What the Tortoise Said to Achilles

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter murshid_islam
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Lewis Carroll's "What the Tortoise Said to Achilles," highlighting the absence of logical errors within the narrative. Participants emphasize that the story illustrates the necessity of accepting foundational rules of logic to validate any logical proposition. The term "Carroll paradox" is referenced, indicating its classification in philosophical literature, specifically in Micheal Clark's "Paradoxes from A to Z." The conversation seeks clarification on the perceived paradoxical nature of the story, with some participants questioning the existence of contradictions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of mathematical logic principles
  • Familiarity with foundational axioms in logic
  • Knowledge of philosophical paradoxes
  • Awareness of Lewis Carroll's literary contributions
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the "Carroll paradox" in philosophical literature
  • Explore foundational axioms in mathematical logic
  • Study the implications of paradoxes in inference
  • Read Micheal Clark's "Paradoxes from A to Z" for further insights
USEFUL FOR

Philosophers, mathematicians, and students of logic who are interested in the foundations of logical reasoning and the exploration of paradoxes in philosophical discourse.

murshid_islam
Messages
468
Reaction score
21
"What the Tortoise Said to Achilles"

"What the Tortoise Said to Achilles" by Lewis Carroll: http://www.ditext.com/carroll/tortoise.html

What exactly is wrong with the logic here? Is anything wrong at all?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


No error. It is just noting that in order to accept any logical proposition as true, you must first accept the "rules of logic" as true. And, in order to do that, you must accept the rules used to construct those rules, etc.

That is why mathematical logic (I can't speak for philosophers) always starts with "given" rules and axioms.
 


I don't understand what makes this story paradoxical. Can anyone enlighten me as to where there is a contradiction or otherwise?
 


I see nowhere any mention of "paradox". Where did you get the idea that the story was "paradoxical"?
 


Wikipedia refers to it as the Carroll paradox. It is included in Micheal Clark's book Paradoxes from A to Z as the Paradox of Inference. Thus I get the idea that the story was paradoxical.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 115 ·
4
Replies
115
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 276 ·
10
Replies
276
Views
27K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K