Chinese ways of dealing with seeming contradictions result in a dialectical or compromise approach— retaining basic elements of opposing perspectives by seeking a “middle way.” European-American ways, on the other hand, deriving from a lay version of Aristotelian logic, result in a differentiation model that polarizes contradictory perspectives in an effort to determine which fact or position i...

This paper is the continuation of 1] in this volume. There we present a sceptical semantics which avoids contradiction for extended logic programs plus integrity contraints in the form of denials, based on the notion of optative hypotheses {an abductive approach. In this part we deene a program revision method for removing contradiction from contradictory programs under WFSX, based on the notio...

Sometimes it is pragmatically useful to prove a theorem by contradiction rather than finding a direct proof. Some reductio ad absurdum arguments have made mathematical history and the general issue if and how a proof by contradiction can be replaced by a direct proof touches upon deep foundational issues such as the legitimacy of tertium non datur arguments in classical vs. intuitionistic found...

This paper is an attempt to model to what extent an intuitionistic fuzzy set is self-contradictory, both in the case of selfcontradiction regarding a strong intuitionistic negation, and without depending on a specific negation. For this purpose, firstly, a geometrical study on self-contradiction regarding a negation is considered; afterwards some functions to measure degrees of self-contradicto...

Abstract In this article, I reply to Jens Timmermann’s critical discussion of my essay “Contradiction and Kant’s Formula Universal Law”. first consider reasons for rejecting interpretation the Law. argue that self-contradiction relevant determining a maxim’s moral status should not be sought in imagined world which maxim is universal law. then discuss suggestion something like volitional found ...

One can prove X1 is not regular using the pumping lemma. One can prove X2 is not regular either by using the pumping lemma (a version with bounds on the prefix) or by contradiction: if X2 is regular than X2 ∩ a∗b∗ = X1 is regular. One cannot prove X3 non-regular with the pumping theorem directly; however one can prove its regular by contradiction: if X3 is regular than X3 = X2 is regular. We wi...