Therefore the jumble argument fails to satisfy the 'apparently acceptable premises' condition in Sainsbury's definition, since apparent acceptability requires more than doxastic commitment.

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

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1 perspective

Reason against

Based on where you are in your exploration

Condition: A condition is a requirement or circumstance that must be true or present for something else to happen or be valid. For example, "if it rains" is a condition that might determine whether you bring an umbrella. In everyday life, conditions are the "if" parts of "if-then" statements—they set up the situation that needs to exist before a result or action follows.
Doxastic commitment(in epistemology (the study of knowledge)): Actually believing something as true, rather than just pretending to believe it or treating it as if it were true in some limited way (doxastic relates to beliefs).
Sainsbury(The statement refers to 'Sainsbury's definition,' meaning a particular philosopher's take on the problem): A contemporary philosopher who has written about logic and paradoxes—in this case, someone who developed a specific way of thinking about what counts as contradictory or problematic in our beliefs.
apparently acceptable premises(as a condition or requirement in Sainsbury's definition): Starting points or assumptions in an argument that seem reasonable and believable at first glance, even if they might not actually be.
jumble argument(Sorensen's construction used to challenge Sainsbury's definition of paradox): An argument formed by taking the negation of one of a person's beliefs as the conclusion and treating that person's remaining beliefs as the premises

1 topic