http://www.logicalparadoxes.info
I worked my way through all the examples just for giggles and I concluded that not one of them is actually a logical paradox at all.
In each case except one, the apparent paradox is created by the incorrect application of premises.
In the other one there simply isn't a paradox at all. It just describes a law of mathematics and make it look like it is paradoxical.
Take a look through them all and see if you concur. If not then let's have a chat about philosophy and stuff just for giggles.
Remember these things.
- The purpose of a logical examination of a series premises is designed to test whether those premises are actually valid. Don't assume that the premises given are correct.
- There may be a hidden premise somewhere in the text which is in fact NOT true.
- Knowledge and beliefs are held tentatively. i.e. If they are shown to be false then we must be ready to discard them. There is no such thing as TRUTH.
Or maybe you agree with them?