Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

sQGNXXnkceeEfhm t1_ir6wv96 wrote

Reply to comment by itsastickup in "For evoking impossible entities, paradox has too easily been dismissed as philosophically suspect. Yet, far from entailing error, paradox suggests a “certaine valeur de vérité,” a particular type of truth inherent to language." by Maxwellsdemon17

I studied logic and my mentor was a logician. He had a lecture in his back pocket for this.

In short, no, paradoxes are a first-class entity in metamathematics/model theory. A “real” mathematical paradox is a statement that is provably neither provable nor disprovable. Such paradoxes include the continuum hypothesis.

2

itsastickup t1_ir75dnd wrote

I meant it tongue in cheek.

But still, in real life a paradox is something true but appears false. The multiple meanings (with Websters even condescending to a straight 'contradiction' as a final definition of about 5, in contradiction of it's meaningfulness of existence) makes use of the word quite tricky in public debate.

2

HKei t1_ir77qdo wrote

If a word having multiple meanings bothers you I have some bad news about nearly all words for you.

7

itsastickup t1_ir7b2la wrote

LOl, sure :)

But so many parallel and orthogonal meanings and one that just outright defeats the purpose of its existence makes it difficult to use even with context, right?

(I actually very much enjoy the multiple meanings of the word; I wouldn't change the situation.)

2