Research Paper On Paradox

For an argument to be valid it should have a logical conclusion for a sequential premises, and based on an assumption that the premises are true the conclusion must be true [1]. Moreover the soundness of the argument depend on its validity and that all the premises are true. When examining Meno’s paradox and its premises any one can conclude that the third premise is a logical conclusion for the first two premises, and assuming the truthfulness of the first two this lead to true third premise. Since if a person cannot relearn a thing which he attain foreknowledge about and he cannot learn anything that he don’t knew before, this logically lead us to the third premise which implies that inquiry is either unnecessary or impossible.

Allow me to present a slight tangent . . . an example from modern science that might prove illuminating. Consider Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. Written one way (the Oxford English Dictionary way) it states that “certain pairs of observables (e.g. the momentum and position of a particle, the energy and lifetime of a quantum level) cannot both be precisely and simultaneously known, and that as one of any pair is more exactly defined, the other becomes more uncertain.” In the example of particles: as the precision of the measurement of position (momentum) increases, the measurement of momentum (position) becomes more indeterminate. It is a struggle between opposites.

In the modern physics world there are many phenomena that are unexplainable just like Young’s Double Slit Experiment. In Young’s Double Slit Experiment, he wanted to prove whether light is a wave or a particle. This might seem to be rather simplistic but, in all reality, it is anything but simple. A particle, when passed through a vertical slit, will form a vertical line on an object that is on the other side of the slit and when you add another slit it will form a similar vertical line that is separated by about the same distance as the slits are separated. It will look something like this:

Thus each particle would contain the necessary information with it resulting in there being no need for information to be transmitted between the particles when they are measured. This theory was originally seen by Einstein and by many others as the only explanation to the paradox and they thus accepted that the quantum mechanical description must be

Mathematics is a logical and precise subject. Without precision in math everything is imprecise. A modest inaccuracy can produce a catastrophe. For example, if a doctor fails to calculate the correct amount of medicine to give a patient, it could result in a serious complication, such as death. A further example is the logic and precision it takes to construct a building. If there is one minor miscalculation the whole building could collapse, causing mass destruction.

Meno 's paradox is a very prevalent paradox in the area of philosophy. It arises during a conversation between Socrates and Meno in the book Five Dialogues. Meno and Socrates are speaking about what virtue is when Meno raises an interesting point, “How will you look for it, Socrates, when you do not know at all what it is? How will you aim to search for something you do not know at all? If you should meet with it, how will you know that this is the thing that you did not know?” (p. 70). In simple terms, Meno is asking Socrates how he will

In a real traffic situation, 15 subjects were tested when performing different tasks using a Driver Information System (DIS).There are 8 various classes in driving. The results can be seen in the above figure 2.3.

In this essay I will be exploring the temporal parts answer to this paradox and arguing for

An opposing example would be the very question “Why are things things ?”. Many philosophers and writers dwelled on this matter for

We determine that something is logically possible if it doesn’t contradict itself. We assign either true or false to statements A and it’s opposite not-A. Something is logically contradictory if A and not-A are both true or false at the same time.

Palmer discusses six major ideas of paradox in teaching. Palmer’s first is space being bound and open. In the

Hempel’s paradox, also known as the paradox of the ravens, is a classic paradox dealing with confirmation theory, also known as a paradox of confirmation. These paradoxes generally deal with issues when dealing with the following proposal :

Mathematics has greatly advanced since the time of Zeno and Aristotle and this has brought to light another way to counter Zeno’s paradoxes. With the creation of calculus, Zeno’s paradox has been more or less resolved. The calculus solution to this paradox considers the infinite sequence of ½, ¼, 1/8, …, 1/2^n, which is an infinite geometric sequence. Geometric sequences have a formula of ∑_(n=1)^∞▒〖(〖 1/2〗^i )〗=1 were the number of half steps are balanced out by the increasingly short amount of time needed to journey through all those distances. However, this is a convergence of an infinite series, which means that the sum of this can be approximated very closely to one if you add up enough terms. This mathematical explanation seemed to suffice for a lot of people, since the sum of all of those terms can be approximated closely enough to a doable number to justify motion being an actual thing. However, if we take a closer look at Zeno’s paradox, the problem was not that the runner wouldn’t get close to the final point, point B. The problem was that the runner would never actually manage to reach that final point because no matter how small the distance between the runner and the final point, the distance can still be divisible by half and therefore there would never be a final point were the runner would confidentially reach point B. Because the calculus equation can only approximate very closely to the final point, but never the actual point, this solution is still not the correct

Before discussing the idea of paradoxes, I will first describe what a paradox is. A paradox, strictly speaking, is when a theory with logical premises leads to the creation of two logical, but contradictory, conclusion. This definition of paradox works, but is very limited in scope of what we can classify as a paradox. Thus modifying the definition of a paradox to mean an argument that leads to wildly different conclusion… . Using this understanding of paradox, I will give a famous example of a paradox thought up by the Greek philosopher Zeno.

A paradox is a statement that appears to be self-contradictory or absurd but may include a latent truth. It is also used to illustrate an opinion or statement contrary to accepted traditional ideas. A paradox is often used to make a reader think over an idea in innovative way, and the world is full of them. They are just about everywhere we look, from literature, to everyday life. They play a large part in how we perceive subjects psychologically in order to embrace them inevitably,because without an open mind, they would go unnoticed.