The absurdities of Moore's paradoxes
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20142204 |
|---|---|
| Authors | John N Williams (0000-0002-5473-5382, University of Hull, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1982 |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 38-46 |
| Publication date | 1982-04-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Theoria (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0040-5825 • E-ISSN: 1755-2567 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1755-2567.1982.tb00481.x |
| OpenAlex | W2126205032 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 7 |
of two different paradoxes. ([14]). The paradox is either that of saying (i) ‘p&-Ibp ” e.g. ‘I went to the pictures last Tuesday but I don’t believe that I did ’ (see [9], p. 543) or that of saying (ii) ‘p&Ib-p ’ e.g. ‘I believe that he has gone out but has not ’ (see [lo], p. 204). The absurdity of (i) and (ii) arises because asserting ‘p ’ normally expresses a belief that p. Normally, when (i) is asserted, what is conjointly expressed and asserted, i.e. a belief that p and a lack of belief that p, is logically impossible, whereas normally, when (ii) is asserted, it is differently absurd, since what is conjointly expressed and asserted, i.e. a belief that p and a belief that-p, is logically possible, but inconsistent. A possible source of confusion between ‘impossible ’ and ‘inconsistent’
Citation · Library science · Sociology · Classics · Computer Science · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · History · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Philosophy and Theoretical Science
| Citations per year | 0.1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 1987 - 2026 (40) |
| Highly cited | No |