epub online Paradoxes AUTHOR R.M. Sainsbury – chiangshistory.org
I read this back in high school and it it was a great introduction to Zeno s
Paradox Vagueness Heap And Itvagueness heap and It enough depth as a thorough introduction and prepares the mind well to touch on these topics in advanced philosophies I ve given 2 stars only because a lot of it I couldn t uite grasp fully I didn t spend ages on this as I read it through so I plan on reading it thoroughly a second time towards the end of summer and hopefully I will understand some On ParadoxesI liked the last chapter which was on contradictions More importantly he talked about Graham Priest and Dialetheism I admired the fact that though Sainsbury did not want to give credence to such an idea he ended up saying that he can t really argue against it Overall a nice wee book on ParadoxesPS If you buy an older edition the only thing that will be missing are moral paradoxes which are not really paradoxes So save yourself some money and get the second edition Don t make the same mistakes I made Very nice book It is not too demanding same mistakes I made Very nice book It is not too demanding starts with the simpler paradoxes slowly working up to the difficult paradoxes Although the author takes the position that the difficult paradoxes must be solvable the author does not present any solution The author admits to not knowing a solution yet from gut feeling the author holds that such paradoxes
must ultimately be solvableThis is not really a downfall for this book nobody said paradoxes were easy ust doultimately be solvableThis is not really a downfall for this book nobody said paradoxes were easy ust do read this book looking for a rigorous counter to logical paradoxes Another plus paradoxes lie at the core of the most fundamental ph. A paradox can be defined as an unacceptable conclusion derived by apparently acceptable Ilosophical problems As a result this book serves as a good overview of some of the most fundamental and important philosophical problems This was something I should have expected but nonetheless it was a pleasant surprise Although aimed at general
*readers with no background in philosophy I wouldn t recommend this book to anyone who hasn t done a college *with no background in philosophy I wouldn t recommend this book to anyone who hasn t done a college in introductory logic I have albeit twenty five years ago and found the formal proofs that emerge around page 100 difficult to keep up with The discussions surrounding the logic also took me back to my years of college philosophy and two dogmas of the way I was taught we do philosophy rather than study philosophy and we only do analytical philosophy The idea behind we do philosophy was that the student should immediately engage with the problems philosophers have perennially tackled rather than learn ust what those philosophers had to say about these problems Which was fine in the seminars we had for One Hour A Week But Didn T Really Apply To hour a week but didn t really apply to rest of the time Reading Paradoxes and following Sainsbury some dutifully described dead end I wished I could say I know where this is heading but what about Reading philosophy is studying philosophy not doing philosophy The only change seemed to be that rather than reading about the greats of the subject we were reading about what the teachers and colleagues of our teachers had to say on the problem at hand The idea behind analytical philosophy was expressed tongue in cheek by one of my teachers via a potted history of philosophy When philosophy started. Easoning from apparently acceptable premises This revised edition is expanded and updated. ,
It was metaphysical is nature Plato asked himself what IS THERE AFTER STRUGGLING WITHOUT PROGRESS FOR A THOUSAND there After struggling without progress for a thousand Descartes suggested philosophers should ask themselves How do we know it s there instead Three hundred years later after eually little progress was made answering that uestion Russell suggested what philosophers should ask is what do we mean when we say it s there Sainsbury is firmly in this analytical tradition of conceptual and logical clarification What is interesting is that he twice suggests that analysis alone is not sufficient to solve some paradoxesIn the chapter Acting Rationally Sainsbury argues that the only way to escape The Prisoner s Dilemma is to have firm beliefs of how the other prison in likely to react These beliefs can only be cultural rather than logical and he illustrates this point with references to politicians and used car salesmen The upshot that in this damages our claim to have a supposedly objective culture independent notion of rationality against which any action at all can be measured pg 64 All of which serendipitously sets up my next philosophy project Whose Justice Which RationalityMore challenging for analytical philosophy are Sainsbury s concluding remarks on Russell s paradox that a purely metaphysical notion that of derivativeness might be used to provide a philosophical ustification for both a hierarchical conception of classes and for a hierarchical conception of propositions pg 138 Those metaphysical uestions Plato asked haven t gone away and to be rational we have to do than analytical philosoph. To provide an accessible introduction to a range of paradoxes and their possible solutio.