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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Dialetheism is true. — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→No one is ever morally responsible.

    Dialetheism is true.

    Truth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.For each paradox of this kind, there appears to be a perfectly sound argument ending in a contradiction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If such arguments are sound, then dialetheism is true.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The apparent soundness of paradox-generating arguments reveals defects in our logical or semantic frameworks, not true contradictions in reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Tarski's hierarchy of metalanguages dissolves the Liar Paradox by showing self-referential truth attributions are category errors, not genuine contradictions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If a diagnosis-based solution exists for even one paradox class, the inference from 'sound-seeming contradictions' to dialetheism is not compulsory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Explosion (ex contradictione quodlibet) is a structural feature of classical logic: accepting any true contradiction trivializes all inference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dialetheism can only avoid trivialism by adopting paraconsistent logic, but this move abandons the very logical norms underwriting 'soundness' in P1.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An argument whose conclusion requires rejecting the logical framework used to certify its own soundness is self-undermining, not dialectically compelling.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Moral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    An argument whose conclusion requires rejecting the logical framework used to ce...Dialetheism can only avoid trivialism by adopting paraconsistent logic, but this...Explosion (ex contradictione quodlibet) is a structural feature of classical log...For each paradox of this kind, there appears to be a perfectly sound argument en...
    +4 moreShow less
    If a diagnosis-based solution exists for even one paradox class, the inference f...If such arguments are sound, then dialetheism is true.Tarski's hierarchy of metalanguages dissolves the Liar Paradox by showing self-r...The apparent soundness of paradox-generating arguments reveals defects in our lo...

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: dialetheism
    View source passageHide passage
    Paradoxes of this kind have been known since antiquity (the standard Liar is attributed to the Greek philosopher Eubulides, probably the greatest paradox-producer of antiquity). But they were thrown into prominence by developments in the foundations of mathematics around the turn of the twentieth century. In the case of each paradox, there appears to be a perfectly sound argument ending in a contradiction. If the arguments are sound, then dialetheism is true. Of course, many have argued that the
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit