Paradox
From Geography
DennisPrince (Talk | contribs) |
DennisPrince (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Paradoxes are used by several philosophers such as [[Søren Kierkegaard]] who wrote ; | Paradoxes are used by several philosophers such as [[Søren Kierkegaard]] who wrote ; | ||
''one must not think ill of the paradox, for the paradox is the passion of thought, and the thinker without the paradox is like the lover without passion: a mediocre fellow. But the ultimate potentiation of every passion is always to will its own downfall, and so it is also the ultimate passion of the understanding to will the collision, although in one way or another the collision must become its downfall. This, then, is the ultimate paradox of thought: to want to discover something that thought itself cannot think. '' | ''one must not think ill of the paradox, for the paradox is the passion of thought, and the thinker without the paradox is like the lover without passion: a mediocre fellow. But the ultimate potentiation of every passion is always to will its own downfall, and so it is also the ultimate passion of the understanding to will the collision, although in one way or another the collision must become its downfall. This, then, is the ultimate paradox of thought: to want to discover something that thought itself cannot think. '' | ||
| - | Luhmann has used paradoxes on several occasions as well. His view on paradox has some similarities with [[Søren Kierkegaard]] in a way that they both view paradox as a limitation of communication. In his work he uses two paradoxes very clearly; the fact that no observer can fully observe itself and silence. With regard to the double contingent, silence will always be interpreted by the other. Making silence a form of communication. Arnoldi on Luhmann | + | Luhmann has used paradoxes on several occasions as well. His view on paradox has some similarities with [[Søren Kierkegaard]] in a way that they both view paradox as a limitation of communication. In his work he uses two paradoxes very clearly; the fact that no observer can fully observe itself and silence. With regard to the double contingent, silence will always be interpreted by the other. Making silence a form of communication. (Arnoldi on Luhmann, 2001, p.8) |
Revision as of 11:14, 19 September 2012
A paradox is usually a statement that goes against common opinion, defies logic or reason. when referred to in science this usually means a counter-intuitive outcome of theory.
Early research on paradoxes are Canter's theory on cardinal numbers and Russell's contradiction. Where Canter explains that a given value is predictable cannot predict itself. Only previous results can give the answer. Russel's paradox, based on class and sets, states that the set of all those sets do not contain themselves. Indicating then when you combine all the sets into a set, this will not suffice as they are not similar. Later studies which have tried to solve paradoxes such as 'the vicious circle principle' have led to alternative approaches by Russel such as the zig-zag theory.
Paradoxes are usually a play of words that indicate the limitations of use of communication. Such as if the universe is not infinitely old, how can it be infinitaly? Paradoxes are used by several philosophers such as Søren Kierkegaard who wrote ; one must not think ill of the paradox, for the paradox is the passion of thought, and the thinker without the paradox is like the lover without passion: a mediocre fellow. But the ultimate potentiation of every passion is always to will its own downfall, and so it is also the ultimate passion of the understanding to will the collision, although in one way or another the collision must become its downfall. This, then, is the ultimate paradox of thought: to want to discover something that thought itself cannot think. Luhmann has used paradoxes on several occasions as well. His view on paradox has some similarities with Søren Kierkegaard in a way that they both view paradox as a limitation of communication. In his work he uses two paradoxes very clearly; the fact that no observer can fully observe itself and silence. With regard to the double contingent, silence will always be interpreted by the other. Making silence a form of communication. (Arnoldi on Luhmann, 2001, p.8)
References
Arnoldi, J. (2001) Theory culture & society p.8.
Kierkegaard, S. (1844) Philosophical fragments p. 37.
Unknown. Retrieved 2012 September 18 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox
Unknown. Retrieved 2012 September 18 from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/paradoxes-contemporary-logic/
Contributors
- page created by--DennisPrince 12:25, 18 September 2012 (CEST)
- page enhanced by--DennisPrince 13:13, 19 September 2012 (CEST)
