Scholarlink

<p>This paper offers a new line of argument for challenging the still somewhat prevailing view of logic as a politically neutral discipline by connecting the psychological concept of ambiguity (in-)tolerance with the treatment of contradictions in formal logic(s). While contradictions are rigidly rejected in classical logic, paraconsistent and contradictory logics are more accommodating towards them. In this context, the well-studied concept of ambiguity (in-)tolerance seems relevant, suggesting a connection between the outright dismissal of contradictions and rigid cognitive dispositions that may conflict with democratic values. On this basis, the paper offers a socio-political – rather than purely technical or theoretical – argument for taking contradiction-tolerant logics seriously, promoting their study and not excluding them from curricula. Thus, it contributes to the literature of exploring how our formal choices in logic may carry societal implications.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Contradictions, Classical Logic and the Phenomenon of Ambiguity Tolerance: A Socio-political Argument for Paraconsistent and Contradictory Logics

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月18日

查看全文
  • Sara Ayhan

摘要

This paper offers a new line of argument for challenging the still somewhat prevailing view of logic as a politically neutral discipline by connecting the psychological concept of ambiguity (in-)tolerance with the treatment of contradictions in formal logic(s). While contradictions are rigidly rejected in classical logic, paraconsistent and contradictory logics are more accommodating towards them. In this context, the well-studied concept of ambiguity (in-)tolerance seems relevant, suggesting a connection between the outright dismissal of contradictions and rigid cognitive dispositions that may conflict with democratic values. On this basis, the paper offers a socio-political – rather than purely technical or theoretical – argument for taking contradiction-tolerant logics seriously, promoting their study and not excluding them from curricula. Thus, it contributes to the literature of exploring how our formal choices in logic may carry societal implications.