Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Paradoxes: are contradictions within formally correct statements or sets of statements that lead to an existence assumption, which initially seemed plausible, to be withdrawn. Paradoxes are not errors, but challenges that may lead to a re-formulation of the prerequisites and assumptions, or to a change in the language, the subject domain, and the logical system. See also Russellian paradox, contradictions, range, consistency.
 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

 
Books on Amazon
I 223
Self-reference / Paradox / Vollmer: there are many self-references that do not lead to the antinomies or contradictions: - e.g. I tell the truth - e.g. the catalog that lists all catalogs that list themselves. - e.g. the set of all sets that contain themselves as an element. - In contrast, problem: e.g. no rule without exception - e.g. there is no (not even hypothetical) knowledge - e.g. all general propositions are false - e.g. a claim that is only likely is probably wrong. - Solution: these statements are meaningless or wrong - they do not refute epistemology.

Vo I
G. Vollmer
Die Natur der Erkenntnis Bd I Stuttgart 1988

Vo II
G. Vollmer
Die Natur der Erkenntnis Bd II Stuttgart 1988


> Counter arguments against Vollmer
> Counter arguments in relation to Paradoxes



> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-28