Wikipedia Wrote:A primary motivation for paraconsistent logic is the conviction that it ought to be possible to reason with inconsistent information in a controlled and discriminating way. The principle of explosion precludes this, and so must be abandoned. In non-paraconsistent logics, there is only one inconsistent theory: the trivial theory that has every sentence as a theorem. Paraconsistent logic makes it possible to distinguish between inconsistent theories and to reason with them.
Research into paraconsistent logic has also led to the establishment of the philosophical school of dialetheism (most notably advocated by Graham Priest), which asserts that true contradictions exist in reality, for example groups of people holding opposing views on various moral issues.[4] Being a dialetheist rationally commits one to some form of paraconsistent logic, on pain of otherwise embracing trivialism, i.e. accepting that all contradictions (and equivalently all statements) are true.[5] However, the study of paraconsistent logics does not necessarily entail a dialetheist viewpoint. For example, one need not commit to either the existence of true theories or true contradictions, but would rather prefer a weaker standard like empirical adequacy, as proposed by Bas van Fraassen.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraconsistent_logic
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: January 11, 2025, 6:23 am
Poll: Solipsism, TRUE or FALSE? This poll is closed. |
|||
TRUE | 3 | 30.00% | |
FALSE | 3 | 30.00% | |
N/A | 4 | 40.00% | |
Total | 10 vote(s) | 100% |
* You voted for this item. | [Show Results] |
Thread Rating:
Is the self all that can be known to exist?
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)