What question did this study set out to answer?

This work investigates the relationship between paradoxes and non-paradox, challenging traditional distinctions in philosophy and logic.

June 1, 2026Open Access

Paradox and Non-Paradox: The Ultimate Inquiry

Puntos clave

This work investigates the relationship between paradoxes and non-paradox, challenging traditional distinctions in philosophy and logic.
Analyzed classic paradoxes like the liar paradox and Russell's paradox.
Utilized a holistic framework to re-evaluate the nature of paradoxes and non-paradoxes.
Examined cognitive evolution and conceptual updates in logical reasoning.
Proposed that paradoxes are transitional states, not inherent contradictions.
Demonstrated that updating cognitive frameworks results in the dissolution of paradoxes into non-paradoxes.
Suggested implications for fields including philosophy, logic, and cognitive science.

Resumen

This paper focuses on the core proposition of "Paradox is Non-Paradox" , re-examining the nature of paradoxes from a theoretical perspective. It challenges the traditional binary distinction between "paradox" and "non-paradox" in philosophy and logic, arguing that paradoxes are not inherent contradictions but transitional states of cognitive evolution. By analyzing classic paradoxes (such as the liar paradox and Russells paradox) through a holistic framework, this work proposes that paradoxes dissolve into "non-paradox" when the underlying conceptual boundaries and cognitive frameworks are updated. This study aims to provide a new lens for understanding logical contradictions and cognitive limits, with potential implications for philosophical thinking, logical research, and cognitive science.

Leer artículo completoexternamente

Me gusta

Guardar

Ver artículo completo