Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Fitch's paradox of knowability is a puzzle of epistemic logic. It provides a challenge to the knowability thesis , which states that every truth is, in principle, knowable. The paradox states that this assumption implies the omniscience principle , which asserts that every truth is known.
Fitch's paradox: If all truths are knowable, then all truths must in fact be known. Paradox of free will: If God knows in advance what a person will decide, how can there be free will? Goodman's paradox: Why can induction be used to confirm that things are "green", but not to confirm that things are "grue"?
At the end of the article there's a part that introduces a rule C' to replace C, and this is claimed to restore the paradox: "There is an unknown, but knowable truth, and it is knowable that there is an unknown, but knowable truth." The article needs to show this in an example which ordinary people can follow to see whether the claim stacks up.
The principle that truths must be knowable. It is brought up in the context of verificationism [121] and Fitch's paradox of knowability. [122] epistemic modal logic A branch of modal logic that deals with reasoning about knowledge and belief, using modalities to express what is known and what is believed. epistemic paradox
A version of the paradox occurs already in chapter 9 of Thomas Bradwardine’s Insolubilia. [1] In the wake of the modern discussion of the paradoxes of self-reference, the paradox has been rediscovered (and dubbed with its current name) by the US logicians and philosophers David Kaplan and Richard Montague, [2] and is now considered an important paradox in the area. [3]
"Socratic paradox" may also refer to statements of Socrates that seem contrary to common sense, such as that "no one desires evil". [ 16 ] The words of the apostle Paul are also found paralleling this saying in 1Cor 8:2 , " Anyone who claims to know something does not yet have the necessary knowledge."
[1] [2] Diogenes Laërtius, citing Favorinus, says that Zeno's teacher Parmenides was the first to introduce the paradox of Achilles and the tortoise. But in a later passage, Laërtius attributes the origin of the paradox to Zeno, explaining that Favorinus disagrees. [3] Modern academics attribute the paradox to Zeno. [1] [2]
The omnipotence paradox is a family of paradoxes that arise with some understandings of the term omnipotent. The paradox arises, for example, if one assumes that an omnipotent being has no limits and is capable of realizing any outcome, even a logically contradictory one such as creating a square circle.