Paradox Etymology can be traced back to at least Plato's Parmenides [1]. Paradox comes from para ("contrary to") and doxa ("opinion"). The word appeared in Latin "paradoxum" which means "contrary to expectation," or "incredible. We propose, in this discussion thread, to debate philosophical or scientific paradoxes: their geneses, formulations, solutions, or propositions of solutions... All contributions on "Paradoxes", including paradoxical ones, are welcome.
[1] https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Paradox
Illustration from: "Science Paradoxes Bulletin Board Set": https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Product/Science-Paradoxes-Bulletin-Board-Set-Unique-Classroom-Decor-Black-Holes-More-10342713
Let's dive into a discussion about paradoxes, their origins, and some famous examples.
The Nature of Paradoxes:Paradoxes have always been a fascinating aspect of philosophy and science. They challenge our understanding of reality and often lead to deep philosophical and scientific inquiries. The etymology of the word, as you mentioned, reveals that paradoxes are inherently linked to contradictions or ideas contrary to common opinion.
Philosophical Paradoxes:One of the most famous philosophical paradoxes is Zeno's Paradox, which comes in several forms. The most well-known version involves Achilles and the Tortoise, where Achilles, the faster runner, can never overtake a slower tortoise if it has a head start. How do you think this paradox challenges our understanding of motion and infinity?
Scientific Paradoxes:In the realm of science, the Twin Paradox from Einstein's theory of relativity is a classic example. It proposes that if one twin travels into space at near-light speed while the other stays on Earth, the traveling twin will age slower, leading to a paradoxical situation where the traveling twin can return home younger than the twin who remained on Earth. How can we reconcile this with our everyday understanding of time?
Resolving Paradoxes:One approach to resolving paradoxes is to reexamine our fundamental assumptions. For example, Zeno's Paradox can be resolved by understanding that in calculus, we can sum an infinite series of decreasing distances, ultimately reaching a finite total. How important is it to redefine our assumptions and frameworks when dealing with paradoxes?
The Paradox of Self-Reference:Another intriguing type of paradox is the paradox of self-reference, as seen in the famous liar paradox. If a person says, "I am lying," is that statement true or false? This paradox raises questions about the limits of language and self-reference. How do you think we can grapple with such paradoxes?
Modern Paradoxes:Paradoxes are not confined to the ancient or classical realms. In modern times, we encounter new paradoxes in fields like quantum mechanics and artificial intelligence. One example is Schrödinger's Cat, which explores the bizarre nature of quantum superposition. How do these modern paradoxes challenge our understanding of reality?
Final Thoughts:Paradoxes are like intellectual puzzles that invite us to question our assumptions and delve deeper into the mysteries of the universe. They often spark innovation and lead to breakthroughs in both philosophy and science. As we explore these paradoxes, we may find that the journey of seeking solutions can be as enlightening as the resolutions themselves.
Kristaq Hazizi Thank you for inaugurating this discussion with this remarkable contribution. I in particular enjoyed reading your well-inspired Final Thoughts: "Paradoxes are like intellectual puzzles that invite us to question our assumptions and delve deeper into the mysteries of the universe. They often spark innovation and lead to breakthroughs in both philosophy and science. As we explore these paradoxes, we may find that the journey of seeking solutions can be as enlightening as the resolutions themselves".
Congratulations, Jamel, for introducing such good topics for discussions!
Paradoxes are intellectual puzzles that get into the minds of critical thinkers! Paradoxes enable better critical thinking! Ordinary pupils cannot even understand certain paradoxes! For pupils to get into the intricacies of paradoxes, they need good teachers who can help them think! Paradoxes and discussions should become part of the curriculum at all stages of education with definite objectives of intellectual attainments!
Joseph George Ray Thank you for the excellent post. "Paradoxes are intellectual puzzles that get into the minds of critical thinkers! Paradoxes enable better critical thinking!" Yes well said! And this helps stimulate the curiosity of young people.
On the paradox of paradoxes. This is an outstanding paper "Baldwin, W. C., Sauser, B., Boardman, J., & John, L. (2010). A typology of systems paradoxes. Information Knowledge Systems Management, 9(1), 1-15." which reminds us that the notion of Paradox comes to us from the Ancient Greeks. "Consider the Greek philosopher Socrates who is credited with a group of paradoxes called “Socratic paradoxes.” Among the group is, that Socrates knew that he knew nothing. Based on philosophy, one could argue that this paradox is another example of a perception paradox". This led the authors to write within the conclusion "... it is possible that the identification of systems paradoxes is sufficient to provide opportunities that they otherwise impede. Perhaps this situation creates the ultimate paradox, a paradox worthy of Socrates, a paradox of paradoxes. Equipping managers and systems engineers with a means to identify paradox opens the door to new opportunities that otherwise would go unnoticed."
The paper is available on:
Article A typology of systems paradoxes
Dear Doctor
Go To
Paradoxes, Contradictions, and the Limits of Science
Noson S. Yanofsky
American Scientist, Volume 104, 2016
"Science and technology have always amazed us with their powers and ability to transform our world and our lives. However, many results, particularly over the past century or so, have demonstrated that there are limits to the abilities of science. Some of the most celebrated ideas in all of science, such as aspects of quantum mechanics and chaos theory, have implications for informing scientists about what cannot be done. Researchers have discovered boundaries beyond which science cannot go and, in a sense, science has found its limitations. Although these results are found in many different fields and areas of science, mathematics, and logic, they can be grouped and classified into four types of limitations. By closely examining these classifications and the way that these limitations are found, we can learn much about the very structure of science."
"Because science and mathematics are constructed to mimic the contradictionfree physical universe, they also must not contain contradictions.
The mathematical formulation of “This statement is not provable” negates its own provability.
There are reasons to believe that there is a lot more “out there” that we cannot know than what we can know.
"How much is beyond our ability to solve? In general, such things are hard to measure. However, in computer science there is an interesting result along these lines. We all know of many different tasks that computers perform with ease. However, there are many problems that are beyond the ability of computers. We can examine whether there are more solvable problems than unsolvable problems. First, a bit about infinite sets. Mathematicians have shown that there are different levels of infinity. The smallest infinity corresponds to the natural numbers: {0, 1, 2, 3 …}. We say that this set of numbers is “countably infinite.” Although we can never finish counting the natural numbers, we can at least begin listing them. In contrast, the set of all real numbers—that is numbers such as –473.4562372... and pi—are “uncountably infinite.” We cannot even begin to count them. After all, what is the first real number after 0? 0.000001? What about 0.0000000001? It can be shown easily that uncountably infinite sets are vastly larger than countably infinite sets. Now let us turn to computers that solve problems. There are a countably infinite number of potential computer programs for solvable computer problems. In contrast, there are uncountably infinite computer problems. If one takes all the uncountably infinite computer problems and subtracts the countably infinite solvable problems, one is left with uncountably infinite unsolvable problems. Thus the overwhelming vast majority of computer problems cannot be solved by any computer. Computers can only solve a small fraction of all the problems there are."
Sundus F Hantoosh These examples give food for thought, get the brain spinning and keep the mind busy. Thank you for the reference.
Paradoxes of science as a system: (Fragments from the philosophy of science)
I. The general paradox of systems science: Systems scientists think that science is a system and that system science is a science. No one feels called on to explicate these relationships. Systems theorists do not believe it is incumbent on them to tell what way their discipline is a science. Nor do scientists feel obliged to say how the generic notion of system is binding on them.
II. The paradox of theory versus practice: If theory is taken to be basic, practice is taken to be lower level applied theory. If practice is taken to be basic, theory is felt not to be able to pay its way.
III. The paradox of basic research versus R & D: To the extent that Science embraces R & D, the scientist becomes a manager; a manager is not a Scientist.
IV. When science as management becomes an integral part of the political economy, the scientific manager becomes a politician.
V. Philosophy tries to unscramble this mess. For scientific practice it suggests a division of the work of science into experimentation governed by something like lab control and for the emotional romantic side of science a newly furbished discipline, essentially preaching, which it calls hermenuetics.
VI. It has been said the ‘philosophy is the misuse of a vocabulary expressly designed for that purpose.’ Is this true? It almost looks like it. Since the early part of the century, and increasingly before WWII philosophy has been burying more of its messes under the catch-all word ‘vocabulary.’ If you took the term away from logical positivists, logicians and Richard Rorty, they would not have much left. Leibniz said that mathematics is a well-made language. Is the mathematician also a vocabulary? Nothing but a vocabulary? What about the philosopher or systematist who is one of Freud's anals, that is, ‘orderly, parsimonious and abstinate’? When will philosophers recognize that orality is a personality trait characteristic of only certain people?
Article Paradoxes of science as a system: (Fragments from the philos...
Thank you Dear Ljubomir Jacić for this remarkable contribution; in six points, each more relevant than the others. Thanks also for the reference: I requested the author a full-text copy, I will read with interest.
Learn about the six famous paradoxes in philosophy and science: © Open University (A Britannica Publishing Partner).
https://www.britannica.com/video/186423/overview-paradoxes-science-philosophy
Article media libraries that feature this video: Achilles paradox, twin paradox, Albert Einstein, paradox, quantum mechanics, Erwin Schrödinger, principle of superposition, time dilation, Alan Turing, Zeno of Elea, John Searle, time travel, Chinese room argument, Schrödinger’s cat, grandfather paradox
On Freedom of Conscience. Many personalities at the origin of major political, philosophical, scientific, artistic, economic, and technological paramount changes are fervent believers and this is part of their "Freedom of Conscience". We do not even know if the thinkers behind the fundamental human "Freedom of Conscience" principle are believers or not. Somewhat Paradoxically, non-believers believe that there is no room for religion and no one should congratulate them and even less blame them for that since it is their freedom to think according to their conscience.
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience/5
Jamel, you have pointed out a very significant topic in thinking. One should indeed respect one's conscience while thinking. But remember that the conscience is not an 'iron rod' because religion, politics, culture, family, parents, and friends contribute to the development of our conscience! Over-dependence on conscience prevents us from free thinking! A thinker should always know that the 'mind (conscience) tricks one's thinking' and try to be self-critical!
There are some true or significant and false components of evidence or logic in every culture, religion, politics, family, friends, and other environments and historical experiences, influencing the conscience of everybody. Religious or irreligious, political or apolitical, one should have the potential to look deeply into one's thoughts (conscience) and distinguish between the actual and false. Indeed, fanatic religious behavior always prevents people from being self-critical, but secular religions won't be like that. Beliefs belong to different categories based on fanatic ideologies! It is not only in faith but in politics, too! Have you ever noticed fanaticism in communist politics?
Therefore, the fundamental question in independent thinking is whether one has the potential to 'think about one's thinking.' Since conscience is the output of one's current and past social and individual upbringing, what one has in mind may not always be accurate.
Only if one is self-critical can one be a good thinker. Independent thinking doesn't promote looking into conscience but focuses on evidence and logic. Bernadshaw's famous saying, 'Perhaps the best of criticism is self-criticism,' is significant in the quality of one's thinking.
The utility of paradoxes is that they enable one to look critically into one's deeply held beliefs and thoughts (conscience)!
Thank you Dear Joseph George Ray for putting insights on this paramount issue at the interface of scientific knowledge (by definition universal) and beliefs and convictions of whatever nature: religious, mystical, ideological, or even politico-economic (by essens Personel). For this purpose, one has nothing to add to what Dyson Freeman wrote on the topic: "Science and religion are two windows that people look through, trying to understand the big universe outside, trying to understand why we are here. The two windows give different views, but they look out at the same universe. Both views are one-sided, neither is complete. Both leave out essential features of the real world. And both are worthy of respect. Trouble arises when either science or religion claims universal jurisdiction, when either religious or scientific dogma claims to be infallible. Religious creationists and scientific materialists are equally dogmatic and insensitive. By their arrogance, they bring both science and religion into disrepute. The media exaggerate their numbers and importance. The media rarely mention the fact that the great majority of religious people belong to moderate denominations that treat science with respect, or the fact that the great majority of scientists treat religion with respect so long as religion does not claim jurisdiction over scientific questions" Freeman Dyson (March 15, 2000). Progress In Religion (Speech). Templeton Prize Reading
Thank you very much, Jamel, for sharing the valuable thoughts. May I share my thoughts below?
Science and Religion are not two different windows to the world but two sides of the same coin. Perhaps this is the best Christian contribution to the progress of modern science!
Before and after Jesus, many viewed science and religion as separate. But, perhaps, the essence of Christian teaching is that one cannot understand the universe without seeing the things around the person (without being empirical and philosophical simultaneously)
The essence of Jesus's teaching is that, unlike identifying God somewhere else away from the empirical world, God is to be found among us! Jesus taught people to look around and see God in their midst.
When science or Religion is understood fully, one cannot separate the eternal goals of scientific or religious pursuits as different!
When the eternal goals of scientific pursuit are understood, one cannot negate the right to exist for everything (living and non-living). Similarly, when the lasting religious purposes are identified, one cannot separate oneself from the things around! At the culmination of his spiritual journey, St Francis of Assisi calls all the animate and inanimate around him, brothers and sisters!
Naturally, when the intellect of humans develops fully, they will be able to tolerate, sacrifice, and dedicate themselves for the whole, for eternity!
Truly religious is genuinely scientific, and vice versa!
I am sorry If I have confused you!
Joseph George Ray thank you for the developments you provided about your point of view, which I respect religiously; It’s okay to say it like that, isn’t it? Regards
Yes, Jamel, it's my point of view of science and religion! I shared it just for criticism! Criticism is the 'food' for better thoughts! Thank you.
The Paradox of Hyperspecialization and Interdisciplinary Research
How does the shift to interdisciplinary research reshape the very foundation of how knowledge is generated and applied across various fields and what do the different stakeholders in academia need to do to balance the depth of specialized knowledge with the breadth of interdisciplinary understanding?
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2023/08/29/guest-post-the-paradox-of-hyperspecialization-and-interdisciplinary-research/?informz=1&nbd=6f03e560-5431-4744-8998-e00223ee7a82&nbd_source=informz
Thank you Dear Joseph George Ray and Ljubomir Jacić for opening the field of this discussion. In the same vein, I enjoyed reading the research released today by our colleague João Carlos Orquiza as a Preprint [1]. I, in particular, loved the well-inspired statement, the author has put as final consideration: "In a universe ruled by the second law of thermodynamics, entropy stands as an unyielding force, representing the inherent drift towards disorder. In contrast, life, through free energy, defies this tendency, striving to maintain order and complexity. Human energy, an extension of this free energy, has become fundamental in the operations of contemporary societies". This should appeal for a "Third Principle for Free-Energy-Dynamics.Preprint The Diversion of Human Energy: How Labor Became a Commodity ...
A Remarkable Paper On The Conscientiousness Paradox "Chen, S. X., Lam, B. C. P., Buchtel, E. E., & Bond, M. H. (2014). The conscientiousness paradox: Cultural mindset shapes competence perception. European Journal of Personality, 28(5), 425–436. Escerpt "Studies comparing personality across cultures have found inconsistencies between self‐reports and measures of national character or behavior, especially on evaluative traits such as Conscientiousness. We demonstrate that self‐perceptions and other‐perceptions of personality vary with cultural mindset, thereby accounting for some of this inconsistency. ... results converge to show that self‐perceptions and self‐presentations change to fit the social contexts shaped by language and culture"
Dear Jamel - Again, bravo! So glad you exposed the real nature and value of paradoxii [sic]. I we should consider that, likewise, for exactly the same reasons and benefits, anomalies are equally valuable for any conscientious (real) scientist. However, as the studies and the paper by Chen (et al) show, systemic corruption in a culture of cowardice trumps conscientiousness (with 'situational ethics' & moral relativism, i.e., immoral amorality). So, the world rots with normalized intellectual dis-honesty, ethical dysintegrity, shameless promotion of neoPtolemaic dogma, absurdity, and lies passed off as settled scientific facts (for profit & media-star status). In other words, in a post-Truth Age of Showbiz, pop-scientism keeps generating ever more ridiculous conjectures (excuses) for ever more anomalies (that prove the basis of Standard Model theory woefully inadequate and, in some instances, utterly wrong). So, famous pop-star hucksters sell more absurdities, lies, and ads to ever more bamboozled suckers, deluged in tsunamis of lies and nonsense, daily & nightly.
$
Of course, all that 'works' for academia, because the salaries, benefits, tenure, and reputations of the new Old Guard mandarins of the ivory silos (and the administrators) depend on their support of the neoPtolemaic status quo (for profit). What could be worse? Ethical change-makers with better values (and theorems) are so overwhelmed and under-funded and/or under-appreciated that we feel compelled to simply focus on our work and telling our part of the truth. Sadly, that is not good enough to rescue civilization (and us) from itself (us) before it (civilization) becomes incurable ecocidal dystopia-for-fun-and-profit. Preventing our self-extinction (etc.) requires an alliance and mass-collaboration as if humanity is being attacked by a genocidal army of extra-terrestrial invaders.
$
Of course, clearly, billions of normally corrupted egos* are virtually equivalent to an invading horde of monsters. However, if I am wrong about any of the above, I will be very happy to be corrected. So, if possible, feel free to do so (in detail, point by point, error by error), please, ASAP. Thanks ~ M
/
* For more detail, see my preprint, "Trump, Hitler, Freud, and Monstrosity"
Thank you Dear Michael Lucas Monterey for your well-inspired thoughts and for the related paper you provided. I will take the time to read, looking forward to having some exchanges on the topic. Speaking of Conscientiousness, it is IMO, endowed with "Historicity" according to Hegel's Idea, which, to not oppose the second principle as formalized by Khasgiwala, has to be fundamentally irreversible". See this Fascinating Paper available on: https://osf.io/hm5qe/download "Entropy: First as Chaos then as Order", Abstract: This article presents a reformulation to the concept of Entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Research shows that the second law of Thermodynamics is misunderstood, by changing the Law and redefining Entropy, the improved statement of the law is the fundamental law that drives our Universe, following Hegel’s oeuvre.
On Energy Paradoxes. Gerard Reid (2020) stated about Energy: "The choices and approaches... are governed by the six following paradoxes...: 1. The Utility Paradox; 2. The Market Efficiency Paradox; 3. Jevons Paradox; 4. The NIMBY Paradox 5. The Renewable Energy Paradox 6. The Philosophy Paradox. On the other hand, Adam Szymański (2020) showed that the Levelized Cost Of Energy (LCOE) definition is incorrect as it leads to an Economic Paradox.
Gerard Reid (2020) The Six Energy Paradoxes that slow the sector’s progress. Available on: https://energypost.eu/the-six-energy-paradoxes-that-slow-the-sectors-progress/
Szymański, A. (2020). Levelized cost of energy definition–An economic paradox. The Electricity Journal, 33(7). To be requested on:
Article Levelized cost of energy definition – An economic paradox
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes
On Brain Drain Paradox. Developing countries, at the cost of immense sacrifices and great difficulties, are struggling to implement Public Healthcare and Education believing that Human Progress is a synonym for Health, Knowledge, and Education, The Reverse is True. What is Paradoxical is that Poor Developing Countries are transferring Knowledge to Developed Rich Countries, without being able to achieve Local Progress. Indeed, far from any mafia activity, the developed countries, in Europe, in Canada, and in the Americas, blithely devote themselves to setting up policies of "Selected Immigration" where they recruit, with a vengeance, and without any scruple, from poor countries Doctors, Researchers, Computer scientists, Talents...
This South/North Knowledge counter-sens transfer is not a recent phenomenon and figures, at high increase, are alarming [1]: In Africa, the countries most affected by the brain drain in the early 2000s are low-income countries: Cape Verde (67% of qualified personnel), Gambia (63%), Mauritius ( 56%), Morocco (17%), Tunisia (9.6%), Egypt (4.6%), Burkina Faso (2.6%). The islands of Cape Verde, Samoa, Gambia, and Somalia have seen more than half of their executives leave for rich countries in recent years. (Own translation)
[1] Jeune Afrique n°2340, from November 13 to 19, 2005, p96 (In French)
On Unconventional Natural Gas Paradox. The paper by Gene L. Theodori from the Sam Houston State University "Paradoxical Perceptions of Problems Associated with Unconventional Natural Gas Development, Journal of Rural Social Sciences, 24(3), 2009" is in this regard remarkably insightful. Excerpt "..In essence, the results of this study reveal a paradox among the general population. On one hand, it appears the members of the general public typically dislike the potentially problematic social and/or environmental issues perceived to accompany natural gas development. However, on the other hand, local citizens generally appreciate and view favorably the economic and/or service-related benefits that normally accompany such development..."
The paper is available at:
https://egrove.olemiss.edu/ jrss/vol24/iss3/7
See also
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes/4
https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_energy_pattern_and_the_perspective_of_large-scale_exploitation_of_shale_gas_What_alternative_solutions
Dear Jamel Chahed , I have taken part in three research question on PARADOX: Water paradox, the paradox of Value (Diamond/Water) and Math... There are many fine contribution and resources.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/In_which_way_does_drinking_water_influence_status_development_considering_the_water_paradox
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What-makes-life-very-important-diamond-or-water
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do-you-like-paradoxes-If-so-can-you-solve-the-following-one
Thank you Dear Ljubomir Jacić for these pieces of information and for the related links. I will manage to go there and I invite readers to do so.
In the same vein as my previous post on Brain Drain Paradox: Sri Lanka hit by record brain drain, but some stay to rebuild. One can only pay tribute to these doctors and entrepreneurs who remain faithful to the country. "As Sri Lanka sank deep into its economic crisis last year, dentist Lakmal Kulasekara watched many in his field pack up and leave. No matter how bad things became, he was determined to stay. "My education was paid for by the people of Sri Lanka, including poor people, and if I don't pay it back, I am not a man," he said of the nation's free public education system. "Yes, we have a problem in our country. But just because of the problem, if everyone chooses to leave, then what will happen?""
Excerpts from: https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Sri-Lanka-crisis/Sri-Lanka-hit-by-record-brain-drain-but-some-stay-to-rebuild
Released 1 month ago
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience
On The Liar Paradox. "Thomas Bradwardine was born shortly before the start of the fourteenth century. While at Merton College in Oxford in the 1320s, .., who first came upon something of value concerning the insoluble.... The insoluble are paradoxes or antinomies of language, perhaps most famously expressed in the Liar Paradox: ‘What I am saying is false’... The problem with a proposition like ‘What I am saying is false’, is that we appear to be able to show not only that it is false, but that, in consequence, it is true as well. Briefly, if it were true that what I was saying was false, it would be false and so not true, hence (assuming it must be either true or false) it is false. But if what I was saying was false, then what I said was true, as well as false. If we think to avoid this contradiction by suggesting that what I said was neither true nor false, the revenge problem hits back through the alternative paradox: ‘What I am saying is not true’.7 The same reductio proof shows that it is not true. The problem for truth-value gap theorists is to explain why I did not speak truly when I anticipated them and said: ‘What I am saying is not true’...." Excerpts from the introduction of the paper (around 1.1k citations)
Read, S. (2002). The liar paradox from John Buridan back to Thomas Bradwardine. Vivarium, 40(2), 189-218.. Available on: https://www.academia.edu/download/8410440/read-bradwardine.pdf
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience/9
On scientific conjecture and falsification: A "fact", to be qualified as "scientific fact" must come under "universal knowledge", which even if it does not represent the "true truth" has not yet been falsified. Einstein remarks that “As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.” Since ancient times scientists have tried to express physical reality using mathematical formulations. Science teaches us that the physical reality is uncertain, because by definition falsifiable, the mathematical formulations, which are supposed to express them, are just as much. Hence the first part of Einstein's quote "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain"
The fact remains that, apart from the physical reality that the mathematical formulations are supposed to represent, mathematics has nothing uncertain. Indeed, if mathematics is abstracted from any interpretation relating to falsifiable physical reality, they become certain. this is what I understand from the second part of the quote "and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality"
The Paradox of High-Skilled Migration: Is the Brain Drain the Best Antidote to the Brain Drain?
This thesis seeks to demonstrate that some of the major determinants of the brain drain, specifically the absence or weakness of institutions crucial to development, poor macroeconomic policy, and the lack of social capital, have been and can best be mitigated by the brain drain itself—by the out-migration of high-skilled workers. High-skilled diaspora who remain abroad influence public policy in their home countries and provide business connections to migrants who return to start businesses; but the biggest impact seems to be produced by migrant information technology workers...
https://scholarworks.brandeis.edu/esploro/outputs/graduate/The-Paradox-of-High-Skilled-Migration-Is-the-Brain-Drain-the-Best-Antidote-to-the-Brain-Drain/9923880289401921
Dear Jamel Chahed , great discussion on twin(s) paradox is ongoing.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_is_a_debate_about_twins_paradox_so_bad
Youth Migration: The Paradox of Brain Drain
The fact is that the governments of developing countries should be blamed for the recurring brain drain from south to north because they have failed to do the right things for many years now.
The condition in most developing countries does not give room for young professionals to realise their dreams because of several limitations the system places on their potentials. A situation where young professionals have little or no say in policies affecting them and how they grow and develop in their career will frustrate them and drive them to seek migration opportunities to where young blood and talent is valued and encouraged...
https://ypard.net/resources/blog/youth-migration-the-paradox-of-brain-drain
On Energy Paradoxes. 1. The Utility Paradox; 2. The Market Efficiency Paradox; 3. Jevons Paradox; 4. The NIMBY Paradox 5. The Renewable Energy Paradox 6. The Philosophy Paradox.
1. The Utility Paradox "Across much of the world, electric utilities find themselves in the crosshairs of change. They have been broken up, put back together again, privatized, separated from the grid, given the grid back; a dizzying mass of measures designed to “improve” the electricity markets. Yet the utilities are in no way motivated to support decreased consumer energy consumption let alone to reduce carbon emissions.
This is what I brand the Utility Paradox. Energy companies that are best positioned to curb energy consumption and improve energy efficiencies are the least incentivized to do just that. In fact, they quite blatantly encourage the opposite because it is good for business. The more oil or electricity sold, the more money flows into their coffers. As long as an energy company’s profitability is tied to the amount of energy sold, we should not expect any significant decreases in energy use". Excerpts from (Gerard Reid, 2020): https://energypost.eu/the-six-energy-paradoxes-that-slow-the-sectors-progress/
On Energy Paradoxes. 1. The Utility Paradox; 2. The Market Efficiency Paradox; 3. Jevons Paradox; 4. The NIMBY Paradox 5. The Renewable Energy Paradox 6. The Philosophy Paradox.
2. The Market Efficiency Paradox. "Market proponents from Adam Smith to Eugena Fama have been explaining for years, even centuries, why the market acts as a good mechanism to utilize resources and why the markets are generally efficient. However, these same proponents have also been very good at pointing out when and why the market does not work correctly. One such situation is when there is a monopoly in place, or when the market is controlled by a small group of players, allowing the “monopolist” to control either price or output to the disadvantage of the consumer. This has been the case with oil for many decades, until the recent huge increases in oil production in North America and Russia reduced the power of OPEC.
Unsurprisingly, in the electricity space there is still not enough competition, meaning customers cannot adequately adjust their demand to changes in the power price. In fact, the system was set up so that the utility adjusts its supply to expected changes in demand. What this means is that large power generators and utilities still have formidable power. That is why we call this the Market Efficiency Paradox".
Excerpts from (Gerard Reid, 2020):
https://energypost.eu/the-six-energy-paradoxes-that-slow-the-sectors-progress/
On Energy Paradoxes. 1. The Utility Paradox; 2. The Market Efficiency Paradox; 3. Jevons Paradox; 4. The NIMBY Paradox 5. The Renewable Energy Paradox 6. The Philosophy Paradox.
3. The Jevons Paradox: "The nineteenth century English economist, William Stanley Jevons, observed that Britain’s consumption of coal had soared after a more cost efficient and cost-effective steam engine came to the market. This in turn increased the adoption of the steam engine in a wide range of industries, leading to a further increase in total coal consumption, despite the fact that the amount of coal required for the individual applications actually fell.
Today the Jevons Paradox, perhaps the most widely known paradox in environmental economics, is better known as the Rebound Effect. It demonstrates how technological progress, which increases energy efficiency, does not necessarily lead to a decrease in energy consumption; rather it actually tends to increase it and that rising consumption can offset the beneficial effects, along with some of the savings.
One of the reasons for this is that efficiency gains are passed onto the consumer through price reductions. Consequently, consumer demand rises further. A good example of this is lighting. While today we may increasingly use low cost energy saving LED lightbulbs, the paradox is that we now have many more light bulbs in our homes and gardens than we did a decade ago.
Excerpts from (Gerard Reid, 2020):
https://energypost.eu/the-six-energy-paradoxes-that-slow-the-sectors-progress/
On Energy Paradoxes. 1. The Utility Paradox; 2. The Market Efficiency Paradox; 3. Jevons Paradox; 4. The NIMBY Paradox 5. The Renewable Energy Paradox 6. The Philosophy Paradox.
4. The “Not In My Backyard,” NIMBY Paradox. Otherwise known as NIMBYism. It is often the case that those who are strong advocates for a particular energy solution, such as renewable energy, suddenly become opponents if there is a suggestion that a corresponding wind turbine or power line may be built near their home. NIMBYism is a major reason why projects are delayed or fail to even make it out of the starting blocks.
Figure Source: See Legend.
Excerpts from (Gerard Reid, 2020):
https://energypost.eu/the-six-energy-paradoxes-that-slow-the-sectors-progress/
On Energy Paradoxes. 1. The Utility Paradox; 2. The Market Efficiency Paradox; 3. Jevons Paradox; 4. The NIMBY Paradox 5. The Renewable Energy Paradox 6. The Philosophy Paradox.
5. The Renewable Energy Paradox is the fact that even though solar and wind may be the cheapest form of electricity in many parts of the world, these renewables may not be the most valuable. The issue with wind and solar is that they are both intermittent which means that other forms of generation or energy storage are required in order to 24/7 meet our energy needs. We are also seeing wholesale power prices collapse during sunny or windy periods. We are even seeing prices go negative.
So even if the Levelized cost of wind or solar energy is below the average wholesale power price and other forms of generation, where is the incentive to build out new renewable capacity when the capture price on the market is going to be very low?
In contrast, the most valuable (and less renewable) sources of power are flexible, such as gas reciprocal engines, with the ability to respond to changes in both the weather and demand.
Figure Source: See Legend.
Excerpts from (Gerard Reid, 2020):
https://energypost.eu/the-six-energy-paradoxes-that-slow-the-sectors-progress/
On Energy Paradoxes. 1. The Utility Paradox; 2. The Market Efficiency Paradox; 3. Jevons Paradox; 4. The NIMBY Paradox 5. The Renewable Energy Paradox 6. The Philosophy Paradox.
6. The Philosophy Paradox. The United States is one of the most complicated energy markets in the world because essentially each state has its own policy. Some states still have fully regulated utilities in place; others have liberalised markets with competition at both the retail and power generation levels with the key focus on keeping power prices low for the consumer. In Europe, it is somewhat easier as all European markets have liberalised markets meaning that there is competition throughout all parts of the value chain and across borders.
Why do we have such radical differences? We have them because of philosophy differences. Case in point is how the US supports renewable buildout. It does this through tax credits which in Europe are considered not equitable. In contrast, in Europe the support mechanisms used for building out renewables are put onto the energy costs the consumer pays. In the US the consumer would not tolerate higher energy prices.
Perhaps the greatest paradox of all is the need to find appropriate solutions for dealing with ongoing environmental damage across the world, which is even more important and challenging, as if we don’t, then a move to a cleaner, low carbon world becomes less and less attainable.
Excerpts from (Gerard Reid, 2020):
https://energypost.eu/the-six-energy-paradoxes-that-slow-the-sectors-progress/
On the Temporal Paradox: This paradox is also known as the "Grandfather Paradox". The latter gets its name from a very simple question: "What would happen to you if you went back in time and killed your grandfather before he had offspring?" (Parodied by Futurama; see example in Stable Time Loop)
More generally, this means doing something that makes your time travel impossible or unnecessary. For instance, if success in the time travel endeavor means that the condition you set out to change never happens, then you won't ever have had any reason to come back and try to change it. Thus, without your intervention, it will happen after all, meaning you then must go back to change it, meaning you don't have to, meaning you have to, and so on, ad infinitum.
Most cases of Mental Time Travel sidestep or ignore the grandfather paradox. See more on:
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TemporalParadox
The Chronology Protection Conjecture. The chronology protection conjecture is a conjecture first proposed by Stephen Hawking which hypothesizes that the laws of physics are such as to prevent time travel on all but submicroscopic scales. The permissibility of time travel is represented mathematically by the existence of closed timelike curves in some exact solutions to General Relativity. The chronology protection conjecture should be distinguished from chronological censorship under which every closed timelike curve passes through an event horizon, which might prevent an observer from detecting the causal violation (also known as chronology violation).
For detailed: See the essential paper of S. W. Hawking :
Chronology protection conjecture, Phys. Rev. D 46, 603 – Published 15 July 1992
Adaptation and Resilience to Climate Change: "Temporal Paradox" versus "Chronology Protection Conjecture". At what time scale should we consider the priority measures to be implemented in order to ensure the protection of natural resources and guarantee their sustainability? (i) direct and urgent measures associated with the modes of exploitation and development of resources ; (ii) indirect and very long-term implications of Climate Change on the potential of resources. Has everything been done on (i) to decree that it is urgent to tackle (ii) head-on with all its uncertainties, particularly with regard to time scales involved, incompatible with the scales of concrete actions?
See:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Adaptation_and_Resilience_to_Climate_Change_Temporal_Paradox_versus_Chronology_Protection_Conjecture/3
The black hole information paradox
In a landmark series of calculations, physicists have proved that black holes can shed information, which seems impossible by definition. The work appears to resolve a paradox that Stephen Hawking first described five decades ago...
https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-most-famous-paradox-in-physics-nears-its-end-20201029/
Since the statement of the ontological argument by Descartes, the discussion around the demonstration of the existence of God has not dried up and we can cite the recent book by Girard (2022) [1]. But, beyond this discussion, proving God's existence would be somewhat paradoxical: With the definitive proof of God's existence, there would be no more room for "Beliefs" and therefore for "Religions" and for "Freedom of Conscience". I dare to continue to believe that it is impossible to demonstrate the existence of God, if only for Humanity to continue, each in its own way, to believe in God, or not for that matter.
Girard, L. (2022). L'argument ontologique chez Saint Anselme et chez Hegel (Vol. 60). Brill. Large parts of the book are readable on:
https://books.google.tn/books?hl=fr&lr=&id=2UB0EAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=descartes+l%27argument+ontologique&ots=t3lnNk-WEr&sig=rHzrzRowUqrT9D7tS7z5ZDRKJNA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=descartes%20l'argument%20ontologique&f=false
See also
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience
I am just posting this reply on another thread: "**** wrote, "he's detailed the complete vacuum that is the IPCC's version of 'climate science' for us". It was stated that "Consensus is not Science", otherwise, we fall into consensus and dogmatism whatever side it takes. In the same way, we should state that "Scientific Debates are not to give rise to Science Versions, otherwise, we face a Paradox: many Subjective Sciences while Science is Universal and Scientific Matter is of Objective Nature
I am just posting this replay on another discussion thread "@**** Thank you for your comment. You Wrote, "There can never be a consensus on what is true". That's right! What about scientific open questions that are under debate? Two solutions are possible, both paradoxical: 1. Decreet a consensus on issues for which Science does not yet hold the "Truth" 2. opt for "non-unique versions" of Science.
History teaches us that dogmatism, consensus, and conventionalism in Science open questions are nothing but "inquisition". Among the numberless examples, one may cite that of Galileo Galileo and the Church (see [1]) " ..In late 1632, in the aftermath of the publication of the Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, Galileo was ordered to appear in Rome to be examined by the Congregation of the Holy Office; i.e., the Inquisition...."He was declared guilty of “vehement suspicion of heresy,” and made to recite and sign a formal abjuration: I have been judged vehemently suspect of heresy, that is, of having held and believed that the sun in the center of the universe and immoveable, and that the Earth is not at the center of same, and that it does move. Wishing however, to remove from the minds of your Eminences and all faithful Christians this vehement suspicion reasonably conceived against me, I abjure with a sincere heart and unfeigned faith, I curse and detest the said errors and heresies, and generally all and every error, heresy, and sect contrary to the Holy Catholic Church. (Quoted in Shea and Artigas 2003, 194)"
Tradition, but not historical fact, holds that, after abjuring, Galileo mumbled, “Eppur si muove (and yet it moves).” He was sentenced to “formal imprisonment at the pleasure of the Inquisition,” but this was commuted to house arrest, first in the residence of the Archbishop of Siena, and then, from December 1633, at his villa in Arcetri. When he later finished his last book, the Two New Sciences (which does not mention Copernicanism at all), it had to be printed in Holland, and Galileo professed amazement at how it could have been published..."
[1] Machamer, P., & Miller, D. M. (2005). Galileo Galilei, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available on:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/galileo/?utm_campaign=TWA%20Newsletter%20for%20February%2015%2C%202016&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua&utm_content=The%20Writer%27s%20Almanac%20for%20February%2015%2C%202016&elqTrackId=47596999dfe244aca85f21f4c10db55e
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_and_history_serving_political_and_ideological_totalitarianism
The paradox of electric cars. Excerpts from: https://www.smartgreenpost.com/2021/10/06/the-paradox-of-electric-cars/ ".. one of the buzzwords if you will, is electric cars. This could be a good start, or just a way of hiding behind a finger, clearing one’s conscience, and perhaps saying that one has done everything possible to avoid the climate disaster we are heading for. For two reasons.
The first is linked to a simple numerical statement: if you want to talk about a plan to tackle climate change, you have to take into account all human activities that cause greenhouse gas emissions: according to the latest estimates (IPCC data: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data) focusing on cars means, at best, acting on about 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Very, very little. At the top of the list, though decidedly against our perception, are agriculture, livestock farming and industrial power generation.
The second reason is linked to the failure to address the choice of electric cars with an integrated and supply chain strategy: it is true that these cars are powered by electricity, but most of this energy is still derived from power plants that are (still) based on coal"....
The graph above represents an outstanding illustration of the CO2 emission Paradox. It is of remarkable relevance and clarity for these reasons.
1. CO2 emissions are broken down into specific per capita values, which immediately shows that per capita CO2 footprints are much larger in developed and/or rich countries than in developing and/or poor countries. This raises the fundamental question relating to which categories of countries should be held responsible for the effects of global warming.
2. The countries or regions are broken down in population so that the relative CO2 emissions are only the areas of the rectangles calculated as the product (Population X emissions per capita) which gives the areas of the colored rectangles.
3. The surface of the rectangle China (in blue) is the highest: it is the emissions of China that weigh the most on the planet even if the emissions per Chinese inhabitant represent only half of the emissions of a North American or an Arabic- Saudi.
4. The poorest countries (India & all countries in Africa, for example) have very low levels of emissions per inhabitant but relatively large populations. There are two solutions: (i) Reduce populations, (ii) reduce emissions. Solution (i) is morally unacceptable, and solution (ii) is unfair unless all the world population would have the same average per per capita emission.
Source graph: See Legend
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Depopulation_versus_Overpopulation_Demographic_Growth_Transition_and_Decline_What_else_Demographic_Crisis_or_even_Demographic_Crash/1
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes
Dear Jamel Chahed , where is the graph you are reffering to?
"The graph above represents an outstanding illustration of the CO2 emission Paradox. It is of remarkable relevance and clarity for these reasons."
Thank you Dear Ljubomir Jacić for your warning. My bad! I forgot to attach it. Done now. Warm Regards, Jamel
"Shale Gas Revolution" or "Foretold Planetary Disaster"? The Paradox with the shale gas revolution (to be understood as accessible at relatively low costs) is related to the immense reserves of shale gas, everywhere in the world, which are much higher than conventional resources. See for example [1] where one may read "If unconventional oil resources (oil shale, oil sands, extra heavy oil, and natural bitumen) are accounted for, the global oil reserves quadruple current conventional reserves".
Now as the "Shale Gas Revolution" is open and the Shale Gas Rush is announced, policy-making should consider real existent factors related to expected injuries to the climate, water resources, and populations: a "Foretold Planetary Disaster". (See the Map)
[1] https://css.umich.edu/publications/factsheets/energy/unconventional-fossil-fuels-factsheet
Map: Global Shale Gas Reserves, source: A.R.I. (2013) & EIA via Reuters
A.R.I. 2013. EIA/ARI World Shale Gas and Shale Oil Resource Assessment Arlington, USA: Advanced Resources International, Inc
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes
https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_energy_pattern_and_the_perspective_of_large-scale_exploitation_of_shale_gas_What_alternative_solutions
On Obesity Paradox. "The term ‘‘obesity paradox’’ refers to the observations that, although obesity is a major risk factor in the development of cardiovascular and peripheral vascular disease, when acute cardiovascular decompensation occurs, for example, in myocardial infarction or congestive heart failure, obese patients may have a survival benefit. In addition, it has been suggested that obese patients tend to fare better after certain surgical procedures, such as coronary artery bypass surgery. Moreover, it appears that obese men with chronic hypertensive heart disease live longer than men of normal weight. Major hypotheses for this apparent survival effect include: 1. Obese patients may have better and more aggressive medical care and enhanced observation than normal-weight populations. 2. Obese patients tend to be on more, and perhaps better, cardioprotective medical therapy than other groups of patients. 3. Obese patients tend to be younger at the time of the acute cardiovascular event, which may confer an age benefit. 4. Some experts claim the sample size of the existing studies on obesity is still too small or too indecisive to make such determinations. 5. Other investigators suggest the way we measure obesity is unsatisfactory and may explain some of the paradoxic results seen. Specifically, using gross weight and the body mass index (BMI) may not accurately reflect the risk of complications in all obese individuals..." Excerpt from:
Amundson, D. E., Djurkovic, S., & Matwiyoff, G. N. (2010). The obesity paradox. Critical care clinics, 26(4), 583-596.
Available on:
https://www.academia.edu/download/94914836/j.ccc.2010.06.00420221127-1-1sx5k4n.pdf
On Brown Paradox. It is commonly understood that among the intermetallic phases used for permanent magnets, practically none can fully realize its potential based on the intrinsic magnetic properties. The paper [1] discusses "different reasons leading to this limitation, known as the Brown paradox, and proposes some possible ways of overcoming it"
[1] Skokov, K. P., & Gutfleisch, O. (2018). Heavy rare earth free, free rare earth and rare earth free magnets-Vision and reality. Scripta Materialia, 154, 289-294.
On the Invasion Paradox. "Invasions of alien species present ecologists and evolutionary biologists with an interesting paradox: why are exotic organisms, which come from distant locations and have had no opportunity to adapt to the local environment, able to become established and sometimes to displace native species, which have had a long period of history in which to adapt to local conditions? Another version of this paradox is the insular taxon cycle, in which successive waves of newly colonizing species from distant origins are postulated ultimately to replace previous populations." This is how the Invasion Paradox is defined in the well-cited paper by Sax, D. F., & Brown, J. H. 2000. "The paradox of invasion. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 9(5), 363-371." Available on: https://www.brown.edu/Research/Sax_Research_Lab/Documents/PDFs/Paradox%20of%20invastion_SAX2000.pdf
The remarkable finding of this research is to highlight processes that provide contexts in which patterns of invasion are not paradoxical, but instead, expected
The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Paradox
Organizations are rife with paradoxes. Contradictory and interdependent tensions emerge from and within multiple levels, including individual interactions, group dynamics, organizational strategies, and the broader institutional context. Examples abound such as those between stability and change, empowerment and alienation, flexibility and control, diversity and inclusion, exploration and exploitation, social and commercial, competition and collaboration, learning and performing...
In the last thirty years, the depth and breadth of paradox studies in organizational theory has grown exponentially, surfacing new insights and applications while challenging foundational ideas, and raising questions around definitions, overlapping lenses, and varied research and managerial approaches. In this book, renowned organizational scholars draw from diverse lenses, theories, and empirics to depict paradox within organizational studies and provide a range of lenses and tools with which to understand and conduct research into such phenomena...
https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/34627
CHAPTER
Introduction: The Paradoxes of Paradox
While dating back to ancient philosophy, only recently have organizational scholars started to explore paradox. Drawing from insights across disciplines including psychoanalysis and macro sociology, some provocative theorists urged researchers to take seriously the study of paradox and deepen understanding of plurality, tensions, and contradictions...
Reflecting on the state of paradox studies, the editors became aware that they were surfacing the paradoxes of paradoxes—contradictory, yet interdependent perspectives on paradox enveloped in the core theoretical assumptions...
https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/34627/chapter-abstract/295018121?redirectedFrom=fulltext
I am posting the following reply on another thread: @*** wrote "I'm afraid I don't know how to post graphics, hope that Jamal Chahed can help you as he does these" Thank you for your questioning. Yes, I would like to explain it using the following French quote: “A good croquis is better than a long speech” (Own translation: "Un bon croquis vaut mieux qu'un long discours"). This quote from Napoleon Bonaparte is often used in all fields, particularly in education, because illustration is a form of condensation, formatting, and highlighting of ideas, information, and data.
This is one of the philosophical-psychological problems of obvious consequences on human behavior: Do people attach more importance to action than to inaction? Or, do they regret their errors of commission more than their errors of omission? This is analogous to the "three doors" or "Monty Hall" problem that leads to a Paradoxical situation. This problem was addressed in a famous paper by Gilovich, T., Medvec, V. H., & Chen, S. (1995) "Commission, Omission, and Dissonance Reduction: Coping with Regret in the "Monty Hall" Problem. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(2), 182-190.” In their research, the authors conducted experiments on people subjected to choices: "Subjects initially selected one box from a group of three, only one of which contained a "grand" prize. After the experimenter opened one of the two unchosen boxes and revealed a modest prize, subjects were asked to decide whether to stay with their initial selection or trade it in for the other unopened box. One version of the correct solution is as follows: A person's chances of initially picking the box with the grand prize are 33%. Because the person already knows that the "host" can only open a box containing a modest prize (uncovering the grand prize would eliminate the dilemma), nothing of significance to the subjects' task is learned when the contents of one of the boxes are revealed. Because nothing significant has changed, the chances that the person's original box contains the grand prize are still 33%, and therefore the person should switch to the other box, which has a 67% chance of having the grand prize." This explanation reveals a paradoxical outcome.
The "true cost" of Rare Earth Elements (REEs) is an economic paradox. "Clean energy demand for critical minerals set to soar. Rare earths play an important role in emerging clean technologies, because they are critical in the production of electric vehicles, wind turbines and other clean energy applications. But their production contributes to environmental pollution." Excerpt from the conclusion of the paper:
Pangsy-Kania, S., & Flouros, F. (2022). Rare Earth Elements as A Huge Economic Challenge For The Future of Green Economy. In 40th International Business Information Management Association Conference. International Business Information Management Association. Available on:
Article Rare Earth Elements as A Huge Economic Challenge For The Fut...
When discussing the problem of contamination, associated with the production and use of REEs, the authors argue that the question of the "true cost" of REEs, is an economic paradox that poses a great challenge to the future, as REEs are the key to the Green Economy.
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Electric_Vehicle_Battery_and_Rare_Earths_Technological_Economic_and_Environmental_Issues
Dear Jamel Chahed , this are some research questions on paradoxes that I have taken part in.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/In_which_way_does_drinking_water_influence_status_development_considering_the_water_paradox
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What-makes-life-very-important-diamond-or-water
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do-you-like-paradoxes-If-so-can-you-solve-the-following-one
Interesting paper on The Jevons paradox by Freire-González, J., & Puig-Ventosa, I. (2015). Energy efficiency policies and the Jevons paradox. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, 5(1), 69-79.
Abstract: "Energy and climate change policies are often strongly based on achieving energy efficiency targets. These policies are supposed to reduce energy consumption and consequently, associated pollutant emissions, but the Jevons paradox may pose a question mark on this assumption. Rebound effects produced by reduction in costs of energy services have not been generally taken into account in policy making (there is only one known exception). Although there is no scientific consensus about its magnitude, there is consensus about its existence and in acknowledging the harmful effects it has on achieving energy or climate targets. It is necessary to address the rebound effect through behavioral, legal and economic instruments. This paper analyzes the main available policies to minimize the rebound effect in households with special emphasis on economic instruments and, particularly, on energy taxation"
Available on:
https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/361368
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes/6
Somewhat Paradoxical: The suicide rate generally appears to decline during the time of war. This is what this old paper [1] by Rojcewicz, 1971, "War and Suicide" has argued; trying to analyze the reasons. The author wrote "The traditional psychodynamic explanation that this decrease results from the legitimization of outward aggression is questioned. World War II evidence from both occupied and neutral countries, together with fluctuations of the suicide rates among the Scandinavian countries, are better understood as reflecting the social conditions of wartime, rather than the presence of actual fighting. These data, and others, point to the hypothesis that the decreased suicide rate during wartime is tied to the greater social integration–increased patriotism, ease of promotions, greater sense of purpose, and so forth–resulting from a state of war."
[1] Rojcewicz Jr, S. J. (1971). War and suicide. Suicide and Life‐Threatening Behavior, 1(1), 46-54.
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/War_Peace/18
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Could_Suicide_be_Rational_and_Morally_Defensible/14
Since the statement of the ontological argument by Descartes, the discussion around the demonstration of the existence of God has not dried up and we can cite the recent book by Girard (2022) [1]. But, beyond this discussion, proving God's existence would be somewhat paradoxical: With the definitive proof of God's existence, there would be no more room for "Beliefs" and therefore for "Religions" and for "Freedom of Conscience". I dare to continue to believe that it is impossible to demonstrate the existence of God, if only for Humanity to continue, each in its own way, to believe in God, or not for that matter.
Girard, L. (2022). L'argument ontologique chez Saint Anselme et chez Hegel (Vol. 60). Brill. Large parts of the book are readable on:
https://books.google.tn/books?hl=fr&lr=&id=2UB0EAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=descartes+l%27argument+ontologique&ots=t3lnNk-WEr&sig=rHzrzRowUqrT9D7tS7z5ZDRKJNA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=descartes%20l'argument%20ontologique&f=false
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience
Jevons Paradox and Sustainability. Jevons Paradox shows how technological progress, which increases energy efficiency, does not necessarily lead to a decrease in energy consumption; rather it actually tends to increase it. The principle of "Sustainability" can be invoked to counteract "Jevons' paradox" effect. Indeed it is logical to consider that the loss of "sustainability" has an environmental cost, the price that should be paid to keep the same level of "sustainability". Entering this cost into the equation, you increase the price of the commodity and decrease its consumption, which is needed for unsure "Sustainability". A sustainable balance is thus established where the economic cost of environmental impacts prevents Jevons' paradox from occurring and corrects it. This applies to all kinds of goods and services commodities.
Thanks again Jamel. Indeed, it is paradoxical to insist on policy & acts intended to mitigate symptoms without eliminating the causal factors that maintain our cultural illness: malignant financialist-consumer society and its anti-bioethical economic system.
At a performance level, paradoxes were found between environmental sustainability (full supply chain traceability, strong accountability for the supply chain), social sustainability (smallholder inclusion, community development) and economic sustainability (high profit rates, competitiveness).
While these paradoxes can also exist in rule-based private governance, they are more likely to be identified and discussed during the rule formulation process. Though this may not remove them completely, it offers a clearer path for companies to follow. Without this level of formal governance, some voices will be under-represented and unheard until the point of implementation...
https://dobetter.esade.edu/en/palm-oil-companies-zero-deforestation-sustainability-paradoxes#
US legislation on renewable energy and federal taxes exclude hydroelectricity from the renewable energy packages. This paradox is explained in the article by Tarlock, D. (2012) "Hydro law and the future of hydroelectric power generation in the United States. Vand. L. Rev., 65, 1723", where one may read: "...The EIA estimates that the United States' hydro-generating capacity is projected to grow at a rate of only 0.1% per year. Initially, this conclusion is paradoxical because the International Energy Agency ("IEA") estimates that the United States has tapped only 16% of its potential hydro production. The conventional answer to this paradox is that hydro is nonetheless a developed technology, has high environmental costs compared to wind and solar energy, and is both a climate change adaptation option and an energy source stressed by climate change. Therefore, the prevailing consensus is that there is no need to provide substantial incentives for its expansion, like those available for wind, solar, biomass, and other alternative renewables.
To borrow from equilibrium ecology, hydro has reached its climax stage.' This assumption is reflected in state renewable portfolio standards legislation and federal tax incentives, which exclude conventional hydro from definitions of renewable energy...."
The paper is available on:
https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1363&context=vlr
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes
The China wind paradox. China is the world leader in wind power installed capacity. However, wind curtailment – i.e., when the power grid frequently interrupts the power connection of installed wind capacity – has become an increasingly serious problem. Despite wind power Companies are continuing to invest. The study [1] by Zhu et al 2019, "The China wind paradox" shows "that there is a lot to learn from applying traditional market theories to markets in transition such as the Chinese power sector". It also provides "strong implications for wind power policy-making and solutions for the wind curtailment issue".
[1] Zhu, M., Qi, Y., Belis, D., Lu, J., & Kerremans, B. (2019). The China wind paradox: the role of state-owned enterprises in wind power investment versus wind curtailment. Energy Policy, 127, 200-212. Available on:
https://lirias.kuleuven.be/retrieve/525096
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes/7
Other places, other Wind Energy Paradoxes. The Province of Ontario is pursuing an ambitious Wind Energy Program while conflicts surrounding technology development continue to grow. The paper by Songsore, E., & Buzzelli, M. 2015, "Wind energy development in Ontario: A process/product paradox. Local Environment, 20(12), 1428-1451" shed insights into the situation. Paper Available on:
https://www.academia.edu/download/50713741/Emmanuel_Songsore-_Wind_energy_development_in_Ontario_a_process_product_paradox.pdf
On Immigration Paradox. In the study by Dr. Korok Ray "Confronting the Immigration Paradox. The Center for Growth and Opportunity, 2023", the author tackles the economic aspect of immigration in the US. "According to Ray, the United States could sell visas to immigrants for $80,000 and collect between $49 billion and $670 billion in revenue from the visa sales. The proceeds could then be used to offset any societal costs associated with increased immigration". Article available on:
https://www.thecgo.org/research/confronting-the-immigration-paradox/
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Depopulation_versus_Overpopulation_Demographic_Growth_Transition_and_Decline_What_else_Demographic_Crisis_or_even_Demographic_Crash
"Pascal's Wager purports to give a good reason to believe in God. The basic idea of the Wager, put simply, is that if God exists, then the utility of belief is infinite; while if God does not exist, the loss for both the believer and the unbeliever is but finite. Since the expected utility of belief is greater than nonbelief, one has a good reason to try to bring about theistic belief. The notion of an infinite utility plays a prominent role in the Wager; without that notion the Wager is clearly unsound. Not surprisingly, the notion of an infinite utility has also been the object of philosophical suspicion" From:
Jordan, J. (1994). The st. Petersburg paradox and Pascal's Wager. Philosophia, 23(1-4), 207-222.
Available on:
https://www.academia.edu/download/79799328/bf0237985620220128-10918-1nbon9x.pdf
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience/18
On the St. Petersburg paradox. In line with the previous post: "One particularly interesting objection to the Wager's use of the notion of an infinite utility is built upon the St. Petersburg paradox. This paradox was formulated by Nicholas Bernoulli in correspondence with Pierre Montmort in the early 18th century; and was the occasion for the formulation of that famous doctrine of economics, the law of declining marginal value. 3 In broad terms the paradox holds that it is not true that as long as the expected utility of an act A is infinite, reason demands that one do A at any finite cost. From this it's concluded that the notion of an infinite expected utility (and by extension, the notion of an infinite utility) is problematic and best discarded. Given this conclusion, Pascal's famous Wager seems doomed to failure from the start." From:
Jordan, J. (1994). The st. Petersburg paradox and Pascal's Wager. Philosophia, 23(1-4), 207-222.
Available on:
https://www.academia.edu/download/79799328/bf0237985620220128-10918-1nbon9x.pdf
The US legislation on renewable energy and federal taxes exclude hydroelectricity from the renewable energy packages. This paradox is explained in the article by Tarlock, D. (2012) "Hydro law and the future of hydroelectric power generation in the United States. Vand. L. Rev., 65, 1723", where one may read: "...The EIA estimates that the United States' hydro-generating capacity is projected to grow at a rate of only 0.1% per year. Initially, this conclusion is paradoxical because the International Energy Agency ("IEA") estimates that the United States has tapped only 16% of its potential hydro production. The conventional answer to this paradox is that hydro is nonetheless a developed technology, has high environmental costs compared to wind and solar energy, and is both a climate change adaptation option and an energy source stressed by climate change. Therefore, the prevailing consensus is that there is no need to provide substantial incentives for its expansion, like those available for wind, solar, biomass, and other alternative renewables.
To borrow from equilibrium ecology, hydro has reached its climax stage.' This assumption is reflected in state renewable portfolio standards legislation and federal tax incentives, which exclude conventional hydro from definitions of renewable energy...."
The paper is available on:
https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1363&context=vlr
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes
Black Women and the Suicide Paradox. Article [1] by Spates et al. (2017) identifies and analyzes the factors perceived as protective against suicide among black women. The results are edifying: they show that black women, faced with long-standing oppression, seem to have developed a strong sense of survival so that, their level of responsibility and commitment to others often results in a rejection of suicide. A real pleasure to read
[1] Spates, K., & Slatton, B. C. (2017). I’ve Got My Family and My Faith: Black Women and the Suicide Paradox. Socius, 3. Available on:
Article I’ve Got My Family and My Faith: Black Women and the Suicide Paradox
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Could_Suicide_be_Rational_and_Morally_Defensible
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience
Scholars in developing countries must be proud of what they are capable of producing in knowledge and in transmitting it; especially since they do all this with very little means. Regarding scientific output versus research funding, scientists from developing countries are the best, well ahead. Their students, duly trained in the sweat of the people, unfortunately, end up in foreign laboratories and make exceptional careers there, crowned for some with Nobel Prizes. See the Graph, from:
World citation and collaboration networks: Uncovering the role of geography in science, November 2012, Scientific Reports 2(1):902. Available on:
Article World citation and collaboration networks: Uncovering the ro...
One may read within the paper: "...the total research impact of a country grows linearly with the amount of national funding for research & development. However, the average impact reveals a peculiar threshold effect: the scientific output of a country may reach an impact larger than the world average only if the country invests more than about 100,000 USD per researcher annually..."
Exciting reading from Soffa Clarke, Jobe, 2022, “Rare Earth” Solves the Fermi Paradox + Earth is Likely the Only Civilization in the Observable Universe. "The Fermi Paradox: the contradiction between quintillions of nearby habitable planets and zero evidence of any extraterrestrial civilization’s radio signals. Rather than speculating, this paper investigates the most probable reason for the lack of evidence: there are no civilizations in our vicinity, because civilization is extremely rare (Rare Earth Hypothesis). By using a novel statistical technique known as the “~30% rule”, this paper will further investigate 3 specific “Rare Earth events” that are generally highly unlikely to occur, and definitely necessary for civilization to exist. If we estimate the probabilities of “rare earth events” that follow the “30% rule”, we can use the principle of mediocrity to get a generalized probability range for the existence of civilization in the universe. This paper uses this idea, and current scientific knowledge and data, to estimate the probability of all “rare earth events”, and comes to the conclusion that civilization is at least 1 in (3.9 * 10^42) star systems, making earth likely the only civilization in the observable universe".
Available at:
https://ssrn.com/abstract=4291769 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4291769
On contradictions and paradoxes between what state leaders invoke and some of their actions in practice "How do we explain continuity and change in foreign policy (FP)? What roles do emotions, affect and discourse play in FP decision-making? How do we account for contradictions and paradoxes between what state leaders invoke and some of their actions in practice? In what ways can we engage ethically and critically with FP decisions or lack thereof? These are key questions in the study of FP, to which Eberle’s Discourse and Affect in Foreign Policy contributes greatly". Extracted from:
Mandelbaum, M. M. (2023). Discourse and Affect in Foreign Policy: Germany and the Iraq War by Jakub Eberle (2019). Emotions and Society, 1-3. Released 2 weeks ago, Available on:
https://bristoluniversitypressdigital.com/view/journals/emsoc/aop/article-10.1332-26316897Y2023D000000007/article-10.1332-26316897Y2023D000000007.xml
What is Paradoxical in the Paradox of Question?
In this essay I argue for the claim that what is paradoxical in the paradox of the question is Sider’s Paradox. The essay begins with presenting the original paradox of the question, which is also called Markosian’s Paradox. Then, I shall illustrate how Ted Sider showed that Markosian’s Paradox is ill-formulated, followed by presenting what Sider viewed as the true paradox of the question, i.e. Sider’s paradox. Finally, I will evaluate two attempts to solve Sider’s Paradox, one targeted on its assumption that there exist some best questions to ask and the other based on the claim that every question can be answered in a truthful but unhelpful way, and argue that they fail to solve Sider’s Paradox...
https://rc.lse.ac.uk/articles/185
The Paradox of the Question by Ryan Wasserman & Dennis Whitcomb
What is the best question to ask an omniscient being? The question is intriguing; is it also paradoxical? We discuss several versions of what Ned Markosian calls the paradox of the question and suggest solutions to each of those puzzles. We then offer some practical advice about what do if you ever have the opportunity to query an omniscient being...
Article The paradox of the question
The Chicken or Egg Paradox & The CO2 or Global Warming Paradox.: which came first: the chicken or the egg? "The dilemma stems from the observation that all chickens hatch from eggs and all chicken eggs are laid by chickens. "Chicken-and-egg" is a metaphoric adjective describing situations where it is not clear which of two events should be considered the cause and which should be considered the effect, to express a scenario of infinite regress, or to express the difficulty of sequencing actions where each seems to depend on others being done first". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_or_the_egg
According to Wikipedia's interpretation, the chicken or egg dilemma applies perfectly to CO2 and GW so one may speak of the CO2 or GW Paradox.
"...The costs of reducing carbon emissions ...pose several challenges. One ... is that some politically appealing programs .. appear low-cost, but are not. A second challenge is the reverse, where highly visible programs are perceived as high-cost but are not.. A third challenge is that the static costs provide at best an incomplete picture of the true costs of a particular action.." A paradox explained in the paper (396 Citations):
Gillingham, K., & Stock, J. H. (2018). The cost of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(4), 53-72.
Available on:
https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdf/10.1257%2Fjep.32.4.53
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Adaptation_and_Resilience_to_Climate_Change_Temporal_Paradox_versus_Chronology_Protection_Conjecture
Sci-Hub presents a paradox for open access publishing
Sci-Hub has provided a popular, if illicit, access route to much of the scientific record. However, as Abdelghani Maddi discusses its relationship to genuine open access publication is problematic...
The current system has long operated as an oligopolistic market, dominated by a handful of publishers, with a subscription-based model restricting access to research behind paywalls. Faced with this inertia some have suggested pirate libraries, such as Sci-Hub, present a means of disrupting and transforming this system. Yet, as we explore in a recent paper, pirate sites present a paradox for genuine Open Access (OA), as extensive use of these sites may yield a range of unintended consequences that diverge from the tenets of OA...
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2023/10/25/sci-hub-presents-a-paradox-for-open-access-publishing/
Article On the culture of open access: the Sci-hub paradox
Palestinians Doctors Paradox. iNews (5 hours ago) Decisions no doctor should have to make: Gaza medics ‘forced to ration life support’ for children. "There are decisions that doctors in warzones should never have to make. Should I operate on this child without anaesthetic? Which child should I give the only remaining life support machine to? But i has learned this is the reality facing medics as they try to save children in Gaza, which is under bombardment from Israel as it tries to destroy Hamas...."
Read more on:
https://inews.co.uk/news/decisions-no-doctor-make-gaza-medics-ration-life-support-children-2723731
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/War_Peace
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience
Paradoxes, Contradictions, and the Limits of Science "Most of the limitations discussed here are less than a century old, a very short time in the history of science. As science progresses, it will become more aware of its own boundaries and limitations. By looking at these limitations from a unified point of view, we will be able to compare, contrast, and learn about these many different phenomena. We can understand more about the very nature of science, mathematics, computers, and reason." This is the ultimate conclusion of the outing paper by Noson Yanofsky 2016, "Paradoxes, Contradictions, and the Limits of Science, American Scientist 104(3):166" Available on:
Article Paradoxes, Contradictions, and the Limits of Science
See also
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Art_of_State-of-the-Art_on_Science_Knowledge
One of the War Paradoxes: the Hannibal Directive. "The guiding principle of minimum risk to the soldiers at the cost of harming innocent civilians has been integrated into IDF practice (Levy 2017). Hannibal Directive is one example in which if an Israeli soldier(s) is under threat of kidnapping, IDF have a policy of indiscriminate firing to prevent an abduction. The directive was used most recently during the 2014 war in Gaza as soldiers were given leeway in Rafah, Shujaija to shoot at any target to prevent a potential kidnapping of a soldier. In Rafah, where two Israeli soldiers were killed and one was suspected of being kidnapped, every person and moving vehicle became a potential target (Human Rights Council 2015). The directive was officially cancelled by the military in 2016 following heavy criticism. The criticism was not because of the deaths of Palestinian civilians, which numbered in the hundreds, but due to the criticism of a policy of shooting one’s own soldier, preferring a dead rather than an abducted soldier" Excerpt from:
Spitka, T. (2023). Israeli National Protection Strategies and Realities. In: National and International Civilian Protection Strategies in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Palgrave Macmillan,
Available on:
Chapter Israeli National Protection Strategies and Realities
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_and_history_serving_political_and_ideological_totalitarianism/38
"The invention of firearms, an invention which at first sight appears to be so pernicious, is certainly favorable both to the permanency and extension of civilization." This at first glance paradoxical assertion is analyzed in the outstanding paper by Minowitz, P. 1989, "Invisible Hand, Invisible Death: Adam Smith on War and Socio-Economic Development. Journal of Political & Military Sociology, 305-315."
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_and_history_serving_political_and_ideological_totalitarianism
https://www.researchgate.net/post/War_Peace
Is paradox the beginning or the end of philosophy? "Plato and Aristotle both held that philosophy begins in wonder, by which they meant puzzlement or perplexity, and many philosophers after them have agreed. Ludwig Wittgenstein considered the aim of philosophy to be “to show the fly the way out of the fly bottle”—to liberate ourselves from the puzzles and paradoxes created by our own misunderstanding of language. His teacher, Bertrand Russell, remarked in a joking mood that “The point of philosophy is to start with something so simple as not to seem worth stating, and to end with something so paradoxical that no one will believe it.”
Whether paradox is the beginning or the end of philosophy, it has certainly stimulated a great deal of philosophical thinking, and many paradoxes have served to encapsulate important philosophical problems (many others have been exposed as fallacies)."
Source:
Duignan, Brian. "Brain Games: 8 Philosophical Puzzles and Paradoxes". Encyclopedia Britannica, 27 May. 2014,
https://www.britannica.com/list/8-philosophical-puzzles-and-paradoxes. Accessed 5 November 2023.
The paper by Bryan Christie "Academics protest at UK research body’s “failure” to stand up for free speech, BMJ 2023;383:p2573" (Published 03 November 2023) shed light on a paradoxical event that should call out the community of scholars and researchers worldwide on one of the fundamentals of their activity: The “Academic Freedom”. …"One of the main funding bodies for research in the UK has provoked a furious academic backlash after complying with a ministerial request to suspend one of its advisory panels in a row over comments relating to the Israel-Hamas conflict. More than 3000 academics have signed an open letter to UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) protesting about the decision to suspend its advisory group on equality, diversity, and inclusion for England.1 In addition, several members of the group have resigned, and the University and College Union has called on its members to quit voluntary roles at UKRI if the decision is not reversed. The advisory group was set up on 26 October this year to support Research England “in creating and sustaining the conditions for a healthy, dynamic, diverse and inclusive research and knowledge exchange system in English universities.” …
Read the paper on:
https://www.bmj.com/content/383/bmj.p2573.full
See Also
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_and_history_serving_political_and_ideological_totalitarianism
The liar Paradox: Suppose someone tells you “I am lying.” If what she tells you is true, then she is lying, in which case what she tells you is false. On the other hand, if what she tells you is false, then she is not lying, in which case what she tells you is true. In short: if “I am lying” is true then it is false, and if it is false then it is true. The paradox arises for any sentence that says or implies of itself that it is false (the simplest example being “This sentence is false”). It is attributed to the ancient Greek seer Epimenides (fl. c. 6th century BCE), an inhabitant of Crete, who famously declared that “All Cretans are liars” (consider what follows if the declaration is true). The liar paradox is important in part because it creates severe difficulties for logically rigorous theories of truth; it was not adequately addressed (which is not to say solved) until the 20th century.
Source: https://www.britannica.com/list/8-philosophical-puzzles-and-paradoxes
To read more about The Liar Paradox, the well-cited, well-quoted paper essay by Beall, Jc, Michael Glanzberg, and David Ripley, ""Liar Paradox", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2023 Edition)", reviews the important members of the family of Liar paradoxes, and some of the important ideas about how these paradoxes might be resolved. Available on: URL =
The Liar Paradox: A Case of Mistaken Truth Attribution
"A semantic solution to the liar paradox (“This statement is not true”) is presented in this article. Since the liar paradox seems to evince a contradiction, the principle of non-contradiction is preliminarily discussed, in order to determine whether dismissing this principle may be reason enough to stop considering the liar paradox a problem. No conclusive outcome with respect to the value of this principle is aspired to here, so that the inquiry is not concluded at this point and the option to explore an alternative, semantic, solution remains open. This proposed solution is focused on what the liar paradox expresses and what it fails to express..."
Article The Liar Paradox: A Case of Mistaken Truth Attribution
The paradox of Article 5 of the Atlantic Treaty. "Macron wonders in particular about the future of Article 5 of the Atlantic Treaty, which provides for military solidarity between members of the Alliance if one of them is attacked. "What is Article 5 tomorrow? If Bashar al-Assad's regime decides to retaliate against Turkey, are we going to commit? That's a real question," he said. "We are committed to fight against Daesh (acronym for the Islamic State organization). The paradox is that the American decision (to withdraw from northern Syria) and the Turkish offensive in both cases have the same result: the sacrifice of our partners on the ground who fought against Daesh, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)", he regrets". Excerpt from. TV5MONDE - with AFP, 08 NOV 2019, (Update 24.12.2021) (Own translation from French). Read on:
https://information.tv5monde.com/info/l-otan-en-etat-de-mort-cerebrale-juge-emmanuel-macron-331037
Exploring the complexities of a specific paradox fuels my inspiration for creating technology. Is there a method for crafting paradoxes?
This is a disconcerting paradoxical paper by Sher, Shashwat Vidhu, "Suicide: The Final A.I. Frontier (November 15, 2023). Abstract. "With the fall of Good-Old Fashioned Artificial Intelligence, many researchers have questioned what it means to be a self-governing decision-making machine. More importantly, there are concerns related to A.I.'s ability to understand human sensibilities and align with the human idea of progress. In short, how can we ensure whether a machine is really thinking like a human or not? The paper tries to answer these questions by proposing a new Turing test based on the concept of suicide or self-destruction. The argument is that a design ideology centered around creating a personal purpose in A.I. would eventually give rise to an ability to contemplate suicide. This ability will be a tell-a-tale sign of human-like intelligence".
The author comes to the disconcerting conclusion on which it is appropriate to meditate: "A sufficiently advanced A.I. machine, as per the design paradigm of personal purpose, can always have a choice to create new goals when faced with an insurmountable challenge. However, if it chooses self-termination over survival, it is making a call not very unlike humans, who can have two different outlooks even when facing the same situation. One can either look at it hopelessly or dream of a better future. In all these cases , not committing suicide is not a lack of humanness, but contemplating one is undoubtedly a sign of going through all the motions that come with being human.
Available on: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID4629552_code6186283.pdf?abstractid=4629552&mirid=1
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Could_Suicide_be_Rational_and_Morally_Defensible
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience
5 Paradoxes Which Left Artificial Intelligence Researchers In A Lurch
Here is a list of paradoxes that have troubled great minds while in pursuit of making machines more intelligent:
- The Simpson’s Paradox
- Braess’s Paradox
- Sayre’s Paradox
- Moravec’s Paradox
- Tea Leaf Paradox...
https://analyticsindiamag.com/5-paradoxes-which-left-ai-researchers-in-a-lurch/
Unleashing the AI Paradox
Artificial Intelligence has taken the world by storm with its increasing abilities to perform complex tasks and revolutionize industries. From healthcare to finance and self-driving cars, AI has become an integral part of the modern world. However, amidst all the benefits it offers, there is the AI Paradox – the mind-boggling concept that challenges our understanding of AI. That is, while AI is capable of incredible feats, it's also limited by its own nature...
AI Paradox – while AI has the incredible ability to accomplish feats that humans could never achieve alone, it's also limited by its own nature. The paradoxical nature of AI highlights the importance of balancing its benefits with its potential limitations to create a better future...
https://www.toolify.ai/ai-news/unleashing-the-ai-paradox-6131
As the war in Palestine and Ukraine rages and the theaters of clashes could expand over indeterminate geography, the Paradox of Article 5 is more relevant than ever. TV5MONDE - with AFP, 08 NOV 2019, (Update 24.12.2021) Macron wonders in particular about the future of Article 5 of the Atlantic Treaty, which provides for military solidarity between members of the Alliance if one of them is attacked. "What is Article 5 tomorrow? If Bashar al-Assad's regime decides to retaliate against Turkey, are we going to commit? That's a real question," he said. "We are committed to fight against Daesh (acronym for the Islamic State organization). The paradox is that the American decision (to withdraw from northern Syria) and the Turkish offensive in both cases have the same result: the sacrifice of our partners on the ground who fought against Daesh, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)", he regrets". (Own translation from French). Read on:
https://information.tv5monde.com/info/l-otan-en-etat-de-mort-cerebrale-juge-emmanuel-macron-331037
Dear Jamel Chahed , you may visit this thread:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Paradox_of_distances_time_and_instances_How_do_I_solve_this
Hydrostatic paradox: Crève-tonneau de Blaise Pascal (Pascal's Barrel burst) "Apparatus imagined by Pascal to verify the law relating to the pressure of liquids on the walls of the vases which contain them. (The apparatus comprehends a barrel full of water surmounted by a long vertical tube. When water is poured into the tube, the staves of the barrel come apart.)" "Device invented by Pascal, which is used to verify the laws of the pressure of liquids on the walls of the vases which contain them". (Universal Encyclopedia)
Illustration: Hydrostatic paradox, "Pascal's barrel-break". Illustration for The Physical World by Amedee Guillemin (Hachette, 1881)
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Art_of_State-of-the-Art_on_Science_Knowledge
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Forum_for_Enthusiasts_of_Ancient_Hydrology_and_Old_Hydraulics
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Anatomy
- Tissue