ellauri089.html on line 546: § 68. Metaphysics, as dealing with a "supersensible reality" may have a bearing upon practical Ethics (1) if its supersensible reality is conceived as something future, which our actions can affect; and (2) since it will prove that every proposition of practical Ethics is false, if it can shew that an eternal reality is either the only real thing or the only good thing. Most metaphysical writers, believing in a reality of the latter kind, do thus imply the complete falsehood of every practical proposition, although they fail to see that their Metaphysics thus contradicts their Ethics. …
ellauri096.html on line 199: Several commentators on the surprise test paradox object that interpreting surprise as unprovability changes the topic. Instead of posing the surprise test paradox, it poses a variation of the liar paradox. Other concepts can be blended with the liar. For instance, mixing in alethic notions generates the possible liar: Is ‘This statement is possibly false’ true? (Post 1970) (If it is false, then it is false that it is possibly false. What cannot possibly be false is necessarily true. But if it is necessarily true, then it cannot be possibly false.) Since the semantic concept of validity involves the notion of possibility, one can also derive validity liars such as Pseudo-Scotus’ paradox: ‘Squares are squares, therefore, this argument is invalid’ (Read 1979). Suppose Pseudo-Scotus’ argument is valid. Since the premise is necessarily true, the conclusion would be necessarily true. But the conclusion contradicts the supposition that argument is valid. Therefore, by reductio, the argument is necessarily invalid. Wait! The argument can be invalid only if it is possible for the premise to be true and the conclusion to be false. But we have already proved that the conclusion of ‘Squares are squares, therefore, this argument is invalid’ is necessarily true. There is no consistent judgment of the argument’s validity. A similar predicament follows from ‘The test is on Friday but this prediction cannot be soundly deduced from this announcement’.
ellauri096.html on line 245: The common explanation of Moore’s absurdity is that the speaker has managed to contradict himself without uttering a contradiction. So the sentence is odd because it is a counterexample to the generalization that anyone who contradicts himself utters a contradiction.
ellauri112.html on line 931: However, only the Bible is inspired and infallible. Only the Bible can be the rule of our faith and practice. Where the Bible is silent, we will seek to be silent as well. Where the Bible speaks, we will seek to yield faithful obedience. Where it contradicts the opinions of men, or the practices of churches, we will say, “To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isaiah 8:20).
ellauri152.html on line 559: Qu'ran contradicts the Bible, but is in line with Persian historical records which do not contain any reference to the biblical story of a Persian official named Haman during that time period nor the person of Esther.
ellauri336.html on line 318: The fact that there may be such a source is hardly a “slam-dunk” in favor of head-shaving for a variety of reasons. The Talmud in several places either implies or states explicitly that the practice of women is not to shave their heads. For example, Eiruvin 100b says that one of the “curses of Eve” is that women grow their hair long, while Nazir 28b says that a man can cancel his wife’s vow to shave her head if he finds it unattractive. Furthermore, the Shulchan Aruch expressly prohibits women from shaving their heads (YD 182:5). The Zohar, while important, is not a halachic work so ruling from when it contradicts the Talmud or works of halacha is not a simple thing, and Hasidic communities act differently in such a situation than non-Hasidic communities. So this matter goes beyond merely acting leniently vs. acting stringently. (There are also those authorities who say that that’s not even what that Zohar means.)
6