> The actual axioms are irrelevant to my point. I'm saying that if you
> believe the axioms are true, you will only believe the conclusion follows
> logically if you can't imagine the paradox being true. So all logical
> arguments are ultimately arguments from incredulity.
What if we make the first axiom: Paradoxes (paradoxi?) exist and are
real and valid.
How does that effect the resulting logic? And is there a parallel to this
in some philosophies?
-Prof. Tim