Paradoxes

Tags: Philosophy And Debate, Paradoxes
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Read Discussion
Reply to All

Can a paradox be an exception to the rule of a true statement, or true rule? What can they signify, and when are they proof that a rule cannot be true?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link/Embed

Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 477 • Replies: 16

[+1] - fbaezer - 02/14/2005If we go to the etimology of the word [para (beyond) doxa (popular opinion)], then a paradox is a statement that is not considered to be true, but can (partly of totally) hold truth in it. The...
[+1] - CarbonSystem - 02/14/2005So in essence, what we consider a paradox to us, may not be a paradox to another person, consdiderign we are the popular opinion.
[+1] - fbaezer - 02/14/2005Exactly.
[+1] - CarbonSystem - 02/14/2005So with that in mind, something like Zeno's paradoxes may not be a paradox nowadays.
[+1] - fbaezer - 02/14/2005Paradoxes may (or may not) become paradygms. (sp?)
[+1] - theantibuddha - 02/15/2005A paradox to me is something that seems self-contradictory at first glance yet turns out not to be.
[+1] - val - 02/15/2005antibuddha I disagree. A paradox must lead us to a dead end. But we must distinguish between paradoxes and what the greeks called "aporia". Zeno formulated aporias. A paradox would...
[+1] - joefromchicago - 02/15/2005[quote="val"]I disagree. A paradox must lead us to a dead end. But we must distinguish between paradoxes and what the greeks called "aporia". Zeno formulated aporias. A...
[+1] - Synonymph - 02/15/2005Is that a paradigm shift, or are you just happy to see me?
[+1] - Pantalones - 02/15/2005Both antibuddah and val are correct. Zeno's paradox is an example of antibuddah's definition. While Newcomb's paradox is an example of val's. Both can be found here: ...

If we go to the etimology of the word [para (beyond) doxa (popular opinion)], then a paradox is a statement that is not considered to be true, but can (partly of totally) hold truth in it.

The key is that "not considered to be true" is different than "false". That the doxa, popular opinion, can be wrong.

0 Replies

So in essence, what we consider a paradox to us, may not be a paradox to another person, consdiderign we are the popular opinion.

0 Replies

Exactly.

0 Replies

So with that in mind, something like Zeno's paradoxes may not be a paradox nowadays.

0 Replies

Paradoxes may (or may not) become paradygms. (sp?)

0 Replies

A paradox to me is something that seems self-contradictory at first glance yet turns out not to be.

0 Replies

antibuddha

I disagree. A paradox must lead us to a dead end.
But we must distinguish between paradoxes and what the greeks called "aporia". Zeno formulated aporias.
A paradox would be the the example of Russel, concerning Fregge's logic of arithmetic. Or in a similar case, the paradox of the "liar".

This is why I don't think correct the mathematical solution of Zeno's aporias. Those aporias were not mathematical. An aporia must be solved within it's own context.

0 Replies

val wrote:

I disagree. A paradox must lead us to a dead end.
But we must distinguish between paradoxes and what the greeks called "aporia". Zeno formulated aporias.
A paradox would be the the example of Russel, concerning Fregge's logic of arithmetic. Or in a similar case, the paradox of the "liar".

I've never heard of that distinction before, and, frankly, I'm not convinced that you have identified any meaningful difference (I tend to agree with antibuddha: a paradox is an apparent contradiction). Are you relying upon someone else, or did you develop that distinction on your own?

0 Replies

Is that a paradigm shift, or are you just happy to see me?

0 Replies

Both antibuddah and val are correct.

Zeno's paradox is an example of antibuddah's definition. While Newcomb's paradox is an example of val's.

Both can be found here:

http://members.aol.com/kiekeben/para.html

0 Replies

Joe

It is only my opinion. But in the case of Zeno he used some "aporias" in order to show that those who claimed that Parmenide's theory of the Being lead to absurd conclusions, were using a reasoning even more absurd.
I don't think Zeno took those aporias too seriously, at least if we consider that Plato's dialogue "Parmenides" has some hystorical evidence.

0 Replies

I'm not really too sure.

In this case I was simply stating my own personal understanding and usage of the word. More of an acceptation than a definition.

Just remember people that there is no fixed meaning in english language, it evolves and changes, dictionaries are only the acceptations of a particular frozen moment of time.

0 Replies

antibuddha

Yes, that is true. I remember Wittgenstein with the definitions of the word "game": no dictionary can give a definition able to include all games.

0 Replies

val wrote:

Joe

It is only my opinion. But in the case of Zeno he used some "aporias" in order to show that those who claimed that Parmenide's theory of the Being lead to absurd conclusions, were using a reasoning even more absurd.
I don't think Zeno took those aporias too seriously, at least if we consider that Plato's dialogue "Parmenides" has some hystorical evidence.

I agree, there are many solutions for paradoxes, including their definition, that end up being opinions.

Paradoxes

Related Topics