انگيزه ها و استدلال هاي پريست در دفاع از دوحقيقت باوري

Priest on dialetheism: examination of some of his motivations and arguments

دوحقيقت باوري(dialetheism) ديدگاهي است كه مي گويد برخي از تناقض هاي صادق وجود دارند. ازآنجايي كه در منطق سنتي(ارسطويي-كلاسيك) اصل امتناع تناقض(LNC) معتبر و برقرار است، اين ديدگاه چالش برانگيز است. در اين مقاله سعي مي شود كه مسيله ي اساسي دوحقيقت باوري توضيح داده شود، و استدلال ها و انگيزه هاي گراهام پريست را در عدم پذيرش اصل امتناع تناقض و روي آوردن به منطق هاي فراسازگار بررسي شود. بنابر اين، در بخش هاي پي در پي، سعي مي كنيم وجود دوصدقه ها يا تناقض هاي صادق را در نظام هاي حقوقي، زبان طبيعي و زبان فرمال و جهان خارج نشان دهيم و دلايل پريست براي پذيرفتن آن ها و نقد وي از ديدگاه هاي رقيب را بيان كنيم. با انجام اين كارها به نظر مي رسد براي مان مشخص مي شود به شرط آنكه نقضي بر استدلال هاي پريست وارد نباشد، ديدگاه پريست در پذيرش تناقض هاي صادق، مي تواند پذيرفتني ياشد.

Dialetheism is the view that some (and not all) contradictions are true. Since in classical logic the principle of impossibility of contradiction (the Law of Non-Contradiction, i.e., LNC) is widely accepted, the challenge between dialetheism and classical logic surely occurs. In this paper we have tried to explain the main problem of dialetheim and also examined Graham Priest’s arguments against LNC and his advocating to paraconsistent logic. Accordingly, Priest’s examples of dialetheic propositions in some systems such as Law, Natual and Formal Languages and Actual world are examined and criticized. The result is that if Priest’s argument be sound dialetheism may be acceptable. Dialetheism is the view that some (and not all) contradictions are true. Since in classical logic the principle of impossibility of contradiction (the Law of Non-Contradiction, i.e., LNC) is widely accepted, the challenge between dialetheism and classical logic surely occurs. In this paper we have tried to explain the main problem of dialetheim and also examined Graham Priest’s arguments against LNC and his advocating to paraconsistent logic. Accordingly, Priest’s examples of dialetheic propositions in some systems such as Law, Natual and Formal Languages and Actual world are examined and criticized. The result is that if Priest’s argument be sound dialetheism may be acceptable.