The “absurdity constant”, often referred to by the symbol ⊥, is used in formal logic. [39] It represents the concept of falsum, an elementary logical theorem denoted by a “false” constant in several programming languages. An absurdity is a state or condition in which reason is extremely unreasonable, meaningless, or unreasonable to be irrational or not to be taken seriously. “Absurd” is an adjective used to describe nonsense, such as “Tyler and the boys laughed at the absurd situation.” [1] It derives from the Latin absurdum and means “out of tune”, therefore irrational. [2] The Latin surdus means “deaf,” which implies stupidity. [1] Absurdity is opposed to the realistic or reasonable. [3] In everyday language, absurdity can be synonymous with fantasy, madness, weirdness, savage or absurdity. In technical usage, absurdity is associated with extremes in bad thinking or insignificance in reasoning; Ridicule is linked to extremes of inappropriate juxtaposition, laughter and ridicule; And nonsense is related to a lack of meaning. Absurdism is a concept in philosophy related to the concept of absurdity. The rule of absurdity is a rule in logic as used by Patrick Suppes in Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science: Acts. [40] He stops after a second, looks around and laughs, apparently recognizing the absurdity of the enterprise. G.

E. Moore, an English analytic philosopher, cited superficially absurd statements such as: “I was in the pictures last Tuesday, but I don`t believe it.” They can be true and logically consistent and do not contradict each other on closer examination of the user`s linguistic intent. Wittgenstein notes that in some unusual circumstances, the absurdity itself disappears in such statements, because there are cases where “It`s raining but I don`t believe it” can make sense, that is, what seems absurd is not absurd. [13] As a religion, Buddhism is an absurdity; In fact, it is not a religion at all, just a system of moral philosophy. But at what earlier age could it have been used without obvious absurdity? Aristotle corrected an irrational absurdity by reasoning with empiricism using probability: “Once the irrational has been introduced and given a touch of probability, we must accept it despite the absurdity. [8] He asserts that the absurdity of reasoning is obscured by charming language in poetry: “As it stands, absurdity is obscured by the poetic charm with which the poet endows it. But in the epic poem, the absurdity goes unnoticed. [8] Absurdity is cited as the basis for some theological reflections on the formation of faith and faith, as in fideism, an epistemological theory according to which reason and faith can be hostile to each other. The statement “Credo quia absurdum” (“I believe because it is absurd”) is attributed to Tertullian of De Carne Christi, translated by the philosopher Voltaire.

[21] According to the New Advent Church, what Tertullian said in DCC 5 was “… the Son of God is dead; It is to be believed, because it is absurd. [22] The absurd emphasizes a lack of logical sense or harmonious agreement, of parts (such as a premise and a conclusion) that do not go together. In philosophy, he describes the problem of trying to distill meaning from one`s own experiences. In A Discourse on Novelty and Creation (1975), Carl R. Hausman writes: “There is an incongruity, an incoherence, a conflict with a context that seems to be a legitimate and ordered experience. As [Albert] Camus points out, absurdity arises from a “comparison,” a comparison between two aspects of reality that seem to be in disharmony. The doctrine of absurdity is a legal theory in American courts. [32]: 234-239 A type of absurdity known as “writer`s error” occurs when a simple text correction is required to correct an obvious spelling mistake, such as a misspelled word. [32]: 234-235 Another type of absurdity, so-called “evaluative absurdity,” occurs when a legal regulation “makes no sense in terms of content” despite proper spelling and grammar.

An example would be a law that falsely states that a winning party, not a losing party, pays the reasonable legal fees of the other party. [32]: 235-237 In order to remain within the framework of textualism and not to advance further in purposivism, the doctrine is constrained by two limiting principles: “. The absurdity and injustice of applying the provision to the case would be so monstrous that all mankind would unite without hesitation in rejecting the application.”[33] and the absurdity must be capable of being corrected.” by modifying the text in a relatively simple way.” [34] [32]: 237-239 This doctrine is considered consistent with examples of historical common sense. [35] “They make me feel injustice and seem absurd to me,” the thirteen-year-old philosopher replied. This is the noun form of the adjective absurd, which means idiotic, hard to believe and a little crazy. If it`s not Halloween, it would be absurd to show up at school in a chicken costume. If your teacher taught math with a bad French accent, that would also be nonsense. A lot of comedies are full of nonsense, because an absurdity can be funny. If you`re good at thinking about nonsense, maybe you should be a comedy writer.

Nonsense is ridiculously stupid. For the United States to declare war on Fiji would be absurd. Besides the absurdity of some plans, its effectiveness is even more ridiculous. In the 15th century, the Spanish theologian Tostatus argued with what he saw as an absurd reduction against a spherical earth with dogmas, claiming that a spherical earth would imply the existence of antipodes. He argued that this was impossible because it would require Christ to appear twice or that the inhabitants of the antipodes would be damned forever, which he considered absurd. [ref. necessary] Britannica.com: Encyclopedia article on absurdity It simultaneously reveals the absurdity of dictatorship and comforts those who languish in an impossible reality. Iyer uses a great combination of erudition and absurdity reminiscent of the great postmodernists. Francis Bacon, an early proponent of empiricism and the scientific method, argued that absurdity is a necessary part of scientific progress and should not always be ridiculed.

He went on to say that bold new ways of thinking and bold assumptions often lead to absurdity: “For when absurdity is the object of laughter, doubt yourself, but great audacity is rare without some absurdity.” [10] Absurdity arises when language deviates from common sense, is too poetic, or when one cannot defend oneself with language and reason. In Aristotle`s book Rhetoric, Aristotle discusses the situations in which absurdity is used and how it affects the use of persuasion. According to Aristotle, the idea that a person is unable to convince someone with his words is absurd. [11] Any unnecessary information about the case is inappropriate and makes the speech unclear. If the speech becomes too vague; The reasoning of his case is not convincing, which makes the argument absurd. [12] Thomas Hobbes distinguished absurdity from errors, including fundamental linguistic errors, such as when a word is simply used to refer to something that does not have that name. Aloysius Martinich: “What worries Hobbes is absurdity. Only humans can embrace an absurdity because only humans have language, and philosophers are more sensitive to it than others.

[16] Hobbes wrote: “Words with which we understand nothing but sound are called absurd, insignificant, and absurd. And wherefore, if a man spoke to me of a round square; or, accidents of bread in cheese; or intangible property; or a free subject; free will; or some free but free resistance, I should not say that he was wrong, but that his words were meaningless, that is, absurd. [17] He distinguished seven kinds of absurdity. Below is Martinich`s summary, based on what he describes as Hobbes` “mature account” in “De Corpore” 5, all of which use examples one might find in Aristotelian or Scholastic philosophy, and all reflect “Hobbes` commitment to the new science of Galileo and Harvey.” This is called the “Hobbes Table of Absurdity.” Aside from the absurdity of “blood splatters” flying in the air, the implication is that Ebola can be “inhaled.” Reductio ad absurdum, reduced to absurdity, is a method of proof in polemic, logical and mathematical, where the assumption that a sentence is true leads to absurdity; A sentence is assumed to be true and this is used to infer a sentence that is known to be false, so the original sentence must have been false. It is also a style of reasoning in polemics in which a position is proven false or “absurd” by adopting and arguing in order to arrive at something that is known to be considered false or against common sense; it is used by Plato to argue against other philosophical positions. [37] An absurdity condition is used in the logic of model transformations. [38] Michel de Montaigne, father of the essay and modern skepticism, argued that the process of shortening was stupid and produced absurdity: “Any shortening of a good book is a foolish abridgement. Absurdity cannot be cured. satisfied with himself that any reason cannot reasonably be.

[9] Plato often used “absurdity” to describe very bad reasoning, or the conclusion of the hypothesis of an erroneous position and thus to a false conclusion called “absurdity” (argument de reductio ad absurdum). Plato describes himself in Parmenides as not an absurd argument against himself. [6] In Gorgias, Plato refers to an “inevitable absurdity” as the result of reasoning based on a false assumption. [7] Lucy looked at her cousin; The absurdity of the scene was too much for her; She closed the door and laughed until she cried.