Paradox

 Editor
Vázquez, Margarita  mvazquez@ull.es
 Incorporated contributions
F. Salto (20/08/2009)
 Usage domain
transdiciplinary, philosophy
 Type
concept
 French
paradoxe
 German Paradox, Paradoxon

A paradox is a conflict between reasons: those grounding it and those refuting it. The more solid the reasons in conflict, the greater the philosophical interest of the paradox. In this general sense there are paradoxes of very different genres: (a) paradoxes challenging the intelligibility of particularly basic notions, such as: infinite, time, space, identity, etc.; (b) paradoxes challenging the rationality of our action or decision strategies: Newcomb's, Gaifman's paradoxes, prisioner's dilemma, etc.; (c) paradoxes challenging the rationality of our bodies of belief: selfdeceiving paradoxes, Goodman's , knower's paradoxes, etc.; among other many paradoxes, more or less important and more or less funny.

Logical paradoxes or antinomies are logically valid reasonings with non reasonable conclusions. Therefore we call antinomy any deductively valid reasoning driving to a contradiction from rationally justified, highly acceptable or assertable premisses.

 
References
  • McGEE, V. (1993). Truth, Vagueness and Paradox. Indianapolis: Hackett.
  • QUINE, W. (1976). The Ways of Paradox and other essays (rev. ed.). Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press.
  • SALTO, F. (2005). "Verdad y recursividad", in J.M. MÉNDEZ (ed.). Artículos de Segunda Mano. Salamanca: Varona, pp.51-156.
Entries
New entry. Before doing a new entry, please, copy this line and the following ones and paste them at the column bottom. Next fill out the fields: 'name', 'date' and 'text', and delete this upper blue paragraph.
Name (date)
 
[Entry text]
 


Incorporated entries

Francisco Salto (20/08/2009)

A paradox is a conflict between reasons: those grounding it and those refuting it. The more solid the reasons in conflict, the greater the philosophical interest of the paradox. In this general sense there are paradoxes of very different genres: (a) paradoxes challenging the intelligibility of particularly basic notions, such as: infinite, time, space, identity, etc.; (b) paradoxes challenging the rationality of our action or decision strategies: Newcomb's, Gaifman's paradoxes, prisioner's dilemma, etc.; (c) paradoxes challenging the rationality of our bodies of belief: selfdeceiving paradoxes, Goodman's , knower's paradoxes, etc.; among other many paradoxes, more or less important and more or less funny.

Logical paradoxes or antinomies are logically valid reasonings with non reasonable conclusions. Therefore we call antinomy any deductively valid reasoning driving to a contradiction from rationally justified, highly acceptable or assertable premisses.


Comments