Abstract
The preceding paradoxes exhibit several kinds of problem that also beset human thinking in more ordinary cases. These include: hidden assumptions, neglect of the small, confusion, black-and-white thinking, oversimplification, inappropriate idealization, and inference from partial data. In solving paradoxes, we should not give up apparently self-evident principles, such as those of classical logic. The world is not inconsistent or incomprehensible. Human reason is fallible but correctable with effort.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Gibbons-Neff, Thomas. 2016. “‘Fear of Muslims Is Rational’: What Trump’s New National Security Adviser Has Said Online”, Washington Post, November 18, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/11/18/trumps-new-national-security-adviser-has-said-some-incendiary-things-on-the-internet/, accessed June 3, 2017.
Huemer, Michael. 2016. “Confessions of a Utopophobe”, Social Philosophy and Policy 33 (2016): 214–34.
Kant, Immanuel. [1781] 1998. Critique of Pure Reason, tr. and ed. Paul Guyer and Allen Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Huemer, M. (2018). Concluding Remarks. In: Paradox Lost. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90490-0_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90490-0_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-90489-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-90490-0
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)