Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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.
Ironic process theory: Ironic processing is the psychological process whereby an individual's deliberate attempts to suppress or avoid certain thoughts (thought suppression) renders those thoughts more persistent. Meat paradox: People care about animals, but embrace diets that involve harming them.
A paradox is a logically self-contradictory statement or a statement that runs contrary to one's expectation. [1] [2] It is a statement that, despite apparently valid reasoning from true or apparently true premises, leads to a seemingly self-contradictory or a logically unacceptable conclusion.
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.
The process theory of composition (hereafter referred to as "process") is a field of composition studies that focuses on writing as a process rather than a product. Based on Janet Emig's breakdown of the writing process, [1] the process is centered on the idea that students determine the content of the course by exploring the craft of writing using their own interests, language, techniques ...
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 ...
The debate about the paradox of fiction has evolved immensely since its introduction by Radford and Walton. When the paradox was first formulated, the cognitive theory of emotions was a dominant force in philosophical thought. [4] For cognitivists, emotions involve judgments or beliefs.
[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]