Paradox vs contradiction

>>8864221
They're both opposite ends of the same spectrum.

>>8864221
You have it kind of backwards. A contradiction has no requirement of self-reference. If I say the sky is blue and Lucy says it's red, that's a contradiction, but not a paradox, Lucy's just wrong.
A paradox is a logical proposition that cannot be evaluated true or false, usually because of a self-contradictory statement or combination of statements.

File: contra.jpg (22KB, 350x350px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 350x350px

>>8864221
One contradiction eating another

>>8864261
Does this mean that a statement that is paradox in one theory can be valuated in other set of axioms (other logical theory)

>>8864221
Kind of related but I had an existential crisis last night. Isn't our entire existence a paradox? Like, how can the universe come from nothing? The fact there's an answer though that we may never know is equally as frightening.

>>8864307
That's not paradox

>>8864307
The universe is skin flint on a very large creature. Don't know if that will ease your mind or not.

>>8864281
Potentially but not necessarily. Godel proved that at least some paradoxical statements exist that remain paradoxical across logical systems that are themselves self-consistent.

>>8864332
But we do not have any known paradox in ZFC system or in logic. Or is there?

>>8864340
But is ZFC consistent?

I'd say a self-contradictory statement could be but isn't necessarily a paradox

>>8864307
Is this copypasta? It's so bad it's hard to believe it's sincere

>>8864221
A contradiction is in reference to a proposed thought or idea while as a paradox is self destructive or, at the very least, requires an end based on a beginning (or a perpetuation dependent upon itself).

Really Good Question Op.
Everything is a story and stories are either useful to be believed or they stop.

Paradox is the most controversial and complex concept in western thought, because western thought is the use of paradox and the obfuscation of paradox to rhetorically persuade belief.

Contradiction is a Platonic and Sophistic story that comes from the obfuscation of paradox and is a consequence of the use of obfuscating paradox to rhetorically persuade belief.

Human story making is a Direcursive process. The story of the functional story of the brain is that is it a sense organ that senses itself, then sense itself sensing itself. This is a recursion that aggregates into a Representation of everything that can be known depending on whether it is useful to be believed for its intent.

However, if it were simply a recursion you would never be sure of anything in the story if the story always regressed to the differential of senses that had no story attached, so a backwards recursion - the other half of the Direcursion, filters and adds stories called the Representation to give you the sense of a "given" or base reality that cannot be questioned. Stories are kept that are useful to be believed and that are rhetorically useful to persuade, and telling the difference is the key to survival.

But there is more, because the story changes depending on the intent.

You need stories to make stories but the stories you have limit the stories you can make. So you use the Direcursion to make the stories you made your story from simultaneously to the story you made from the stories you had.

(cont)

8864518

This is covered up by the Platonic and Sophistic stories called the Dialectic Myopia, and the Reflection of Perspective that work together to fool you into thinking there is a reality, truth, or facts. Dilaectic Myopia reduces everything to a given and a conclusion; the Reflection of Perspective inverts the order of the recursion states, and the order of the recursion and its Representation to make it appear the conclusion comes from the givens by covering up the actual process of how those givens were created and chosen.

1. Your givens come from the conclusion you already have;
2. You forget this with the shell game of the Dialectic Myopia;
3. and you reflect or invert the order of your conclusion and your givens with the Reflection of Perspective so that the conclusion comes from the givens while simultaneously cementing the givens as "reality, truth and fact" that cannot be questioned.

Brain scans show your brain activity of choice is always after you have already chosen to act.

Now Paradox is even more complex because it also equivocates the Intent of your story. Narrative Objects, or the pathway in the story of the functional brain, are reused. This means a Narrative Object in the Visual Representational Universe for the intent of spatial navigation can be reused in the Agreement Representational Universe of social corroboration even though it was not created in that space. When you reuse, you inherit all the connections that pathway has regardless of their applicability to the story or the usefulness to be believed of the inheritance with regards to the intent.
Just because something is a "fact" in one story, doesn't mean it is relevant to the story you are telling, making it a rhetoric used for the intent of persuasion and confidence, not the algorithmic or sequential telling of the story.

>>8864525
There are kinds of paradox.

Semantic Paradox comes from the equivocation of the Narrative Objects and what they inherit. The meaning changes.
Inductive Paradox comes from the Reflection of the spatial or temporal order of creation or presentation of the Narrative objects. Something comes before something else in time or space.
Deductive Paradox comes from the spatial characteristics of the Narrative Objects inherited. Big thing don’t fit in small things.

But there are also three Bootstrap Paradoxes that create the stopgap of recursion in the Direcursion where simultaneously one Narrative object creates the other while the other creates the first.

The Destructive Bootstrap Paradox is a Contradiction: Free Will versus Predestination; Nature versus Nurture; Wave versus Particle.

The Constructive Bootstrap Paradox is a Complement: matter tells space how to curve and space tells matter how to move; For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

The Oscillatory Bootstrap Paradox is a Loop.

Each side of the Bootstrap Paradox creates the other side. One cannot be a Narrative Object without the other.

And that Paradox is the key to holding any story, whether an action story or a fantasy.

In the end the only thing that matters is whether the story is useful to be believe for its intent, or whether the story stops.

And here is the kicker. That means that only the World that cannot ever be known decides whether to allow a story, and that the entire Narrative does not exist.

Everything you know is illusion – a Representation you hold in place with the rhetoric of the Paradox and the Platonic and Sophistic stories that continue to fool you.

The World is; your story is not.