Paraconsistency

a topic in Logic & Mathematics, a part of the RPG forum.

Moderator: dealing with it

Let's talk about formal logics, mathematical models, and theoretical constructs.

Paraconsistency

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby dealing with it on Sat Dec 10, 2016 5:04 pm

The oldest logical proof is the fact that A=A, that a tautology is always true. This implies that A!=not-A, the fact that a contradiction is always false.

But is this so? Paraconsistency is a rather novel branch of philosophical thought, designed to manage inconsistencies in a discriminating way. For instance, a person can have two contradictory beliefs and still function well enough. True consistency would mean that some thought process which leads to contradiction heads an explosion of absurdity: everything is thereby proven to be true and false, simultaneously.

What are some uses for paraconsistency? Or is it too dangerous to be useful?

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
dealing with it
Groundskeeper
Groundskeeper
Member for 8 years
Contributor Conversation Starter Author Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings Donated! Greeter Beta Tester Tipworthy Concierge Lifegiver

Re: Paraconsistency

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby Sara Whitley on Sun Jan 15, 2017 1:37 pm

I think the reason this might be a "fringe" belief or philosophical thought is because there really are no viable uses. Clearly, A equalling A has brought us much farther towards measurable progress and I would even go so far as to argue that resurgent schools of thought within my own generation, such as questioning all truths or things that are taught to us by others, is actually causing a lot of damage to the political shape of things in the world right now.

I also don't think a person can harbor two contradictory beliefs and still function well "enough," if "enough" is a measure of functioning as "well" as a person who does not hold two contradictory beliefs. There is a phenomenon of discomfort, called cognitive dissonance, that results of trying to believe two contradictory things. The dystopian novel 1984 explored this theme and the various methods with which the state tried to fight it. But it's a natural observation that we remain in a state of discomfort if we cannot decide which of two contradictory beliefs is right.
Creator of the Fantasy Sandbox roleplay.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
Sara Whitley
Member for 9 years
Conversation Starter Author Conversationalist Arc Warden Lifegiver Tipworthy

Re: Paraconsistency

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby dealing with it on Mon Jan 16, 2017 9:54 pm

Let's look at contraries.

Suppose you have two possible beliefs: p and q, and each belief is contradicted by not-p and not-q, respectively. As well, p is contradicted by q, and vice versa. Knowing a single belief gives us insight to 4 beliefs. That's the theory.

Now let's take an example. Free will versus determinism. We believe in determinism, therefore free will is false, that which is not determinism is false, and that which is not free will is true.

Two of the options seem weird. "That which is not determinism is false" and "that which is not free will is true": how do we know we have enough options? We simply guessed, but for purely logical reasons. It might easily be, however, that both free will and determinism are true, or both free will and determinism are false. This is the realm of paraconsistency. This is where we start bumping into features of reality that we don't expect affect us since they seem abnormal: quantum theory and string theory.

The Buddhists have had centuries to explore the realm of paraconsistent logic. The Diamond Sutra is a very simplified version of how facts can be, not-be, either, or neither, in whatever combination.

The end result of this is that we can no longer take a single belief and use it to build a card tower.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
dealing with it
Groundskeeper
Groundskeeper
Member for 8 years
Contributor Conversation Starter Author Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings Donated! Greeter Beta Tester Tipworthy Concierge Lifegiver

Re: Paraconsistency

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby VindicatedPurpose on Mon Jan 16, 2017 11:26 pm

So...are the questions still...

What are some uses for paraconsistency? Or is it too dangerous to be useful?

Or are we allowed to explore paraconsistent questions?

Such as what are some uses of non-paraconsistency? What are not uses of paraconsistency? Is it too dangerous to not be useful? Is it too non-dangerous to be useful? Is it too non-dangerous to be not useful?

Paraconsistency reminds me of paradoxes and duality.

The Yin and Yang in eastern philosophy might echo this paraconsistency, they are two halves of the same whole, proving that the whole is neither whole, but that the halves are neither halves.

If you're asking about it's uses, well, we live in the Postmodern world now, paraconsistency is all around us. The danger, I think, is not in paraconsistency, but in how humans choose to use it, if it is usable all.
Like a stranger on a grate, or a skylark, or a taper, flying ever upward and knowing of love's satiety. Our dreams beyond the Sun and into the expanse of Night doth sound a quiet hymn.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
VindicatedPurpose
Member for 8 years
Contributor Promethean Author Conversation Starter Inspiration World Builder Conversationalist Novelist Completionist Arc Warden Party Starter Beta Tester Greeter Visual Appeal Lifegiver

Re: Paraconsistency

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby dealing with it on Tue Jan 17, 2017 5:27 pm

VindicatedPurpose wrote:What are some uses for paraconsistency?
Two different ethical systems arrive at two different values for what good is. We can say this is a true contradiction. (As opposed to a false contradiction, which is a default limitation of classical logic).
VindicatedPurpose wrote:Or is it too dangerous to be useful?
I think that understanding it is key to unlocking some mysteries, and a novel way to police our thoughts.
VindicatedPurpose wrote:Or are we allowed to explore paraconsistent questions?
Someone needs a firm grasp of logic before trying to explore paraconsistency.
VindicatedPurpose wrote:Paraconsistency reminds me of paradoxes and duality.
It may be the case that paraconsistency answers certain paradoxes by revealing true contradictions.
VindicatedPurpose wrote:The danger, I think, is not in paraconsistency, but in how humans choose to use it, if it is usable all.
Why wouldn't it be usable?

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
dealing with it
Groundskeeper
Groundskeeper
Member for 8 years
Contributor Conversation Starter Author Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings Donated! Greeter Beta Tester Tipworthy Concierge Lifegiver

Re: Paraconsistency

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby VindicatedPurpose on Tue Jan 17, 2017 8:52 pm

On that last one, I'm just giving a nod to the possibility that it might not be usable. Personally, I wouldn't know, but just saying.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
VindicatedPurpose
Member for 8 years
Contributor Promethean Author Conversation Starter Inspiration World Builder Conversationalist Novelist Completionist Arc Warden Party Starter Beta Tester Greeter Visual Appeal Lifegiver

Re: Paraconsistency

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby HelplessBystander on Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:55 pm

The study of paraconsistency is a model of thought based on human nature. It is completely possible to have two conflicting sets of beliefs and still function. Tautology or not, it is in our nature to both doubt and believe; to both love and hate. They are often in conflict, and yet such is life.

If the topic of discussion is expanded further, maybe it will give us further insight on how paraconsistency came to 'be' and how does this correlate to intelligent throught? Can animals be capable of doing this on some level? Are these dictated by chemicals in our brains or a summation of life experiences that offer contradicting info? Or even a little bit of both? As some rando future philosophy major, here's my two cents on the topic.
Image

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
HelplessBystander
Member for 2 years
Friendly Beginnings Author Arc Warden Lifegiver


Post a reply

Make a Donation

$

RPG relies exclusively on user donations to support the platform.

Donors earn the "Contributor" achievement and are permanently recognized in the credits. Consider donating today!

 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests