Abstract
This paper presents a dichotomic analysis of the surprise examination paradox. In section 1, I analyse the surprise notion in detail. I introduce then in section 2, the distinction between a monist and dichotomic analysis of the paradox. I also present there a dichotomy leading to distinguish two basically and structurally different versions of the paradox, respectively based on a conjoint and a disjoint definition of the surprise. In section 3, I describe the solution to SEP corresponding to the conjoint definition. Lastly, I expose in section 4, the solution to SEP based on the disjoint definition.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2005
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 51,723
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Blindspots.Roy A. Sorensen - 1988 - Oxford University Press.
Blindspots.Michael Levin - 1991 - Noûs 25 (3):389-392.
Understanding Truth.Scott Soames - 2002 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 65 (2):397-401.
Blindspots.Roy Sorensen - 1990 - Mind 99 (393):137-140.
Sorites Paradox.Dominic Hyde - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 22 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
73 ( #126,966 of 2,333,794 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #585,936 of 2,333,794 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes