Ein epistemischer Lösungsvorschlag für das Kahlkopfparadox

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 RELIGION
Tobias Förster
{"title":"Ein epistemischer Lösungsvorschlag für das Kahlkopfparadox","authors":"Tobias Förster","doi":"10.3196/004433022835093879","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this essay an epistemic solution to the Bald Man Paradox is suggested. Pre- supposing classical logic and minimal additional premises it is shown that there is a sharp border for baldness. In the course of that it is argued that the same argument can be given regarding alternative\n many-valued logics. Following this we formulate a plausible principle of imperfect soritical knowledge (ISK), with the aid of which it is shown that the concrete value of the sharp border is un- known. The proposed solution of the Bald Man Paradox will then be compared with Williamson's\n solution to the Sorites Paradox. In the end it is argued that the tolerance principle derives its plausibility from an ambiguity of the word \"false\". To this end it is shown that there is an equivalent formulation of the tolerance principle in Ulrich Blau's three-valued logic which is consistent\n with the existence of a sharp border.","PeriodicalId":43672,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHISCHE FORSCHUNG","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHISCHE FORSCHUNG","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3196/004433022835093879","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this essay an epistemic solution to the Bald Man Paradox is suggested. Pre- supposing classical logic and minimal additional premises it is shown that there is a sharp border for baldness. In the course of that it is argued that the same argument can be given regarding alternative many-valued logics. Following this we formulate a plausible principle of imperfect soritical knowledge (ISK), with the aid of which it is shown that the concrete value of the sharp border is un- known. The proposed solution of the Bald Man Paradox will then be compared with Williamson's solution to the Sorites Paradox. In the end it is argued that the tolerance principle derives its plausibility from an ambiguity of the word "false". To this end it is shown that there is an equivalent formulation of the tolerance principle in Ulrich Blau's three-valued logic which is consistent with the existence of a sharp border.
解决秃头悖论的史诗般的解决方案
本文提出了一个解决“秃头悖论”的认识论方法。在假设经典逻辑和最小附加前提的前提下,证明了秃头有一个尖锐的边界。在这个过程中,有人认为,对于可替代的多值逻辑,可以给出相同的论点。在此基础上,我们提出了一个看似合理的不完全批判知识原理(ISK),并在此基础上证明了尖锐边界的具体价值是未知的。然后,将提出的秃头悖论的解决方案与威廉姆森的索里斯悖论的解决方法进行比较。最后,有人认为,容忍原则的合理性来源于“虚假”一词的歧义。为此,我们证明了在乌里希·布劳的三值逻辑中存在一个与尖锐边界的存在相一致的容忍原则的等价公式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
33.30%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Mit diesem Doppelheft beginnt die Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung ihren 50. Jahrgang. Ihre Gründung im Frühjahr 1946 verdankt sie einem glücklichen Zusammenwirken. Die Initiative eines Münchner Philosophen aus Bulgarien verbindet sich mit dem Sachverstand namhafter Professoren, die damals noch aus ganz Deutschland, nicht nur dem Westen kommen. Ob er sie "nur" als Autoren oder zusätzlich für den Beirat der Redaktion gewinnt - von Anfang an versichert sich Georgi Schischkoff der Mitarbeit fast aller großen Namen der Zeit. Zunächst sind es etwa der Philosoph und Pädagoge Friedrich Bollnow, der Platon-Forscher Ernst Hoffmann, der Philosoph und Psychologe Philipp Lersch und die Philosophen Walter Bröcker und Wilhelm Weischedel.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信