Search results
Most philosophers think that finding a contradiction – the assertion of both P and not-P – in one's reasoning is the best possible evidence that something has gone wrong, the ultimate refutation of a position. But why should this be so?
In other words, the Law of Non-Contradiction is a truth about propositions: those primary bearers of truth-value. It is a truth about which truth-values a proposition can and cannot bear: if a proposition bears the value true, it cannot also bear the value false, and vice versa.
- 238KB
- 22
Apr 8, 2015 · Contradiction: something that is false in all possible worlds. So, if we have a conclusion that is false in all possible worlds, the argument would only be valid if we have premises that entail the truth of the conclusion if the premises were true.
Strawson's defining characteristic for contradictions is that they are both logically exclusive and logically exhaustive (C18). Evident in the literature, then, are at least four basic approaches to the notion of contradiction: semantic, syntactic, pragmatic, and ontological.
A contradiction is the conjunction of a proposition and its denial. and contradictions understood as pairs of statements (propositions, sentences), 1 as in the definition given by Kalish, Montague, and Mar (1980): (2) A contradiction consists of a pair of sentences, one of which is the negation of the other.
Jun 28, 2006 · The A / O pair (“Every man is white”, “Not every man is white”) and I / E pair (“Some man is white”, “No man is white”) are contradictories because in any state of affairs one member of each pair must be true and the other false. (See traditional square of opposition.)
People also ask
What is a contradiction in a sentence?
How do authors define contradictions?
What is the law of non-contradiction?
Is a conclusion a contradiction?
What if a premise is a contradiction?
Is a contradiction a bad argument?
Feb 8, 1996 · Ontological arguments are arguments, for the conclusion that God exists, from premises which are supposed to derive from some source other than observation of the world—e.g., from reason alone. In other words, ontological arguments are arguments from what are typically alleged to be none but analytic, a priori and necessary premises to the ...
