tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1433428682510068517.post7301524038426681270..comments2024-02-29T19:21:32.831-05:00Comments on Possible Worlds: Scientism RevisitedRandy Everisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06870605678781409126noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1433428682510068517.post-39596941272469610022012-01-27T11:03:57.453-05:002012-01-27T11:03:57.453-05:00Randy,
I hope you do not mind if I comment on th...Randy, <br /><br />I hope you do not mind if I comment on this post, too? <br /><br />Was the 'new atheist' claiming that there are logical contradictions or that there are TRUE logical contradictions? If the former, he is of course correct. If the latter, I would argue, he is incorrect. <br /><br />Having said that, if you are interested, read the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on Dialetheism (the position that there are true contradictions): http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dialetheism/ <br /><br />and the article on Paraconsistent Logic (which is a set of logics that rejects ex contradictione quodlibet): http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-paraconsistent/<br /><br />Also, within the philosophy of logic and mathematics, there is a significant literature on the empirical revisability of logic. Again, if you are interested, let me know and I can e-mail you some stuff.Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04259033412017918224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1433428682510068517.post-74195277614898095822012-01-27T10:36:31.432-05:002012-01-27T10:36:31.432-05:00Of course the glaring problem, is that this 'n...Of course the glaring problem, is that this 'new atheist' is using philosophy, to demonstrate that philosophy is useless...Rob Elhttp://zaknafein81.wordpres.comnoreply@blogger.com