Matthew Ang
83393632
27 August 2017
Puzzles and Paradoxes
Second Paper
Moore’s Paradox In order to understand the concept of Moore’s Paradox, we must first assess and understand the behavior of logical and performative contradictions. Credited for devising and examining this paradox, George Edward Moore, a British philosopher who taught at the University of Cambridge and studied ethics, epistemology, and metaphysics describes the paradox in its omissive and commissive forms in which we will discuss thoroughly. I will then express my standpoint on which solution is the most optimal choice for Moore’s Paradox in order to analyze and explain why I believe my solution is superior to other solutions. I will also discuss any issues that arise
…show more content…
A logical contradiction is an assertion or a claim that contains both a proposition and its denial given in the form p and not-p. In this case, both of these statements cannot both be true due to the law of noncontradiction. Similar to the principle of bivalence, this law states the declarative statement must be either true or false and cannot be both true at the same time in the same sense. A classic example of a logical contradiction is to assert that “it is raining and it is not raining.” The proposition p is “it is raining” and its denial not-p is “it is not raining.” Because “it is raining” and “it is not raining” cannot be both true at the same time, this statement leads to a logical contradiction when we assume the principle of bivalence or the law of noncontradiction. Some other examples would include statements such as “I know that nothing can be known” and “All general claims have exceptions.” Unlike a logical contradiction, a performative contradiction arises “when the content of an assertion contradicts the act of asserting it or the presuppositions of asserting …show more content…
For example, “It is raining but I don‘t believe it is” (Moore 1942: 543) is a Moorean statement because even though it appears as an absurd statement, it can still be true which is paradoxical. Moorean statements come in two forms: omissive and commissive. The omissive form is when a statement follows the following arrangement: p and I do not believe that p. The example we just used was a Moorean statement in its omissive form where “it is raining” is p and “I do not believe it is” is the second part of the form. Asserting that “it is raining” (p), one implies that one believes in their assertion. This is Moore’s first principle (1942). However, that means it contradicts with the second statement that “I do not believe it is” resulting in a paradox. It demonstrates that what one asserts and what one implies by asserting it would ultimately lead to a contradiction. The commissive form is when a statement follows the following arrangement: p and I believe that not-p or I believe that p, but it is not the case for p. An example of this would be “It is raining and I believe that it is not raining.” Asserting the “it is raining” (p), one also implies that one does not believe in not-p. This is Moore’s second principle (1944). In this case, it implies that I do not believe it is not raining which is contradictory to the second part of the
The Other Wes Moore is a book talking about two different men with the same name,Wes Moore. They were both raised up by a single mother and live in the same decaying city, Baltimore, where there are surrounded by drug and alcohol. However, the author Wes Moore’s parents completed their education and have a good job while his grandparents also were well-educated. But the other Wes Moore’s parents didn’t graduate from college, his mother tried to get the scholarship but failed, and his father left high school and don’t have a job either. This two Wes Moores both grew up with their mother. The author Wes’s father died for disease while the other Wes’s father left his family. With this situation, they went to the same direction, being absent from
Why have the two boys, with the same name and grew up fatherless in the similar poverty-stricken neighborhoods, developed into two dramatically different individuals: a Rhodes Scholar and a convicted inmate? While the book The Other Wes Moore goes to great length to answer the question profoundly, I also mull over just how and why the two Wes Moores have chosen their own paths to the opposed destines. According to the book, environment, family, education, others’ expectation, and opportunities are the primary factors contributing to the two Wes Moores’ failure and success. On the top of those factors, I find that the role models, the supports of their mothers, and the choices they made are surely worth
Have you ever wondered where you would be right now without going to high school? From the book “The Other Wes Moore” by Wes Moore, the author tells the story of himself and another boy named Wes Moore living in Baltimore who came from a similar background and community. Wes Moore the author tells the story of himself and how his way of life was and how one choice changed his life forever. And for the other Wes Moore, the author tells us his way of life growing up was and how one wrong decision defined his future forever. The author’s point in this book is to show how your choices that you make in life will affect you in the future. Therefore, the author Wes Moore tells the story of himself, the other Wes Moore, and the decisions that are made in their lives that changed their future.
A paradox is a statement that contradicts itself. After Guitar suspect that Milkman has taken and hidden the gold, Guitar feels betrayed by Milkman. When Milkman is in Shalimar, Guitar leaves a message warning Milkman that he is going to kill him. The conversation between Guitar and Milkman is paradoxical because a best friend would not try to kill you, and an enemy would not help and warn another enemy.
In this book, many fallacious quotations were used to support Skousen’s viewpoints. These quotations were blindly accepted due to the attached name without proper insight into the context of the quotation. It seemed as if Skousen frequently misinterpreted his sources purposely to authenticate his argument, often without proper justification or a well-reasoned argument. The audience was ultimately misled to believe flimsy assertions with unproven conclusions; Skousen achieved this by supporting axioms that will be widely accepted and by jumping to conclusions with which we have
In “The Other Wes Moore: One Name, Two Fates,” written by Wes Moore the author writes about two boys growing up in Baltimore that share the same name and similar backgrounds but end up taking drastically different paths in life due to many varying factors. The author goes on to earn a college degree, become a Rhodes Scholar, a veteran and more while the “other” Wes cannot avoid the inevitable fate of dealing drugs and ultimately spends his life running from the police and in prison. This reflects how both Wes Moore’s became products of their environment as the way a person is shaped and guided in their developmental years does unquestionably play a large role in the type of person they will become as adults. A lot of elements come into play that help to determine a person’s success or failure, but at the end of the day the most important factors are family, education and opportunities.
In his “Proof of an External World”, Moore puts forth several supported hypotheses in regards to the nature of the existence of things outside the self. Primarily, Moore discusses hands; his argument is that if he can produce two hands then it follows logically that two hands must exist. Furthermore, Moore puts forth the theory that if hands exist then this alone is proof of an external world. In opposition to Moore’s opinions will be found three main arguments: firstly that all of Moore’s evidence is based upon sensory input, secondly that the truth of one fact based on the truth of another fact forms an Epistemic Circle in this case, and finally that the evidence out forth by Moore, even if proved, does not necessarily prove the fact that he is attempting to prove.
The underlying paradox of irrationality, from which no theory can entirely escape, is this: if we explain it too well, we turn it into a concealed form of rationality; while if we assign incoherence too glibly, we merely compromise our ability to diagnose irrationality by withdrawing the background of rationality needed to justify any diagnosis at all. (1)
One Name Two Fates Growing up in the same place with the same name, the author Wes Moore and the other Wes Moore now have very different lives. The author’s father died when he was young. His mother raised him and his sisters with discipline and sent him to the prestigious high school, Riverdale. There he would get into trouble, and after one too many incidents, his mother sent him to military school. Here he learns true discipline and how to be a leader.
These statements assert that the negative ( or contradictory) of an alternative proposition is a conjunction which the conjuncts are the contradictions of the corresponding alternants. That the negative of a conjunctive is an alternative proposition in which the alternants are the contradictories of the corresponding conjuncts.
Each section of this article will be explained in my own words, with the exception of some of the symbolic logic. Russell's own words are indicated by speech marks.
The oxford dictionary describes as “an imagined place or state of things in which everything is perfect. Sir Thomas More first used this word; he was born in 1478 in London, England and came to be one of the most influential figures of the early Renaissance. Not only did he work as a lawyer but he was also a well respected philosopher and historian as well as writer. In 1516, Moore wrote Utopia, a book based off of fiction and political philosophy. Utopia has been with us since the beginning of time – all religions for example has an idea of a perfect place; the Garden of Eden and paradise are examples within the Catholic religion. When Moore first created the word for a book entitles Utopia, the word itself is derived for the Greek ju meaning ‘no’ and toʊpiə meaning ‘place’ therefore the literal translation would be ‘no place.’ However, it could also mean ‘good place’ as eu(topia) means good(place). This idea of no place and good place juxtapose each other and also arise the concept of an ‘ideal’ place being elsewhere – out of the reach of human beings – or just does not exist.
Russell’s Theory of Definite Description has totally changed the way we view definite descriptions by solving the three logical paradoxes. It is undeniable that the theory itself is not yet perfect and there can be objections on this theory. Still, until now, Russell’s theory is the most logical explanation of definite description’s role.
Another example of a contradiction is when he says “That I may rise, and stand, o’erthrow me,’and
4. “Without application in the real world, the value of knowledge is greatly diminished.” Consider this claim with respect to two areas of knowledge.