Timeline for What's the solution to Sorites paradox?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
24 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 24, 2023 at 20:36 | comment | added | Robbie Goodwin | Sorry, RM… That's simply not so. 'paradox' is never about 'seeming'. Ether both statements are demonstrably true or if one fails that test, there is no paradox; merely a mistake. Oops! Who doubts, taking a single grain from a heap leaves a smaller heap, until a certain point. The actual problem here is a combination of what 'a heap' means, and when that 'certain point' is reached. How is that more philosophy than simple vocabulary? Of course a single grain is not a heap and any heap can be reduced to a single grain. How is that more philosophy than simple vocabulary? | |
| Feb 23, 2023 at 15:51 | comment | added | Jumboman | @RobbieGoodwin the reason that this paradox is not easily solved is that your proposed solution would have to be common knowledge. Any and all numeric definitions of the word 'heap' - like "a heap must contain at least 1253 grains of sand; removing the 1253d grain turns the 'heap of sand' into a 'teaspoon of sand' which must contain between 832 and 1252 grains of sand" would be met with "says who?" or "why" or "hahahahaha". It is a paradox precisely because the question assumes that such a definition should exist, when clearly it does not. | |
| Feb 23, 2023 at 14:49 | comment | added | Taladris | Also, a heap is not just its number of grains. If I line up one million grains on a straight line, it is "less" a heap than a hundred grains put in a roughly conic shape. If I have a heap and I start to flatten it with a rack, when does it stop to be a heap? | |
| Feb 23, 2023 at 5:51 | answer | added | Bug Catcher Nakata | timeline score: 7 | |
| Feb 22, 2023 at 23:01 | comment | added | Robbie Goodwin | @R.M. If the issue is as stated here, there exists no 'paradoxical' phrasing; only a Question badly worded. If there is a complicit wording, why hint at what you could clearly state? This is about logic, not term definition: the Question as Posted fails. It's not about 'skipping paradoxical phrasing…'; there would be none even if going to Canterbury round or through London had to do with sand, or heaps. What matters is the ability to distinguish between count and non-count nouns; between grains and heaps; not whether but when removing one grain turns a heap into not-a-heap. | |
| Feb 22, 2023 at 20:31 | comment | added | candied_orange | A solution is to just keep removing grains and call it a heap deficit. | |
| Feb 22, 2023 at 19:56 | answer | added | candied_orange | timeline score: 6 | |
| Feb 22, 2023 at 19:49 | answer | added | Mark Andrews | timeline score: 3 | |
| Feb 22, 2023 at 18:34 | answer | added | Daron | timeline score: 3 | |
| Feb 22, 2023 at 16:16 | answer | added | chasly - supports Monica | timeline score: 4 | |
| Feb 22, 2023 at 2:56 | comment | added | ttw | The question occurs in other situations. Given and list of numbers generated by some TRVE random number generator (radioactive decay for example), such a list may be used for random sampling (the Rand Table for example), one may change one number and still have a "random list." Etc. However, governmental laws may exhibit such behavior. One is considered a "chronic migraine sufferer" if one gets 15 or more migraines per month; apparently, those suffering from 14 or fewer are deemed not to suffer enough for "chronic migraine" treatment. | |
| Feb 22, 2023 at 2:13 | comment | added | R.M. | @RobbieGoodwin There exists at least one phrasing of the issue which meets the definition of a paradox, and that is what one is invoking when one says "sorites paradox". The fact that there are other phrasings which don't matters not. Yes, questioning the definition of terms is indeed a possible resolution. And yes, one may skip the paradoxical phrasing to invoke that resolution. But just because one can travel to Canterbury by going around London rather than through it does not mean that London does not exist, or that it is not a valid path of travel. | |
| Feb 21, 2023 at 23:28 | comment | added | Robbie Goodwin | @R.M. That I have never before seen 'seemingly' confuse the definition of 'paradox' matters not. What we have here is by no means a set of statements resulting in a contradiction, however many pins you hope your angels might dance on. This is purely about comprehension and language; the observer's ability first to distinguish 'one' from 'some' or 'many' and then to convey that difference to an audience, all in light of conflicting definitions of 'heap'. That it could be to do with philosophy is a significant reason so many people disdain philosophy. Oops! | |
| Feb 21, 2023 at 22:55 | comment | added | R.M. | @RobbieGoodwin Roughly, a 'paradox' is a set of seemingly true statements which result in a contradiction. "If you have a heap of sand, and take only a single grain of sand from it, it's still a heap." and "A single grain of sand is not a heap." lead to a contradiction (because a finite heap can be reduced to a single grain by repeated removal of single grains). -- The naive resolution is to deny the first, however a counter example (where you have a heap, remove a grain, and then no longer have a heap) resists construction, which makes demonstrating the falsity difficult. | |
| Feb 21, 2023 at 22:25 | comment | added | Robbie Goodwin | How is that any kind of 'paradox,' please? How is this really about anything other than the observer's ability to distinguish 'one' from 'some' or 'many'? | |
| Feb 21, 2023 at 22:06 | answer | added | Xavier | timeline score: 11 | |
| Feb 21, 2023 at 17:41 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Feb 21, 2023 at 15:55 | answer | added | Frank | timeline score: 11 | |
| Feb 21, 2023 at 12:25 | comment | added | Conifold | Heap is a vague concept, so what is or is not a heap shifts with context. Intuitions about the effect of one grain are localized enough to be plausible without providing the context. The paradox then plays on subtle equivocation by assuming a fixed concept throughout the whole process. | |
| Feb 21, 2023 at 10:14 | answer | added | άνθρωπος | timeline score: -2 | |
| Feb 21, 2023 at 9:57 | answer | added | Professor Sushing | timeline score: 27 | |
| Feb 21, 2023 at 9:53 | comment | added | Mauro ALLEGRANZA | See Sorites Paradox. | |
| Feb 21, 2023 at 9:52 | history | edited | Mauro ALLEGRANZA |
edited tags; edited tags
|
|
| Feb 21, 2023 at 9:40 | history | asked | ActualCry | CC BY-SA 4.0 |