This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to
philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
It seems a straight-forward resolution of the paradox is, for example, to add the proposition "Sally does not believe Tully is Cicero." Surely there must be someone other than little old me to have proposed this resolution.
Jim Bowery (
talk)
20:16, 4 May 2016 (UTC)reply
Yes. It is entirely unclear as to what sort of reasoning one is allowed to do. Common sense reasoning? Something else? Can I make deductions about beliefs? Why or why not? Likewise, for the last example, can I not deduce that Pierre simply does not know that these two Paderewski's are the same? (The Paderewski of the first over-heard discussion and the Paderewski of the second conversation). Is there some implicit assumption of
Identity of indiscernibles clouding the issue, even though the two Paderewskis are clearly distinguishable, since the are parts of different conversations?
67.198.37.16 (
talk)
19:55, 22 July 2016 (UTC)reply
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to
philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
It seems a straight-forward resolution of the paradox is, for example, to add the proposition "Sally does not believe Tully is Cicero." Surely there must be someone other than little old me to have proposed this resolution.
Jim Bowery (
talk)
20:16, 4 May 2016 (UTC)reply
Yes. It is entirely unclear as to what sort of reasoning one is allowed to do. Common sense reasoning? Something else? Can I make deductions about beliefs? Why or why not? Likewise, for the last example, can I not deduce that Pierre simply does not know that these two Paderewski's are the same? (The Paderewski of the first over-heard discussion and the Paderewski of the second conversation). Is there some implicit assumption of
Identity of indiscernibles clouding the issue, even though the two Paderewskis are clearly distinguishable, since the are parts of different conversations?
67.198.37.16 (
talk)
19:55, 22 July 2016 (UTC)reply