A dichotomic analysis of the surprise examination paradox

Abstract

This paper presents a dichotomic analysis of the surprise examination paradox. In section 1, I analyse the surprise notion in detail. I introduce then in section 2, the distinction between a monist and dichotomic analysis of the paradox. I also present there a dichotomy leading to distinguish two basically and structurally different versions of the paradox, respectively based on a conjoint and a disjoint definition of the surprise. In section 3, I describe the solution to SEP corresponding to the conjoint definition. Lastly, I expose in section 4, the solution to SEP based on the disjoint definition.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

The surprise examination paradox.James McLelland & Charles Chihara - 1975 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 4 (1):71 - 89.
The Solution to the Surprise Exam Paradox.Ken Levy - 2009 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 47 (2):131-158.
The Paradox Of Surprise Examination.Igal Kvart - 1978 - Logique Et Analyse 21 (82):337-344.
Deleted.Deleted Deleted - forthcoming - Deleted.
The Surprise Examination Paradox.Michael Stack - 1977 - Dialogue 16 (2):207-212.
The Surprise Examination On The Paradox Of The Heap.J. Wayne-Smith - 1984 - Philosophical Papers 13 (May):43-56.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
94 (#168,322)

6 months
7 (#176,166)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Blindspots.Roy A. Sorensen - 1988 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Blindspots.Roy Sorensen - 1990 - Mind 99 (393):137-140.
Blindspots.Michael Levin - 1991 - Noûs 25 (3):389-392.
Précis of Understanding Truth.Scott Soames - 2002 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 65 (2):397-401.
A paradox regained.D. Kaplan & R. Montague - 1960 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 1 (3):79-90.

View all 21 references / Add more references