Paradoxes persist when reasoning is framed inside object based metaphysics, idealized agents, or category errors that treat relational constraints as optional. The Relational Structure (RS) framework replaces these assumptions with a minimal ontology of gradients, constraints, and propagation. Under this lens, paradoxes are not deep mysteries but structural misclassifications. This paper surveys twenty well known paradoxes across metaphysics, epistemology, decision theory, and cognitive psychology. RS fully dissolves twelve of them by exposing hidden structural errors, reframes seven as coordination or information asymmetry problems rather than paradoxes, and identifies one as a misnamed psychological effect. The result is a unified account of why paradoxes arise, how they persist, and why RS eliminates them without ad hoc fixes. This preprint presents the full classification, dissolution mechanisms, and structural map; a shorter, refined journal version will follow.
Denis Bailey (Thu,) studied this question.