Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    A solution that generates an equally problematic conseque... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Rejecting the induction step of the sorites paradox does not dissolve the paradox but merely transforms it into a different problem.

    A solution that generates an equally problematic consequence has not resolved the original paradox.

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Related

    Positing a sharp threshold for childhood is itself paradoxical or counterintuiti...Rejecting the induction step of the sorites paradox does not dissolve the parado...The negation of the induction step entails the existence of a sharp threshold fo...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    The Church paradox generates an unacceptable result under such a logic83%Rejecting the principle of Excluded Middle does not resolve Russell's ...80%Russell's paradox can be derived without appealing to the principle of...78%There have been attempts to avoid Russell's paradox by altering the un...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: vagueness
    View source passageHide passage
    Guided by Boolos’ firm hand, logic students drive a second stake into the heart of the induction step (the entailment of preposterous conditionals). Yet the paradox seems far from dead. The hitch is that death for the induction step is life for its negation. The negation of the second premise classically implies a sharp threshold for childhood. For the falsehood of the induction step implies the existential generalization that there is a number \(n\) such that an \(n\) day old human being is a c

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective