“说谎者悖论”、“亦此亦彼悖论”的简明消解——“复合命题”和“矛盾定义”谬误

欧布里德的“说谎者”悖论和赫拉克利特的“亦此亦彼”悖论,两者携手挑战亚里士多得的“不矛盾律”。西方的“真值间隙”、“变值”和“语境敏感”诸方案成功地消解欧氏的一些“弱”例;但是本文的“复合命题”方案试图消解欧氏的“强”例,较彻底地表明:欧氏挑战 (亚氏的 )“不矛盾律”失败。最后,本文指出赫氏的“亦此亦彼”悖论挑战“不矛盾律”成功;但是我们为了“实用”需要而把“亦此亦彼”修订为“可此可彼”,指赫氏犯“矛盾定义”谬误,使赫、亚二氏“平分秋色”!

Simple Dissolutions of the Liar and This and That Paradoxes

Eubulides’ the Liar Paradox and Heraclitus’ This and That Paradox both challenge Aristotle’s Non-contradiction Law. Some of Eubulides “weak” instances have been successfully dissolved by the Western theories such as the Truth-gap, the Value-changing and the Context-sensitive theories. This essay, however, with its Complex Proposition theory, tries to dissolve Eubulides’ “strong” instances in order to show the thorough failure of his challenge. The essay also points out that Heraclitus’ This and That Paradox challenges the Non-contradiction Law successfully; but we have revised Heraclitus’ “this and that” into “this or that” for “pragmatic purposes”, and have concluded that Heraclitus commits the “contradictory definition” fallacy, so that Heraclitus and Aristotle have had “equal-shares”!