Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Buttered cat paradox: Humorous example of a paradox from contradicting proverbs. Intentionally blank page: Many documents contain pages on which the text "This page intentionally left blank" is printed, thereby making the page not blank. Metabasis paradox: Conflicting definitions of what is the best kind of tragedy in Aristotle's Poetics.
One example occurs in the liar paradox, which is commonly formulated as the self-referential statement "This statement is false". [16] Another example occurs in the barber paradox, which poses the question of whether a barber who shaves all and only those who do not shave themselves will shave himself. In this paradox, the barber is a self ...
In literature, the paradox is an anomalous juxtaposition of incongruous ideas for the sake of striking exposition or unexpected insight. It functions as a method of literary composition and analysis that involves examining apparently contradictory statements and drawing conclusions either to reconcile them or to explain their presence.
Curry's paradox uses a particular kind of self-referential conditional sentence, as demonstrated in this example: If this sentence is true, then Germany borders China. Even though Germany does not border China , the example sentence certainly is a natural-language sentence, and so the truth of that sentence can be analyzed.
Moore's paradox has been associated with many other well-known logical paradoxes, including, though not limited to, the liar paradox, the knower paradox, the unexpected hanging paradox, and the preface paradox. [5] There is currently not any generally accepted explanation of Moore's paradox in the philosophical literature.
The paradox of analysis (or Langford–Moore paradox) [1] is a paradox that concerns how an analysis can be both correct and informative. The problem was formulated by philosopher G. E. Moore in his book Principia Ethica, and first named by C. H. Langford in his article "The Notion of Analysis in Moore's Philosophy" (in The Philosophy of G. E. Moore, edited by Paul Arthur Schilpp, Northwestern ...
Polanyi's paradox, named in honour of the British-Hungarian philosopher Michael Polanyi, is the theory that human knowledge of how the world functions and of our own capability are, to a large extent, beyond our explicit understanding.
Littlewood's pack of cards is infinitely large and his paradox is a paradox of improper prior distributions. Martin Gardner popularized Kraitchik's puzzle in his 1982 book Aha! Gotcha, in the form of a wallet game: Two people, equally rich, meet to compare the contents of their wallets. Each is ignorant of the contents of the two wallets.