When rejecting the induction step produces a regress of higher-order vagueness, as Fara and Williamson argue, the paradox has been transformed into an infinite hierarchy of problems rather than resolved.

?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.

Fara and Williamson(as referenced philosophers in logic): Contemporary philosophers who study vagueness; they've argued that certain approaches to vagueness problems lead to infinite layers of confusion rather than real solutions.
Regress(as used in epistemology and logic): An infinite chain of reasoning where each explanation requires another explanation, like asking 'why?' infinitely and never reaching a final answer.
The paradox(as used in this logical reasoning problem): A situation where something seems to contradict common sense or logic, even though it's actually true. It tricks your brain into thinking something is wrong when it isn't.
Transformed into an infinite hierarchy(as used in logical analysis): Changed from one difficult problem into an endless chain of similar problems stacked on top of each other.

Based on where you are in your exploration