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
    The law of non-contradiction is the most fundamental law ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Truth & Knowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The Carnapian and mereological answers to the same question cannot both be correct without qualification.

    The law of non-contradiction is the most fundamental law of logic and cannot be abandoned.

    Truth & Knowledge
    ?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

    Truth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language3 linked

    Related

    If one and the same proposition were both true and not true, the law of non-cont...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Truth & Knowledge
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    The Carnapian and mereological answers are mutually incompatible.
    The Carnapian and mereological answers to the same question cannot both be corre...

    Similar

    The law of contradiction is a philosophical axiom (an indispensable pr...85%The law of contradiction is provable from the remaining axioms of the ...84%The law of non-contradiction applies to at least some aesthetic judgme...83%If the universal law formula were derived from the principle of non-co...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: relativism
    View source passageHide passage
    The puzzle is to explain how both the Carnapian and mereological answers to the one and same question could be correct and yet mutually incompatible, for unless we abandon the most fundamental law of logic, the law of non-contradiction, we cannot deem one and the same proposition true and not true. Relativists respond that both answers are correct, each relative to the conceptual scheme it invokes. So, once we accept the insight that there is no Archimedean vantage point for choosing among confl

    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