婆特利哈利的悖论
Bhartrhari's Paradox

原始链接: https://www.futilitycloset.com/2026/08/18/bhartrharis-paradox/

有些事物是不可名状的。但似乎无法通过列举正面的例子来证实这一点,因为这需要我们将那些被宣称为不可名状的事物命名出来。正如五世纪印度语法学家兼哲学家伐致呵利(Bhartrhari)所观察到的,哲学家汉斯·赫茨伯格(Hans Herzberger)和拉迪卡·赫茨伯格(Radhika Herzberger)指出:“任何为支持‘不可名状性’论点而提出的论据,都会让人陷入更深的悖论之中,因为它们自然而然地倾向于反复提及那些本身正试图被证明为不可名状的事物。”(汉斯·G·赫茨伯格与拉迪卡·赫茨伯格,《伐致呵利的悖论》,《印度哲学杂志》第9卷第1期 [1981年3月],第1-17页。)

``` Hacker News最新 | 过往 | 评论 | 提问 | 展示 | 招聘 | 提交登录Bhartrhari 悖论 (futilitycloset.com)11 分,由 surprisetalk 发布于 2 小时前 | 隐藏 | 过往 | 收藏 | 2 条评论 帮助 kranner 9 分钟前 | 下一条 [–] Herzberger 夫妇的论文:https://sci-hub.ru/10.1007/BF00202726回复snapcaster 22 分钟前 | 上一条 [–] 我对某些事物无法命名这一观点持开放态度,但需要一个例子 :)回复 指南 | 常见问题 | 列表 | API | 安全 | 法律 | 申请加入 YC | 联系 搜索:```
相关文章

原文

There are some things that are unnameable. But it seems impossible to verify this by giving positive instances, because this would require us to name that which we have declared to be unnameable.

From an observation by the fifth-century Indian grammarian and philosopher Bhartrhari. “[E]very argument advanced to support any instance of the unnameability thesis drives one still more firmly into the paradox,” note philosophers Hans and Radhika Herzberger, “for they naturally tend to involve repeated reference to the very things whose unnameability they undertake to establish.”

(Hans G. Herzberger and Radhika Herzberger, “Bhartrhari’s Paradox,” Journal of Indian Philosophy 9:1 [March 1981], 1-17.)

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com