Behind the Lottery and Preface Paradoxes: Lossy Rules for Uncertain Inference. Synthese 186 (2):511-529.score: 20.0
    We reflect on lessons that the lottery and preface paradoxes provide for the logic of uncertain inference. One of these lessons is the unreliability of the rule of conjunction of conclusions in such contexts, whether the inferences are probabilistic or qualitative; this leads us to an examination of consequence relations without that rule, the study of other rules that may nevertheless be satisfied in its absence, and a partial rehabilitation of conjunction as a ‘lossy’ rule. A second lesson is (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Teresa Marques (2008). The Square of Opposition and the Paradoxes. Logica Universalis 2 (1):87-105.score: 20.0
    Can an appeal to the difference between contrary and contradictory statements, generated by a non-uniform behaviour of negation, deal adequately with paradoxical cases like the sorites or the liar? This paper offers a negative answer to the question. This is done by considering alternative ways of trying to construe and justify in a useful way (in this context) the distinction between contraries and contradictories by appealing to the behaviour of negation only. There are mainly two ways to try to do (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Saul Smilansky (2007). 10 Moral Paradoxes. Blackwell Pub..score: 20.0
    Presenting ten diverse and original moral paradoxes, this cutting edge work of philosophical ethics makes a focused, concrete case for the centrality of paradoxes within morality. Explores what these paradoxes can teach us about morality and the human condition Considers a broad range of subjects, from familiar topics to rarely posed questions Makes a concrete case for the centrality of paradox within morality Asks whether the existence of moral paradox is a good or a bad thing Presents (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Saul Smilansky (2013). Why Moral Paradoxes Matter? “Teflon Immorality” and the Perversity of Life. Philosophical Studies 165 (1):229-243.score: 20.0
    “Teflon immorality’’ (or TI) is immorality that goes on unchecked—the wrongdoing is not stopped and its perpetrators, beyond the reach of punishment or other sanction, often persist in their immoral ways. The idea that the immoral prosper has been recognized as morally (and legally) disturbing presumably for as long as humanity has been reflective, and can be found already in the Bible. The reasons behind a great deal of successful immorality are important practically, but uninteresting philosophically. Sometimes, however, we face (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Robert C. Koons (1992). Paradoxes of Belief and Strategic Rationality. Cambridge University Press.score: 20.0
    The purpose of this book is to develop a framework for analyzing strategic rationality, a notion central to contemporary game theory, which is the formal study of the interaction of rational agents, and which has proved extremely fruitful in economics, political theory, and business management. The author argues that a logical paradox (known since antiquity as "the Liar paradox") lies at the root of a number of persistent puzzles in game theory, in particular those concerning rational agents who seek to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Gregory Landini (2009). Cocchiarella's Formal Ontology and the Paradoxes of Hyperintensionality. Axiomathes 19 (2):115-142.score: 20.0
    This is a critical discussion of Nino B. Cocchiarella’s book “Formal Ontology and Conceptual Realism.” It focuses on paradoxes of hyperintensionality that may arise in formal systems of intensional logic.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Thomas Mulligan (forthcoming). Disagreement, Peerhood, and Three Paradoxes of Conciliationism. Synthese:1-12.score: 20.0
    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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Anna Orlandini (2003). Logical, Semantic and Cultural Paradoxes. Argumentation 17 (1):65-86.score: 20.0
    The property common to three kinds of paradoxes (logical, semantic, and cultural) is the underlying presence of an exclusive disjunction: even when it is put to a check by the paradox, it is still invoked at the level of implicit discourse. Hence the argumentative strength of paradoxical propositions is derived. Logical paradoxes (insolubilia) always involve two contradictory, mutually exclusive, truths. One truth is always perceived to the detriment of the other, in accordance with a succession which is endlessly (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Kevin C. Klement (2014). The Paradoxes and Russell's Theory of Incomplete Symbols. Philosophical Studies 169 (2):183-207.score: 20.0
    Russell claims in his autobiography and elsewhere that he discovered his 1905 theory of descriptions while attempting to solve the logical and semantic paradoxes plaguing his work on the foundations of mathematics. In this paper, I hope to make the connection between his work on the paradoxes and the theory of descriptions and his theory of incomplete symbols generally clearer. In particular, I argue that the theory of descriptions arose from the realization that not only can a class (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Michał Walicki (2009). Reference, Paradoxes and Truth. Synthese 171 (1):195 - 226.score: 20.0
    We introduce a variant of pointer structures with denotational semantics and show its equivalence to systems of boolean equations: both have the same solutions. Taking paradoxes to be statements represented by systems of equations (or pointer structures) having no solutions, we thus obtain two alternative means of deciding paradoxical character of statements, one of which is the standard theory of solving boolean equations. To analyze more adequately statements involving semantic predicates, we extend propositional logic with the assertion operator and (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Frode Bjørdal (2012). Librationist Closures of the Paradoxes. Logic and Logical Philosophy 21 (4):323-361.score: 20.0
    We present a semi-formal foundational theory of sorts, akin to sets, named librationism because of its way of dealing with paradoxes. Its semantics is related to Herzberger’s semi inductive approach, it is negation complete and free variables (noemata) name sorts. Librationism deals with paradoxes in a novel way related to paraconsistent dialetheic approaches, but we think of it as bialethic and parasistent. Classical logical theorems are retained, and none contradicted. Novel inferential principles make recourse to theoremhood and failure (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Roy T. Cook (2013). Paradoxes. Polity.score: 20.0
    The care and feeding of your new paradoxes -- The truth about truth -- The title of this chapter will have its revenge -- Some collections are bigger and badder than others -- Bald, not bald, and kinda bald -- What we know about what we know -- Conclusion: many paradoxes, one solution?
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. R. M. Sainsbury (1995). Paradoxes. Cambridge University Press.score: 20.0
    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 (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Saul Smilansky (2007). Moral Paradoxes. Blackwell Pub..score: 20.0
    Presenting ten diverse and original moral paradoxes, this cutting edge work of philosophical ethics makes a focused, concrete case for the centrality of paradoxes within morality. Explores what these paradoxes can teach us about morality and the human condition Considers a broad range of subjects, from familiar topics to rarely posed questions Makes a concrete case for the centrality of paradox within morality Asks whether the existence of moral paradox is a good or a bad thing Presents (...)
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Hartry Field (2004). The Semantic Paradoxes and the Paradoxes of Vagueness. In J. C. Beall (ed.), Liars and Heaps: New Essays on Paradox. Clarendon Press.score: 19.0
    Both in dealing with the semantic paradoxes and in dealing with vagueness and indeterminacy, there is some temptation to weaken classical logic: in particular, to restrict the law of excluded middle. The reasons for doing this are somewhat different in the two cases. In the case of the semantic paradoxes, a weakening of classical logic (presumably involving a restriction of excluded middle) is required if we are to preserve the naive theory of truth without inconsistency. In the case (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Hartry Field (2007). Solving the Paradoxes, Escaping Revenge. In J. C. Beall (ed.), Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox. Oxford University Press.score: 19.0
    It is “the received wisdom” that any intuitively natural and consistent resolution of a class of semantic paradoxes immediately leads to other paradoxes just as bad as the first. This is often called the “revenge problem”. Some proponents of the received wisdom draw the conclusion that there is no hope of any natural treatment that puts all the paradoxes to rest: we must either live with the existence of paradoxes that we are unable to treat, or (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Karin Verelst (2006). Zeno's Paradoxes. A Cardinal Problem. 1. On Zenonian Plurality. In J. Šķilters (ed.), Paradox: Logical, Cognitive and Communicative Aspects. Proceedings of the First International Symposium of Cognition, Logic and Communication,. University of Latvia Press.score: 19.0
    In this paper the claim that Zeno's paradoxes have been solved is contested. Although "no one has ever touched Zeno without refuting him" (Whitehead), it will be our aim to show that, whatever it was that was refuted, it was certainly not Zeno. The paper is organised in two parts. In the first part we will demonstrate that upon direct analysis of the Greek sources, an underlying structure common to both the Paradoxes of Plurality and the Paradoxes (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. 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.score: 19.0
    The paradoxes of self-reference are genuinely paradoxical. The liar paradox, Russell’s paradox and their cousins pose enormous difficulties to anyone who seeks to give a comprehensive theory of semantics, or of sets, or of any other domain which allows a modicum of self-reference and a modest number of logical principles. One approach to the paradoxes of self-reference takes these paradoxes as motivating a non-classical theory of logical consequence. Similar logical principles are used in each of the paradoxical (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Rachael Briggs (2010). Decision-Theoretic Paradoxes as Voting Paradoxes. Philosophical Review 119 (1):1-30.score: 18.0
    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 (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Gustaf Arrhenius, The Paradoxes of Future Generations and Normative Theory.score: 18.0
    As the title of this paper indicates, I’m going to discuss what we ought to do in situations where our actions affect future generations. More specifically, I shall focus on the moral problems raised by cases where our actions affect who’s going to live, their number and their well being. I’ll start, however, with population axiology. Most discussion in population ethics has concentrated on how to evaluate populations in regard to their goodness, that is, how to order populations by the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000