Abstract

Logical paradoxes are self vicious reference sentences that are there lies contradiction in assumption of both its truthfulness and its falsity, hence. For the reason that logical paradoxes challenge the veracity of the most important theories of logical and philosophy such as statement`s ability to truthfulness and falsity the correspondence theory of truth, law of the excluded middle and the system of Aristotelian bivalence, finding a reliable solution for them has always been one of the most important apprehensions of Muslim logicians specially in 7th century and also some western logicians. So that approximately ten solutions for paradoxes have been presented by them all of which have been introduced, analyzed and criticized in this article generally. Among the presented solutions, Khaje Nassir and following him, Taftazani and Sadroddin Dashtaki, believing in hierarchy of the statement and discrimination of the statement and predicate or priority and posteriority of the truth, managed to achieve an appropriate solution of paradoxes. In resent centuries Alferd Tarsky, a western logician, introducing the hierarchy theory of language has managed to devise a solution for these paradoxes. But, regarding the possibility of formulating new reinforced assertions of paradoxes, it seems that none of the stated solutions in this article is acceptable. Therefore, the author suggests that adopting the multivalence system of logic and accepting neither-true, nor-false statements which has been contemplated by some prior theologians and is more adaptable with skeptical ontology of Molla Sadra can be acceptable solution.