← Back to catalogue
Research draft

paradox

vr.tr.paradox · INF.MED

Let an agent explain what a paradox is and its main kinds, relay classic examples and their proposed resolutions from logic, philosophy and science sources with attribution, describe the role of paradoxes in the growth of theories, and distinguish paradoxes from contradictions, fallacies, dilemmas and mere surprises.

Thing Registry Information and virtual systems

Research draft, second pass

A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.

written by Claude from model knowledge without web access - no source was read, every claim is a lead to verify

Researched by: Claude

Purpose and description

Let an agent explain what a paradox is and its main kinds, relay classic examples and their proposed resolutions from logic, philosophy and science sources with attribution, describe the role of paradoxes in the growth of theories, and distinguish paradoxes from contradictions, fallacies, dilemmas and mere surprises.

A statement or situation that seems self-contradictory or absurd yet may be true, or that leads from acceptable premises by acceptable reasoning to an unacceptable conclusion, studied in logic and philosophy through cases such as the liar paradox, the paradoxes of material implication and Zeno s paradoxes, in physics through temporal paradoxes and causal loops and the hydrodynamic paradox, in mathematics through apportionment paradoxes in seat allocation, and in everyday life through curiosities such as the elevator paradox; paradoxes expose hidden assumptions and drive revisions of theories.

What it is for: Not applicable; a logical and rhetorical concept.

It can be explain the concept and kinds; relay classic examples; describe resolutions and their role; distinguish related concepts.

Distinguishing features

Apparent contradiction

Hidden assumption

Many domains

Theory-revising

What it looks like

Not a visible object; a statement or scenario.

Physical character

Quine s classification: veridical, falsidical, antinomy list

Zeno s paradoxes: 5th century BCE period

Alabama paradox: 1880 year - apportionment

How it is recognised

Seemingly self-contradictory statement or situation

Liar paradox, material implication paradoxes, temporal paradox, causal loop, elevator paradox, hydrodynamic paradox, apportionment paradox

A contradiction is simply false; a fallacy is bad reasoning; a dilemma is a hard choice

Related models

is a kind of - in registry terms

incongruence

is a kind of - in registry terms, when stated

declarative sentence

is contrasted with - which is simply false

contradiction

is exemplified by - a semantic paradox

liar paradox

In practice

Families and kinds

logical and semantic paradoxes such as the liar and Russell s paradox

paradoxes of material implication

paradoxes of motion and infinity

temporal paradoxes and causal loops in physics and fiction

physical paradoxes such as the hydrodynamic paradox

mathematical and voting paradoxes such as apportionment paradoxes

everyday and probabilistic curiosities such as the elevator paradox

Standards and regulation

No regulation

Failure modes and hazards

Confusing paradoxes with contradictions or fallacies

Treating unresolved paradoxes as resolved

Registry aliases mixing logic, physics and mathematics

Also called

temporal paradoxcausal loopelevator paradoxhydrodynamic paradoxapportionment paradoxparadoxes of material implicationnaïve set theory's paradoxpragmatic paradoxphysical paradoxworld upside downliar paradoxparadox of toleranceDialetheismBerkson's paradoxBertrand paradoxparadoxes of set theoryfalse positive paradoxMilner–Rado paradoxPrevention paradoxSimpson's paradoxPinocchio paradoxtrivialism

Where this came from

wikidata · CC0 1.0

Also registered as vr.tr.paradox

Drafted structure

Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 4 bundles · 8 layers · 8 findings · 16 questions.

Understand What a paradox is.

Definition.

Definition

Definition.

Definition

Definition.

  1. What is a paradox, and how does it differ from a contradiction, a fallacy and a dilemma? definition
  2. Is the question about the concept, a kind or a specific paradox? boundary

Kinds

Kinds.

Kinds

Kinds.

  1. What are veridical, falsidical and antinomic paradoxes in Quine s scheme, and what are the main families? definition
  2. Which entry fits the specific paradox? action
Logic Logic and philosophy.

Attribution.

Semantic

Semantic and set paradoxes.

Semantic

Semantic.

  1. What are the liar, Russell s and the material implication paradoxes, and how are they addressed, with positions attributed? provenance
  2. Which references are standard? provenance

Motion

Motion and infinity.

Motion

Motion.

  1. What are Zeno s paradoxes and paradoxes of infinity, and what resolutions are proposed? provenance
  2. Which sources are cited? provenance
Science Science and mathematics.

Science.

Physics

Physical paradoxes.

Physics

Physics.

  1. What are temporal paradoxes, causal loops and the hydrodynamic paradox, and how does physics treat them? provenance
  2. Which entry fits time travel in physics? action

Mathematics

Mathematical paradoxes.

Mathematics

Mathematics.

  1. What are apportionment paradoxes, the elevator paradox and probability paradoxes? provenance
  2. Which entry fits apportionment paradox? action
Context Role and culture.

Context.

Role

Role in inquiry.

Role

Role.

  1. How have paradoxes driven revisions in logic, mathematics and physics, with cases attributed? provenance
  2. Which entry fits philosophy of logic? action

Culture

Culture.

Culture

Culture.

  1. How are paradoxes used in literature, rhetoric and fiction? provenance
  2. Which entry fits paradox in literature? action

What the second pass must settle

  • Should logical paradox, temporal paradox and apportionment paradox be separate primary entries?
  • How should philosophical sources be linked?
  • The registry entry has merged aliases naming specific paradoxes from unrelated fields; should they be split off?