Resolving Paradoxes

[henry quirk]

False. This is because young human can not lie.

Children are the biggest liars/manipulators of all humans.

Of course not. Kids can lie, but, by definition, most lack the experience to really understand what they do.

No, the Alpha Liar-Manipulator is a self-aware, middle-aged, person (a nice chunk of history behind them; a nice chunk of unplotted territory in front of them).

[Arising_uk]

The author describes types of contradictions and classifies them. But is there a way they can be resolved?

Did you read the article? As it was all about how we resolve them.

“When a contradiction is impossible to resolve except by a lie, then we know that it is really a door.” - Simone Weil

Does anyone here understand what she means by the door and how it can be opened?

Can you give an example of a contradiction impossible to resolve except by a lie or one that has been resolved by a lie?

[Arising_uk]

Quotation mark(s) indicate a quotation.
No quotation marks, no quotation. ...

Italicising a sentence and attributing an author is also a convention.

“Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.”
Ayn Rand (speaking through a literary character)
- Atlas Shrugged

I don't disagree especially since this is the premise upon which reductio ad absurdum works as a proof procedure.

Rely on the meaning, not on the words.
- From the Four Reliances Sutra

The meaning of one's words are the response they get.
-NLP

[mickthinks]

So how could you possibly know what anything means?

I've not claimed to know the meaning of anything. I have pointed out that you are misusing the word "paradox" and I am (charitably) assuming that is because you are ignorant.

Do you still want to play?
Not if you going to treat it as just a game.

[Skepdick]

I have pointed out that you are misusing the word "paradox" and I am (charitably) assuming that is because you are ignorant.

Can I assume that you are ignorant since you are misusing the word "charitably"?

Every single one of the words I type is used precisely the way I mean to use it.

To think that there is a "correct" and "incorrect" way to use words stinks like sanctimony.

Not if you going to treat it as just a game.

It's all there is to it...

[Skepdick]

Of course not. Kids can lie, but, by definition, most lack the experience to really understand what they do.

Lack of self-awareness and intent is immaterial from a consequentialist point of view.

No, the Alpha Liar-Manipulator is a self-aware, middle-aged, person (a nice chunk of history behind them; a nice chunk of unplotted territory in front of them).

Also immaterial to the point - all humans lie.

White lies. Pre-meditated lies. Accidental lies. All lies.

[mickthinks]

dick: Do you still want to play?
mick: Not if you going to treat it as just a game.
dick: It's all there is to it...

kthxbai!

[Skepdick]

Not if you going to treat it as just a game.

It's all there is to it...

kthxbai!

Not a game theorist then? Shame.

Seems very much on-point since you continue to "charitably" assume my ignorance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory

Game theory is the study of mathematical models of strategic interaction among rational decision-makers. It has applications in all fields of social science, as well as in logic, systems science and computer science...Today, game theory applies to a wide range of behavioral relations, and is now an umbrella term for the science of logical decision making in humans, animals, and computers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory#Philosophy

Game theory has been put to several uses in philosophy. Responding to two papers by W.V.O. Quine (1960, 1967), Lewis (1969) used game theory to develop a philosophical account of convention. In so doing, he provided the first analysis of common knowledge and employed it in analyzing play in coordination games. In addition, he first suggested that one can understand meaning in terms of signaling games.

Game theory has also challenged philosophers to think in terms of interactive epistemology: what it means for a collective to have common beliefs or knowledge, and what are the consequences of this knowledge for the social outcomes resulting from the interactions of agents.

[henry quirk]

Lack of self-awareness and intent is immaterial from a consequentialist point of view.

What's material to the consequentialist is result and adults, as liars and manipulators, are always gonna trump snot noses when it comes to result.

Also immaterial to the point - all humans lie.

Nope. Absolutely on point.

You claimed Children are the biggest liars/manipulators of all humans.

They're not; adults are.

[Age]

False. This is because young human can not lie.

Children are the biggest liars/manipulators of all humans.

If you say so, then, to you, this must be absolutely true, correct?

[Age]

Of course not. Kids can lie, but, by definition, most lack the experience to really understand what they do.

Lack of self-awareness and intent is immaterial from a consequentialist point of view.

No, the Alpha Liar-Manipulator is a self-aware, middle-aged, person (a nice chunk of history behind them; a nice chunk of unplotted territory in front of them).

Also immaterial to the point - all humans lie.

This is OBVIOUSLY false.

If you want to claim things, then I suggest having some thing to back it up before you make the claim.

Provide examples of, and/or explain, how young humans lie.

White lies. Pre-meditated lies. Accidental lies. All lies.

[Skepdick]

If you say so, then, to you, this must be absolutely true, correct?

I don't know what you mean by "absolutely true".

[Skepdick]

This is OBVIOUSLY false.

Obviously you would say that. You are a lying child.

Provide examples of, and/or explain, how young humans lie.

When you grow up one day and have children on your own, remember me.

[Age]

If you say so, then, to you, this must be absolutely true, correct?

I don't know what you mean by "absolutely true".

Okay, this is fair enough. This, "I don't know what you mean", is also what you just about always 'go to', when you do not want to answer or respond to some thing.

[Age]

This is OBVIOUSLY false.

Obviously you would say that. You are a lying child.

If you say and believe so, then this could not be anything else but absolutely true, to you.

Provide examples of, and/or explain, how young humans lie.

When you grow up one day and have children on your own, remember me.

Lol once again, you are obviously WRONG, and as such completely stuck, and therefore completely incapable of providing any actual proof of what you claim is irrefutably true.

I have suggested before, if one wants to claim some thing, then it is best to have at least some thing to back up and support that claim BEFORE making the claim, itself.

But being an adult human being, you BELIEVE you know better, correct?