Back

ⓘ Philosophical paradoxes ..



                                               

Argument from free will

The argument from free will, also called the paradox of free will or theological fatalism, contends that omniscience and free will are incompatible and that any conception of God that incorporates both properties is therefore inconceivable. See the various controversies over claims of Gods omniscience, in particular the critical notion of foreknowledge. These arguments are deeply concerned with the implications of predestination.

                                               

Buridan's bridge

Buridans Bridge is described by Jean Buridan, one of the most famous and influential philosophers of the Late Middle Ages, in his book Sophismata. It is a self-referential paradox that involves a proposition pronounced about an event that might or might not happen in the future.

                                               

Liberal paradox

The liberal paradox, also Sen paradox or Sens paradox, is a logical paradox proposed by Amartya Sen which purports to show that no social system can simultaneously always result in a type of economic efficiency known as Pareto efficiency, and be capable of functioning in any society whatsoever. be committed to a minimal sense of freedom, This paradox is contentious because it appears to contradict the classical liberal claim that markets are both Pareto efficient and respect individual freedoms. The paradox is similar in many respects to Arrows impossibility theorem and uses similar mathem ...

                                               

Mere addition paradox

The mere addition paradox, also known as the repugnant conclusion, is a problem in ethics, identified by Derek Parfit and discussed in his book Reasons and Persons. The paradox identifies the mutual incompatibility of four intuitively compelling assertions about the relative value of populations.

                                               

Newcomb's paradox

In philosophy and mathematics, Newcombs paradox, also referred to as Newcombs problem, is a thought experiment involving a game between two players, one of whom purports to be able to predict the future. Newcombs paradox was created by William Newcomb of the University of Californias Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. However, it was first analyzed in a philosophy paper by Robert Nozick in 1969, and appeared in the March 1973 issue of Scientific American, in Martin Gardners "Mathematical Games." Today it is a much debated problem in the philosophical branch of decision theory.

                                               

Omnipotence paradox

The omnipotence paradox is a family of paradoxes that arise with some understandings of the term omnipotent. The paradox arises, for example, if one assumes that an omnipotent being has no limits and is capable of realizing any outcome, even logically contradictory ideas such as creating square circles. A no-limits understanding of omnipotence such as this has been rejected by theologians from Thomas Aquinas to contemporary philosophers of religion, such as Alvin Plantinga. Atheological arguments based on the omnipotence paradox are sometimes described as evidence for atheism, though Chris ...

Free and no ads
no need to download or install

Pino - logical board game which is based on tactics and strategy. In general this is a remix of chess, checkers and corners. The game develops imagination, concentration, teaches how to solve tasks, plan their own actions and of course to think logically. It does not matter how much pieces you have, the main thing is how they are placement!

online intellectual game →