11 Brain Twisting Paradoxes

reply to post by shells4u


The modern day equivalent of course being, "Could God microwave a burrito so hot that he himself could not eat it?".

reply to post by Subnatural


I think you were going down the correct path when you speculated that even if god created a stone with infinite mass, he himself has infinite strength, and so would always be able to lift it, which then of course brings us back to the idea that if he cannot limit himself, (I'm using the word "he" to make things easy, even though I imagine the Infinite Creator is without gender, has surpassed gender, or is an amalgam of all genders.) then he is not truly omnipotent.

At that point you'd need to bring in all sorts of weird dual-reality paradigms, as Bob Sholtz has so keenly pointed out, which truly boggles the mind of this mortal, which I guess is why I'm only part of the creator, rather than the creator in it's entirety. Then again, that's where it get's even weirder, because if (as I believe) the creator is One, then we are all it, while at the same time being individualized portions of the creator's consciousness. Which is, in and of itself, another paradox... fascinating.

"t is first found in Aristotle’s De Caelo, where Aristotle mentions an example of a man who remains unmoved because he is as hungry as he is thirsty and is positioned exactly between food and drink. Later writers satirised this view in terms of an ass who, confronted by two equally desirable and accessible bales of hay, must necessarily starve while pondering a decision."

While some of these seem like paradoxes to me - I'm really confused about this. Even with the "ass satirised". My brain sort of bawked at the whole paragraph. I'm finding a hard time thinking of any living creature who looks between two sources of something vital to them and is so buggered by a decision that they would rather sit in between and starve to death than make a decision. It's not a paradox to me. It's -honestly- making a freaking decision. If I have equal options left or right there is no paradox, it is only... do I go left or right? And if that decision is too big for me? Than there is something wrong with me beyond that whole situation. I'm just confused on where the paradox is. I understand the god can't make a stone stronger than him to lift otherwise it proves he's not a god -to use quick words- and poo, but this kind of boggles me to the paradox point.

I'm not making this statement towards the whole article, simply a few things in there that made me go - um, what? At Listverse.com I'm allowed to have those what-tha-f#ck moments. The rest of it was very interesting though. I love the idea and theory of true paradoxes.

reply to post by Bajema


Yeah, it's not the best paradox, is it? All this talk about asses (lol) and hungry men and bales of hay only muddles the actual point of it. To me, the paradox boils down to this:

When faced with two or more (in every way) equal alternatives of action we cannot make a logical choice about which one we choose. If there is no difference between them, then how can we justify choosing one over the other?

Solution: we choose to pick one at random. We decide to override the first choice. I think this is why it's actually not a paradox at all, to us. Or the asses (and I think this might even be part of what makes us sentient human beings? Or sentient asses, for that matter. Hmm...).

Even so, I think this paradox has some merit. Again, if we consider only one choice between two completely equal alternatives then how can it be logical to choose one over the other? How? I think the asses failure to act, the failure to make a choice, is a red herring.

reply to post by ExquisitExamplE


Yeah, it was kind of a pain in the ass to use "this being", etc.

And I agree, if this omnipotent guy is actually the creator of everything (time, space and so on), it gets kind of tricky. Can there be different degrees of omnipotence? Different degrees of infinity?

My answer is no. But "omnipotence" and "infinity" are alien concepts to everyday human logic, as you say, which is evolved to solve problems such as "killing an animal", "not falling into a hole" or "safely navigating a spaceship to the surface of the moon".

When we try to reach beyond these things, things get very counter-intuitive. But we can always try, huh? That's the human spirit.

Disclaimer: No asses where harmed in the making of this post. Except for mine own. From sitting too long on this ******* chair, typing this ******* message. (I'm assuming swearing is not allowed on ATS? Correct me if i'm wrong. I'm new here.)

reply to post by BlackCommander


I really didn't find any paradox things described here, just failed logic.

reply to post by BlackCommander


This is bunch of paradoxical crappy statements. There is no paradox in these statements, they are all faulty and they make no sense. Should waste your time on something that adds value, not waste my time. In any case thank you for the posting.

reply to post by Bajema

look at it less as a paradox (because it isn't one) and more as a psychological/philosophical question.

the question being "how does one choose which equally necessary and desirable thing they will pursue first?"

The only one that is even remotely close to a paradox is #1, and it has no basis in reality. Faulty logic does not a paradox make.