3 Sencillos Pasos para Resolver Cualquier Paradoja

About this video

• Video Title: 3 Sencillos Pasos para Resolver Cualquier Paradoja
• Channel: Adictos a la Filosofía
• Speakers: Enric
• Duration: 00:12:10

Overview

This video, presented by Enric, explains three fundamental strategies philosophers use to address paradoxes: logically revisionist, metaphysical, and conservative strategies. It clarifies the difference between solving and "killing" a paradox and provides examples like Thomson's Lamp Paradox and the Grandfather Paradox to illustrate these approaches. The ultimate goal is to equip viewers with a framework for understanding and tackling philosophical paradoxes.

Key takeaways

• Two Approaches to Paradoxes: Paradoxes can either be "solved" (showing apparent contradictions are compatible or based on false premises) or "killed" (arguing the paradoxical situation is impossible).
• Three Core Strategies:
  1. Logically Revisionist: Challenges classical logic (e.g., principle of non-contradiction).
  2. Metaphysical: Argues the paradoxical situation is impossible based on general metaphysical principles (e.g., time being discrete, impossibility of infinite causes).
  3. Conservative: Avoids changing logic or positing new metaphysical claims, either by addressing the specific paradoxical situation as an exception or by showing there's no real paradox upon closer inspection.
• Choosing a Strategy: While conservative strategies are generally preferred for their simplicity and minimal disruption, the best approach depends on the paradox's nature and the implications of each strategy. Sometimes, a single metaphysical stance can "kill" multiple paradoxes more elegantly than solving each individually.
• Book Recommendation: The video references Alexander Pruss's book "Infinity, Causation, & Paradox" as a source for understanding paradoxes of infinity and the metaphysical stance of causal finitism.