I always assumed that there could be no contradictions -- that the principle of non-contradiction was absolute, so to say.  Recently, however, I read about dialetheism and paraconsistent logic and realized that some philosophers disagreed.  It seems all of logic falls apart if contradictions are permitted.  I fail to understand how their position makes any sense (which could admittedly be just a failure on my part).  So is it possible someone could better explain their viewpoint?  Surely none of them believe that, say, one could simultaneously open and close a book, right?          
                  
    
  
  
      Read another response about Logic
    






