624:
which by implication utilizes cognitive faculties, such as evolutionary theory, would be undermined. In this particular case, it is the confluence of evolutionary theory and naturalism that, according to the argument, undermine the reason for believing themselves to be true. Since
Plantinga originally formulated the argument, a few theistic philosophers and Christian apologists have agreed. There has also been a considerable backlash of papers arguing that the argument is flawed in a number of ways, one of the more recent ones published in 2011 by Feng Ye (see also the references in the
168:
356:
127:
326:
explicitly states that the phrase "property is theft" is analogous to the phrase "slavery is murder". According to
Proudhon, the slave, though biologically alive, is clearly in a sense "murdered". The "theft" in his terminology does not refer to ownership any more than the "murder" refers directly to physiological death, but rather both are meant as terms to represent a denial of specific rights.
221:
342:. For example, the negation of a proposition can be proved by showing that the proposition implies its own negation. Likewise, it can be inferred that a proposition cannot be proved by (1) showing that a proof would imply the negation of the proposition or by (2) showing a proof would imply that the negation of the proposition can be proved.
448:. For a brain in a vat that had only ever experienced the simulated world, the statement "I'm not a brain in a vat" is true. The only possible brains and vats it could be referring to are simulated, and it is true that it is not a simulated brain in a simulated vat. By the same argument, saying "I'm a brain in a vat" would be false.
321:
owned, that is, if nothing is property, there can be no such concept as "theft." Thus, the statement "All property is theft" has an internal contradiction: to use the concept "theft" while denying the validity of the concept of "property," is to use "theft" as a concept to which one has no logical right—that is, as a stolen concept.
488:
is self-defeating. Faced with a situation of limited resources, egoists would consume as much of the resource as they could, making the overall situation worse for everybody. Egoists may respond that if the situation becomes worse for everybody, the egoist will also be negatively placed, such that it
320:
While discussing the hierarchical nature of knowledge, Nathaniel
Branden states, "Theft" is a concept that logically and genetically depends on the antecedent concept of "rightfully owned property"—and refers to the act of taking that property without the owner's consent. If no property is rightfully
948:
Determinism is self-defeating. A determinist insists that both determinists and non-determinists are determined to believe what they believe. However, determinists believe self-determinists are wrong and ought to change their view. But "ought to change" implies they are free to change, which, within
737:
The statements "statements are meaningless unless they can be empirically verified" and "statements are meaningless unless they can be empirically falsified" have both been called self-refuting on the basis that they can neither be empirically verified nor falsified. Similar arguments have been made
623:
that the combination of naturalism and evolution is "in a certain interesting way self-defeating" because if it were true there would be insufficient grounds to believe that human cognitive faculties are reliable. Consequently, if human cognitive abilities are unreliable, then any human construct,
325:
Others have said the statement is fallacious only on a superficial reading of
Proudhon, devoid of context. Proudhon used the term "property" with reference to claimed ownership in land, factories, etc. He believed such claims were illegitimate, and thus a form of theft from the commons. Proudhon
299:
One form of an indirect self-denying statement is the "Stolen
Concept": the act of using a concept while ignoring, contradicting or denying the validity of the concepts on which it logically and/or genetically depends. The idea of the "Stolen Concept" is generally attributed to be first noted by
1212:
To the author a perfect correlation is identity. Two events that always occur together at the same time in the same place, without any temporal or spatial differentiation at all, are not two events but the same event. The mind-body correlations as formulated at present, do not admit of spatial
750:
The perhaps ancient, proverbial saying "all things in moderation" is itself a call to excess in that it commands moderation in every single possible thing. An actually moderate assertion would be something like "most things in moderation" or more precisely, "a moderate number of things in
913:
Hewitt, C. “Large-scale
Organizational Computing requires Unstratified Reflection and Strong Paraconsistency” Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Agent Systems III Jaime Sichman, Pablo Noriega, Julian Padget and Sascha Ossowski (ed.). Springer-Verlag.
31:
of the act or situation of holding them to be true. Many ideas are called self-refuting by their detractors, and such accusations are therefore almost always controversial, with defenders stating that the idea is being misunderstood or that the
560:
is also self-refuting because if it were true neither it, nor any other idea, would exist, and similarly that an argument to that effect would be self-refuting because it would deny its own existence. Several other philosophers also argue that
189:(particularly the inclusion of the quotation). The idea of arguments that indirectly defeat themselves is a common one in academic philosophy, and although the fallacy of the stolen concept deserves mention, it should not dominate the section
658:) is self-refuting on the basis that this idea is itself neither self-evident nor based directly or indirectly on what is evident and that the same applies to other formulations of such foundationalism. However, the
717:. Relativists often rejoin that in fact relativism is only relatively true, leading to a subtler problem: the absolutist, the relativist's opponent, is perfectly entitled, by the relativist's
689:
state that "nothing can be known". This has caused some to ask if nothing can be known then can that statement itself be known, or is it self-refuting. One very old response to this problem is
73:
is a statement of the form "this statement is false". Such statements troubled philosophers, especially when there was a serious attempt to formalize the foundations of logic.
975:
Walter Block (1998). "Environmentalism and
Economic Freedom: The Case for Private Property Rights (Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 17, No. 16 (Dec., 1998), pp. 1887-1899)".
257:
249:
428:
that one could actually be a brain in a vat receiving electrical input identical to that which would be coming from the nervous system. Similar premises are found in
666:
can be offered as a justification for foundationalism. Following the identification of problems with "naive foundationalism", the term is now often used to focus on
308:. Much like Objectivism the idea of the "Stolen Concept" does not have mainstream acceptance in academia. An example of the stolen concept fallacy is anarchist
853:
1468:
The problem of self-refutation is quite general. It arises whether truth is relativized to a framework of concepts, of beliefs, of standards, of practices.
244:
Specifically, most of this section is concerned with possible responses to the specific example used by the
Objectivist argument, but these are not relevant
713:
must be applied to itself. The cruder form of the argument concludes that since the relativist is calling relativism an absolute truth, it leads to a
1567:
544:(e.g., the West pre-1776 versus post-1776, East Germany versus West Germany, Hong Kong versus mainland China, North Korea versus South Korea, etc.).
654:" that "Rational belief either self-evident or based directly or indirectly on what is evident" (which he termed "foundationalism" following
36:
is invalid. For these reasons, none of the ideas below are unambiguously or incontrovertibly self-refuting. These ideas are often used as
253:
1343:
This particular chapter is based on a 1982 lecture which may explain the shift in the meaning of the term "foundationalism" since then.
178:
626:
620:
521:
requires regulation. Thus, an argument against the tragedy of the commons, in this belief system, is fundamentally an argument for
1213:
correlation, so they reduce to matters of simple correlation in time. The need for identification is no less urgent in this case.
1560:
1515:
1336:
1063:
1480:"If truth is relative, then non-relativist points of view can legitimately claim to be true relative to some standpoints."
738:
for statements such as "no statements are true unless they can be shown empirically to be true", which was a problem for
140:
1378:
833:
475:
Any kind of debate seems to be posited on the idea that the parties involved are trying to change each other's minds.
399:
286:
154:
94:
1481:
489:
is not, in fact, in the egoist's rational self-interest to take things to such extremes. However, the (unregulated)
381:
1553:
1179:
889:
848:
261:
366:
101:
that is rich enough to contain elementary arithmetic contains at least one proposition whose interpretation is
796:
1702:
1498:
Alston, William P. (2003). "Religious language and verificationism". In Moser, Paul K.; Copan, Paul (eds.).
1682:
1354:
693:: an exception is made for the skeptic's own statement. This leads to further debate about consistency and
457:
196:
1135:
497:
are cases in which, on the one hand, it is rational for an individual to seek to take as much as possible
1286:
1742:
772:
44:
assumptions), and cannot be used to test themselves, for doing so would lead to only two consequences:
1299:
1627:
1258:
69:
Directly self-denying statements are characterised by being necessarily (or inherently) false. The
501:
to do so makes things worse for everybody,, and on the other hand, the behaviour remains rational
1712:
1576:
1536:
824:
Kraft, Rory E. (2019). "Stolen
Concept". In Arp, Robert; Barbone, Steven; Bruce, Michael (eds.).
777:
577:
562:
522:
377:
146:
1737:
526:
490:
339:
309:
1507:
1225:
1687:
811:
686:
675:
585:
581:
494:
335:
1499:
1079:
Reppert, V. (1992). "Eliminative
Materialism, Cognitive Suicide, and Begging the Question".
373:
1657:
445:
425:
86:
82:
8:
1632:
1597:
1285:
is a philosopher that supports and utilizes Plantinga's argument effectively in his book
1019:
690:
192:
28:
1697:
1692:
1197:
1154:
1123:
1092:
1000:
992:
923:
739:
421:
313:
230:
70:
49:
1469:
1707:
1637:
1607:
1511:
1500:
1332:
1282:
1270:
1059:
960:
943:
829:
722:
533:
238:
110:
41:
1004:
334:
Self-refutation plays an important role in some inconsistency tolerant logics (e.g.
1732:
1642:
1602:
1403:
1158:
1150:
1115:
1088:
984:
694:
663:
651:
186:
74:
1273:
is an example of a scientist-theologian who is supportive of Plantinga's position.
873:
1667:
1647:
1587:
1250:
857:
751:
moderation." However, many philosophers use the saying in the context of ethics.
721:
standards, to reject relativism. That is, the relativist's arguments can have no
667:
655:
616:
537:
444:
argues that some versions of the thought experiment would be inconsistent due to
234:
106:
105:(from within the logical system concerned), and hence no such system can be both
78:
81:" to formalize a set of rules that would prevent such statements (more formally
1763:
1677:
1662:
1592:
589:
485:
437:
417:
98:
85:) being made in symbolic logic. This work has led to the modern formulation of
988:
1757:
1382:
1324:
931:
726:
714:
639:
605:
541:
513:. Egoists might respond that a tragedy of the commons assumes some degree of
441:
53:
90:
1652:
1612:
1039:
671:
659:
597:
553:
518:
1545:
1444:
1163:
1727:
1722:
1622:
593:
569:
514:
461:
305:
182:
45:
1419:
1240:
The Recalcitrant Imago Dei: Human Persons and the Failure of Naturalism.
996:
826:
Bad Arguments: 100 of the Most Important Fallacies in Western Philosophy
1617:
1531:
1353:
Hasan, Ali; Fumerton, Richard (11 March 2018). Zalta, Edward N. (ed.).
1127:
706:
433:
572:
may escape this kind of argument because, rather than eliminating the
1020:"The Ultimate Resource II: People, Materials, and Environment (1996)"
761:
647:
429:
1119:
384:. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed.
1420:"Cicero: Academic Skepticism - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy"
301:
33:
767:
643:
532:
More generally, egoists might say that an increasing respect for
797:"JP Moreland's Web » Why Strong Scientism is Self-Refuting"
505:
it is ultimately self-defeating. That is to say, in these cases
89:. While Russell's formalization did not contain such paradoxes,
1672:
601:
37:
710:
1445:"Cognitive Relativism - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy"
732:
573:
540:
and increasing usable resources despite a fixed amount of
876:
Performative Contradictions and Subtle Misunderstandings
525:
and the system that recognizes both property rights and
472:
chosen, which according to the determinist is impossible
949:
the incompatibilist view, is contrary to determinism.
239:
a particular aspect rather than the subject as a whole
116:
1300:"NaturalizedTruthAndPlantinga - Feng Ye's Homepage"
828:(1st ed.). WILEY Blackwell. pp. 388–391.
608:states that such arguments are based on semantics.
64:
600:state that ideas exist materially as patterns of
1755:
1367:– via Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
1106:Boghossian, P. (1990). "The Status of Content".
1359:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
860:by Nathaniel Branden - originally published in
464:a rational statement is doubly self-defeating.
642:argues that the idea, "common to theists like
1561:
1352:
1205:
27:is an idea or statement whose falsehood is a
974:
604:structure and activity. Christian apologist
1575:
1207:SocietĂ italiana per la filosofia analitica
745:
681:
155:Learn how and when to remove these messages
1568:
1554:
1133:
1105:
611:
547:
199:this issue before removing this message.
40:, which are definitions taken to be true (
1162:
1058:. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
733:Verification and falsification principles
424:in philosophy which is premised upon the
400:Learn how and when to remove this message
304:and then later supported by followers of
287:Learn how and when to remove this message
1017:
627:Evolutionary argument against naturalism
621:evolutionary argument against naturalism
1356:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1202:A Field Guide to the Philosophy of Mind
1078:
468:To count as rational, a belief must be
256:any relevant information, and removing
1756:
1497:
1226:"Dictionary of the Philosophy of Mind"
1549:
1323:
1053:
823:
725:force over someone who has different
670:beliefs (modern foundationalism), or
229:This section may primarily relate to
887:
349:
214:
161:
120:
1470:Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
584:it to, the material. For instance,
456:It has been argued by advocates of
193:create a more balanced presentation
13:
1155:10.1111/j.1468-0114.1990.tb00404.x
1093:10.1111/j.1467-9973.1992.tb00550.x
633:
117:Indirectly self-denying statements
14:
1775:
1484:On the Motivations for Relativism
1195:
1136:"The Status of Content Revisited"
890:"What is Property? Proudhon 1840"
479:
412:
136:This section has multiple issues.
1506:. New York: Routledge. pp.
1177:
517:; that is, a commons forbidding
484:It has been argued that extreme
354:
219:
166:
125:
65:Directly self-denying statements
1524:
1490:
1474:
1462:
1437:
1412:
1397:
1371:
1346:
1317:
1292:
1276:
1264:
1244:
1232:
1218:
1189:
1171:
1143:Pacific Philosophical Quarterly
1099:
1072:
1047:
1032:
1011:
968:
954:
536:uniquely allows for increasing
144:or discuss these issues on the
1331:. Oxford: OUP. pp. 9–10.
936:
917:
907:
881:
867:
842:
817:
803:
789:
451:
103:this proposition is unprovable
1:
1703:Rebound effect (conservation)
783:
700:
59:
1683:Parable of the broken window
558:nothing exists except matter
338:and direct logic) that lack
262:Knowledge's inclusion policy
93:showed that it must contain
7:
1496:See e.g. the discussion by
809:Russell B, Whitehead A.N.,
754:
380:the claims made and adding
345:
329:
10:
1780:
1743:Tyranny of small decisions
977:Journal of Business Ethics
928:Reason, Truth, and History
862:The Objectivist Newsletter
773:Performative contradiction
556:states that the idea that
1628:Excess burden of taxation
1583:
1502:The Rationality of Theism
1200:. In Nanni, Marco (ed.).
1259:Cornell University Press
746:Moderation In All Things
705:It is often stated that
682:Philosophical skepticism
676:reformed foundationalism
568:However, other forms of
16:Idea that refutes itself
1713:Self-defeating prophecy
1577:Unintended consequences
1379:"The Gallilean Library"
989:10.1023/A:1005941908758
778:Self-defeating prophecy
650:and to an atheist like
612:Evolutionary naturalism
563:eliminative materialism
548:Eliminative materialism
523:private property rights
314:"All property is theft"
1738:Tragedy of the commons
1537:Is Religion Dangerous?
1287:"The Existence of God"
1206:
687:Philosophical skeptics
527:rational self-interest
491:tragedy of the commons
340:proof by contradiction
323:
310:Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
1688:Paradox of enrichment
1043:The Myths we Live by.
812:Principia Mathematica
458:libertarian free will
336:paraconsistent logics
318:
52:) or exception (self-
1658:Inverse consequences
1406:Classical Skepticism
1255:Naturalism Defeated?
1108:Philosophical Review
446:semantic externalism
426:skeptical hypothesis
260:that may be against
87:axiomatic set theory
1633:Four Pests campaign
1385:on 22 December 2005
1257:, Ed. James Beilby
1198:"Identity Theories"
691:academic skepticism
231:a different subject
29:logical consequence
25:self-defeating idea
1718:Self-refuting idea
1698:Perverse incentive
1054:Baker, L. (1987).
856:2007-05-01 at the
850:The Stolen Concept
740:logical positivism
586:identity theorists
565:is self-refuting.
495:prisoner's dilemma
493:and the (one-off)
422:thought experiment
365:possibly contains
185:, on the basis of
71:Epimenides paradox
50:circular reasoning
21:self-refuting idea
1751:
1750:
1708:Risk compensation
1517:978-0-415-26332-0
1338:978-0-19-283067-8
1283:Richard Swinburne
1271:John Polkinghorne
1180:"Identity Theory"
1065:978-0-691-07320-0
983:(16): 1887–1899.
662:impossibility of
534:individual rights
410:
409:
402:
367:original research
297:
296:
289:
279:
278:
213:
212:
191:. Please help to
175:This section may
159:
83:Russell's paradox
1771:
1733:Streisand effect
1643:Hawthorne effect
1603:Butterfly effect
1598:Braess's paradox
1570:
1563:
1556:
1547:
1546:
1541:
1528:
1522:
1521:
1505:
1494:
1488:
1478:
1472:
1466:
1460:
1459:
1457:
1455:
1441:
1435:
1434:
1432:
1430:
1416:
1410:
1401:
1395:
1394:
1392:
1390:
1381:. Archived from
1375:
1369:
1368:
1366:
1364:
1350:
1344:
1342:
1321:
1315:
1314:
1312:
1310:
1304:sites.google.com
1296:
1290:
1280:
1274:
1268:
1262:
1248:
1242:
1238:Moreland, J.P.,
1236:
1230:
1229:
1222:
1216:
1215:
1209:
1193:
1187:
1186:
1184:
1175:
1169:
1168:
1166:
1140:
1134:— (1991).
1131:
1103:
1097:
1096:
1076:
1070:
1069:
1051:
1045:
1036:
1030:
1029:
1027:
1026:
1015:
1009:
1008:
972:
966:
958:
952:
951:
940:
934:
921:
915:
911:
905:
904:
902:
900:
894:www.marxists.org
885:
879:
871:
865:
864:in January 1963.
846:
840:
839:
821:
815:
807:
801:
800:
793:
695:special pleading
664:infinite regress
638:The philosopher
552:The philosopher
405:
398:
394:
391:
385:
382:inline citations
358:
357:
350:
292:
285:
274:
271:
265:
258:excessive detail
223:
222:
215:
208:
205:
170:
169:
162:
151:
129:
128:
121:
97:statements. Any
75:Bertrand Russell
1779:
1778:
1774:
1773:
1772:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1754:
1753:
1752:
1747:
1693:Parkinson's law
1588:Abilene paradox
1579:
1574:
1544:
1529:
1525:
1518:
1495:
1491:
1479:
1475:
1467:
1463:
1453:
1451:
1449:www.iep.utm.edu
1443:
1442:
1438:
1428:
1426:
1424:www.iep.utm.edu
1418:
1417:
1413:
1402:
1398:
1388:
1386:
1377:
1376:
1372:
1362:
1360:
1351:
1347:
1339:
1322:
1318:
1308:
1306:
1298:
1297:
1293:
1281:
1277:
1269:
1265:
1251:Alvin Plantinga
1249:
1245:
1237:
1233:
1224:
1223:
1219:
1194:
1190:
1182:
1176:
1172:
1138:
1120:10.2307/2185488
1104:
1100:
1077:
1073:
1066:
1052:
1048:
1037:
1033:
1024:
1022:
1016:
1012:
973:
969:
959:
955:
942:
941:
937:
924:Brains in a vat
922:
918:
912:
908:
898:
896:
886:
882:
872:
868:
858:Wayback Machine
847:
843:
836:
822:
818:
808:
804:
795:
794:
790:
786:
757:
748:
735:
703:
684:
636:
634:Foundationalism
617:Alvin Plantinga
614:
576:, they seek to
550:
538:wealth creation
529:: capitalism.
509:does not imply
482:
454:
415:
406:
395:
389:
386:
371:
359:
355:
348:
332:
293:
282:
281:
280:
275:
269:
266:
248:Please help by
247:
224:
220:
209:
203:
200:
171:
167:
130:
126:
119:
79:Theory of Types
77:developed his "
67:
62:
17:
12:
11:
5:
1777:
1767:
1766:
1749:
1748:
1746:
1745:
1740:
1735:
1730:
1725:
1720:
1715:
1710:
1705:
1700:
1695:
1690:
1685:
1680:
1678:Osborne effect
1675:
1670:
1665:
1663:Jevons paradox
1660:
1655:
1650:
1645:
1640:
1638:Goodhart's law
1635:
1630:
1625:
1620:
1615:
1610:
1608:Campbell's law
1605:
1600:
1595:
1593:Adverse effect
1590:
1584:
1581:
1580:
1573:
1572:
1565:
1558:
1550:
1543:
1542:
1523:
1516:
1489:
1482:Westacott, E.
1473:
1461:
1436:
1411:
1396:
1370:
1345:
1337:
1329:What is Faith?
1325:Kenny, Anthony
1316:
1291:
1275:
1263:
1243:
1231:
1217:
1188:
1170:
1164:2027.42/138325
1149:(4): 264–278.
1114:(2): 157–184.
1098:
1087:(4): 378–392.
1081:Metaphilosophy
1071:
1064:
1046:
1031:
1018:Julian Simon.
1010:
967:
953:
935:
916:
906:
880:
866:
841:
834:
816:
802:
787:
785:
782:
781:
780:
775:
770:
765:
756:
753:
747:
744:
734:
731:
702:
699:
683:
680:
635:
632:
619:argues in his
613:
610:
590:J. J. C. Smart
549:
546:
507:self-defeating
486:ethical egoism
481:
480:Ethical egoism
478:
477:
476:
473:
453:
450:
440:. Philosopher
438:dream argument
418:Brain in a vat
414:
413:Brain in a vat
411:
408:
407:
362:
360:
353:
347:
344:
331:
328:
312:'s statement,
295:
294:
277:
276:
227:
225:
218:
211:
210:
195:. Discuss and
174:
172:
165:
160:
134:
133:
131:
124:
118:
115:
99:logical system
66:
63:
61:
58:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1776:
1765:
1762:
1761:
1759:
1744:
1741:
1739:
1736:
1734:
1731:
1729:
1726:
1724:
1721:
1719:
1716:
1714:
1711:
1709:
1706:
1704:
1701:
1699:
1696:
1694:
1691:
1689:
1686:
1684:
1681:
1679:
1676:
1674:
1671:
1669:
1666:
1664:
1661:
1659:
1656:
1654:
1651:
1649:
1646:
1644:
1641:
1639:
1636:
1634:
1631:
1629:
1626:
1624:
1621:
1619:
1616:
1614:
1611:
1609:
1606:
1604:
1601:
1599:
1596:
1594:
1591:
1589:
1586:
1585:
1582:
1578:
1571:
1566:
1564:
1559:
1557:
1552:
1551:
1548:
1539:
1538:
1533:
1527:
1519:
1513:
1509:
1504:
1503:
1493:
1486:
1485:
1477:
1471:
1465:
1450:
1446:
1440:
1425:
1421:
1415:
1408:
1407:
1400:
1384:
1380:
1374:
1358:
1357:
1349:
1340:
1334:
1330:
1326:
1320:
1305:
1301:
1295:
1288:
1284:
1279:
1272:
1267:
1260:
1256:
1252:
1247:
1241:
1235:
1227:
1221:
1214:
1208:
1203:
1199:
1196:Place, U. T.
1192:
1181:
1174:
1165:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1148:
1144:
1137:
1129:
1125:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1109:
1102:
1094:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1075:
1067:
1061:
1057:
1056:Saving Belief
1050:
1044:
1041:
1035:
1021:
1014:
1006:
1002:
998:
994:
990:
986:
982:
978:
971:
965:
962:
957:
950:
945:
944:"Determinism"
939:
933:
932:Hilary Putnam
929:
925:
920:
910:
895:
891:
884:
878:
877:
874:Rockwell, L.
870:
863:
859:
855:
852:
851:
845:
837:
835:9781119167907
831:
827:
820:
814:
813:
806:
798:
792:
788:
779:
776:
774:
771:
769:
766:
764:
763:
759:
758:
752:
743:
741:
730:
728:
727:basic beliefs
724:
720:
716:
715:contradiction
712:
708:
698:
696:
692:
688:
679:
677:
673:
672:basic beliefs
669:
665:
661:
657:
653:
649:
645:
641:
640:Anthony Kenny
631:
629:
628:
622:
618:
609:
607:
606:J.P. Moreland
603:
599:
595:
591:
587:
583:
579:
575:
571:
566:
564:
559:
555:
545:
543:
542:raw materials
539:
535:
530:
528:
524:
520:
516:
512:
511:self-refuting
508:
504:
500:
496:
492:
487:
474:
471:
467:
466:
465:
463:
460:that to call
459:
449:
447:
443:
442:Hilary Putnam
439:
435:
431:
427:
423:
419:
404:
401:
393:
383:
379:
375:
369:
368:
363:This section
361:
352:
351:
343:
341:
337:
327:
322:
317:
315:
311:
307:
303:
291:
288:
273:
263:
259:
255:
251:
245:
242:
240:
236:
232:
226:
217:
216:
207:
198:
194:
190:
188:
184:
180:
173:
164:
163:
158:
156:
149:
148:
143:
142:
137:
132:
123:
122:
114:
112:
108:
104:
100:
96:
92:
88:
84:
80:
76:
72:
57:
55:
54:contradiction
51:
47:
43:
39:
35:
30:
26:
22:
1717:
1668:Murphy's law
1653:Hydra effect
1648:Hutber's law
1613:Cobra effect
1535:
1526:
1501:
1492:
1483:
1476:
1464:
1452:. Retrieved
1448:
1439:
1427:. Retrieved
1423:
1414:
1405:
1399:
1387:. Retrieved
1383:the original
1373:
1361:. Retrieved
1355:
1348:
1328:
1319:
1307:. Retrieved
1303:
1294:
1278:
1266:
1254:
1246:
1239:
1234:
1220:
1211:
1201:
1191:
1173:
1146:
1142:
1111:
1107:
1101:
1084:
1080:
1074:
1055:
1049:
1042:
1040:Mary Midgley
1034:
1023:. Retrieved
1013:
980:
976:
970:
963:
956:
947:
938:
927:
919:
909:
897:. Retrieved
893:
883:
875:
869:
861:
849:
844:
825:
819:
810:
805:
791:
760:
749:
736:
718:
704:
685:
668:incorrigible
660:self-evident
637:
625:
615:
598:E. G. Boring
580:it with, or
567:
557:
554:Mary Midgley
551:
531:
519:homesteading
510:
506:
502:
498:
483:
469:
455:
416:
396:
387:
364:
333:
324:
319:
298:
283:
267:
250:spinning off
243:
235:undue weight
228:
201:
179:undue weight
176:
152:
145:
139:
138:Please help
135:
102:
68:
42:tautological
24:
20:
18:
1728:Social trap
1723:Serendipity
1623:Externality
964:Britannica.
594:Ullin Place
570:materialism
515:public land
503:even though
499:even though
462:determinism
452:Determinism
390:August 2009
306:Objectivism
233:, or place
183:Objectivism
95:independent
46:consistency
1618:CSI effect
1532:Keith Ward
1404:Suber, P.
1025:2014-03-14
888:Proudhon.
784:References
707:relativism
701:Relativism
630:article).
434:evil demon
374:improve it
254:relocating
141:improve it
111:consistent
91:Kurt Gödel
60:Variations
1530:See e.g.
1178:Hill, C.
762:Peritrope
723:normative
656:Plantinga
648:Descartes
430:Descartes
378:verifying
187:WP:FRINGE
147:talk page
1758:Category
1454:11 March
1429:11 March
1389:11 March
1363:11 March
1327:(1992).
1309:11 March
1005:17655955
997:25074025
961:"Ethics"
899:11 March
854:Archived
755:See also
588:such as
578:identify
346:Examples
330:In logic
302:Ayn Rand
270:May 2022
204:May 2022
107:complete
34:argument
1261:, 2002.
1128:2185488
930:ch. 1,
768:Paradox
652:Russell
644:Aquinas
372:Please
197:resolve
1673:Nocebo
1540:p. 86.
1514:
1335:
1126:
1062:
1003:
995:
832:
709:about
602:neural
582:reduce
574:mental
470:freely
38:axioms
1764:Logic
1510:–34.
1183:(PDF)
1139:(PDF)
1124:JSTOR
1001:S2CID
993:JSTOR
914:2008.
711:truth
420:is a
177:lend
1512:ISBN
1456:2018
1431:2018
1391:2018
1365:2018
1333:ISBN
1311:2018
1132:And
1060:ISBN
1038:See
901:2018
830:ISBN
646:and
596:and
436:and
109:and
1253:in
1159:hdl
1151:doi
1116:doi
1089:doi
985:doi
719:own
678:).
432:'s
376:by
252:or
237:on
181:to
56:).
23:or
1760::
1534:,
1508:26
1447:.
1422:.
1302:.
1210:.
1204:.
1157:.
1147:71
1145:.
1141:.
1122:.
1112:99
1110:.
1085:23
1083:.
999:.
991:.
981:17
979:.
946:.
926:,
892:.
742:.
729:.
697:.
592:,
316:.
150:.
113:.
19:A
1569:e
1562:t
1555:v
1520:.
1487:.
1458:.
1433:.
1409:.
1393:.
1341:.
1313:.
1289:.
1228:.
1185:.
1167:.
1161::
1153::
1130:.
1118::
1095:.
1091::
1068:.
1028:.
1007:.
987::
903:.
838:.
799:.
674:(
403:)
397:(
392:)
388:(
370:.
290:)
284:(
272:)
268:(
264:.
246:.
241:.
206:)
202:(
157:)
153:(
48:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.