0
Paradox and Antithesis
Includes questions related to contradictory statements or when opposing words are used to create a balance.
659 Questions
What is the definition of bittersweet?
Bittersweet can mean an outcome for something that was wished for, but with unforeseen consequences. (The film's ending was bittersweet...)
Bittersweet or bitter sweet is best described as something that is both good and bad at the same time. You go home to be with your family because of a death is bitter, but seeing your family after a long time away is also sweet. "My return home for the funeral was bittersweet."
It can also mean sweet, yet bitter, to the taste. That chocolate was bittersweet.
See the related link listed below for more information:
Where is an Oxymoron in cry the beloved country?
In "Cry, the Beloved Country" by Alan Paton, an oxymoron can be found in the phrase "the sound of silence." This juxtaposition highlights the profound sense of loss and despair in the novel, particularly in the context of South Africa's social issues. It reflects the contrast between the physical noise of the world and the emotional silence experienced by individuals grappling with the injustices of apartheid. This literary device emphasizes the deep emotional undercurrents present throughout the narrative.
In the story last cover why did the father name the fox bandit?
The father named the fox Bandit because he was going around to people's farms and barns and eating the chickens and eggs.
What is the ethnicity paradox?
People who may participate actively in their ethnic enclave while at the same time trying to cross the bridge into the wider community.
Will a straight run duck lay eggs?
Straight run ducks are not sexed. Straight run basically means you get what they give you. No choice in male or female. Only females lay eggs. The drake (male duck) fertilizes the eggs. Ducks are difficult to sex and costly to do so if you hire the services of someone to do it for you. So bottom line, Your taking your chances for a female from a straight run selection.
Well..... A female chicken lays eggs and if a male chicken fertilizes it then the egg will turn into a chick, however if the egg is not fertilized it becomes eggs that we eat!!
What could a knot be that is about the size of a hen egg on the back of the neck?
You need to got to a doctor, it's more than likely a boil and just needs to be lanced.If not a boil you need to go and have it checked anyway.
No, there's no reason to do so, switching in this case will win half of the time, exactly like sticking to the initial choice.
This Monty Hall problem variant is called the "Monty Fall" or "Ignorant Monty" variant. The possible scenarios which made switching win more often in the original Monty Hall problem, correspond in this variant to the scenarios where the randomly opened door revealed the car (and as such are not considered here).
Where do HEB chickens come from?
HEB chickens come from HEB branded farms. The chickens are 100 percent fed with vegetarian feed and contain no additives.
The hen came first before the egg?
This is a rephrase of "What came first, the chicken or the egg?"
Evolution and natural selection, where creatures are slowly changing over time due to random mutations. The good, beneficial mutations give the creature an advantage which allows it to survive. The bad mutations give the creature a disadvantage meaning they are less likely to survive.
At a certain point in time, a creature that was almost a chicken layed an egg containing a creature that had a mutation that made it the first chicken. Therefore the egg came before the chicken.
For non-evolutionists...
One Creationist view would be that the chicken was created a chicken, so came first. Another creationist view would be similar to the natural selection answer, as some creationists agree with natural selection as it can be seen to happen. So a chicken adapting by selection to be a better chicken or a different breed of chicken is fine, as long as it doesn't decide to evolve into a lizard.
Why is the Monty Hall paradox true?
The Monty Hall paradox is true because it is actually not a paradox, it is a case of misdirection and/or misunderstanding that probabilities do not change just because you open a door.
Restating the problem:
You are in a game show with Monty Hall. You have three doors to choose from. Behind one door, there is a car. Behind the other two doors, there are goats. You choose a door. Just then, Monty spices things up by opening one of the other doors, to reveal a goat. He then give you an opportunity to change your mind and pick the third door. Is it in your best interest to stay with your original choice, or to change to the third door?
The answer is that you should change your mind. The odds of getting a car will double if you do that.
The misunderstanding is in not realizing that the probability distribution did not change just because Monty opened that door. One could, erroneously, think that "now, we have a 50-50 chance, and it does not matter if you change your mind". Wrong.
Look at the original problem. There is a 1 in 3 chance that the car is behind any of the three doors, and there is a 2 in 3 chance that the goat is behind any of the three doors.
Expand your thinking a bit... There are three sets of two doors; door AB, door AC, and door BC. The probability that the car is behind one of those three sets of two doors is 2 in 3. If you do not understand that, stop, and think again. Don't go forward until you agree.
Now. You picked a door. The probability that you picked the car is 1 in 3, and the probability that you picked a goat is 2 in 3. More importantly, if the probability that the car is behind your door is 1 in 3, then the probability that it is behind one of the other two doors must be 2 in 3. Again, make sure you understand this before proceeding.
Now. Monty opened one of the other two doors, revealing a goat. Quick; what is the probability that the car is behind your original door? It is 1 in 3. That did not change. Since the sum of the probabilities must be 1, then there is still a probability of 2 in 3 that the car is behind one of the other two doors.
But you know that one of the other two doors has a goat. Right? Your door is still 1 in 3. Therefore, the probability that the car is behind the third door is 2 in 3. Your odds of getting the car doubled from 1 in 3 to 2 in 3 by changing your mind.
Comment: Those probabilities only apply when Monty deliberately reveals a goat. So, hehas to knowwhat's behind the doors.
If he just opened a doorat random,then the 2 remaining doors would indeed
leave you with a 50-50 choice.
A time paradox generally refers to a paradox of time travel.
The most well-known time paradox is the grandfather paradox. Follow the logic here: If you went back in time and killed your grandfather, then your own father would never have been born and thus you would never have been born. However, if you were never born, then you could never have have gone back in time and killed your grandfather. Therein lies the paradox. What would happen then? Well, since no one's ever traveled through time, it's impossible to know for sure. There are some theories:
- According to the Back to the Future films, the universe would explode.
- After killing your grandfather, you would return to the present only to find yourself in a world where you don't exist. Basically, you would be like James Stewart in It's A Wonderful Life.
- According to the Novikov self-consistency principle, if you went back in time and tried to kill your grandfather, you would find yourself unable to.
Another time paradox is the predestination paradox, also known as a "casual loop". This was demonstrated in an episode of The Twilight Zone where a man traveled back in time to determine the cause of a famous fire. While in the past, he accidentally knocked over a kerosene lantern and started the very fire he was trying to determine the cause of. Unlike the grandfather paradox, this does not create a contradiction. In fact, strictly speaking, this is perfectly consistent. However, it's a paradox because it seems to indict that free will doesn't exist or that it's an illusion.
An ontological paradox is kind of a version of the predestination paradox. Now, let's say that one day your future self shows up and gives you blueprints to build a time machine. You then build a time machine and travel back in time to give the blueprints to yourself, closing the loop. All this begs the question, where did the blueprints come from in the first place? Well, nowhere, apparently. Perhaps from an earlier timeline.
A quick expanation of a time paradox is imagine if you had a time machine, and you went back and killed your grandfather, as a consequence of this your father or mother would never have been conceived, and thus neither will you have been. The paradox comes into play as this, if you were not conceived because you had killed your grandfather, and your parent wasnt born, and you werent born, this means you didnt exist, and If you didnt exist, you werent around to kill your grandfather in the first place, so your parent will have been born, thusly you would have been too. Its all very confusing. Also, imagine someone you love dies,and you go back in time to save them, and you do, the reason you travelled back in time is to save that person, if that person is saved and alive and well, there was no reason to go back in time anyway, so the loop begins again.
Also in the new show into the universes with Stephen Hawking a crazy scientis builds a time machine, sets it to be a minute earlier then the present, assembles a gun, goes to the other side of the time machine sees himself assembling the gun and shoots himself through the machine.
What come first the darkness or the lightness?
ok first off this person didnt even word this question right...they must be an idoit and once they do then their question would probably have a good answer under it....GET IT STRAIGHT NEXT TIME!
Do you have to throw away the first egg laid from a first laying hen?
because it is the most likely on to be fertilized
An example of a visual paradox?
a eplican crashing into a sea. when he is gracefully picking up a fish
