Abstract

The article provides a critical-comparative analysis of selected positions lending grounds for limitation of the clasical principle of consistency of belief systems. The first part contains arguments of C. Cherniak, P. Klein, R.C. Pinto, N. Rescher and R. Brandom for the inevitability of contradictions in human belief systems. The second part presents several systems of paraconsistent doxastic logic (N.C.A. da Costa, S. French, G. Priest) formally tolerating (in various way) contradictory beliefs. The analysis especially focuses on the weaknesses of the paraconsistent interpretation of the self-deception phenomenon and the contradictions resulting from the so-called Moore's paradox