Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

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correct statements or sets of statements that lead to an existence assumption, which initially seemed plausible, to be withdrawn.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
Berka I 371
Antinomies/Ramsey: Subdivision:
A) Semantic: Liar, Grelling/Nelson, Russellian A. of the designation.
B) syntactically (logically): antinomy of Cantor, of Burali Forti, Russell's set of all sets which do not contain themselves as elements.
I 372
Antinomies/Paradoxes/Solution/Berka: a) Axiomatization, (Fraenkel, v. Neumann, Bernays, Quine)
B) (Russell, K├Ânig, Brouwer, Hilbert): Verification of the logical foundations of set theory and mathematics. > Type theory, > Separation of object and meta language.

Rams I
F. P. Ramsey
The Foundations of Mathematics and Other Logical Essays 2013

Brk I
K. Berka/L. Kreiser
Logik Texte Berlin 1983

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

> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-27