http://www.logicalparadoxes.info
I worked my way through all the examples just for giggles and I concluded that not one of them is actually a logical paradox at all.
In each case except one, the apparent paradox is created by the incorrect application of premises.
In the other one there simply isn't a paradox at all. It just describes a law of mathematics and make it look like it is paradoxical.
Take a look through them all and see if you concur. If not then let's have a chat about philosophy and stuff just for giggles.
Remember these things.
- The purpose of a logical examination of a series premises is designed to test whether those premises are actually valid. Don't assume that the premises given are correct.
- There may be a hidden premise somewhere in the text which is in fact NOT true.
- Knowledge and beliefs are held tentatively. i.e. If they are shown to be false then we must be ready to discard them. There is no such thing as TRUTH.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
Or maybe you agree with them?