Is there a non-dialetheist paraconsistent logic in which invalidating the law of non contradiction (someone is both stupid and not stupid and short
∃x(STUPID(x) ∧ ¬STUPID(x) ∧ SHORT(x))) in any proposition means that every predicate in it only holds in false propositions (it is false that Simon is someone who is short
⊥∃x(SIMON(x) ∧ SHORT(x)).
I've tried reading the linked to articles but don't understand them. Just trying to work out if it's OK to believe some intuitive reasoning.