Abilene paradox critique

Explanation[ edit ] The term was introduced by management expert Jerry B.

Abilene paradox critique

Logical paradox[ edit ] Thomas Fowler states the paradox as follows: But if he is a liar, what he says is untrue, and consequently the Cretans are veracious; but Epimenides is a Cretan, and therefore what he says is true; saying the Cretans are liars, Epimenides is himself a liar, and what he says is untrue.

Thus we may go on alternately proving that Epimenides and the Cretans are truthful and untruthful. There are two options: First, assume that it is true, but then Epimenides, being a Cretan, would be a liar, and making the assumption that liars only make false statements, the statement is false.

So, assuming the statement is true leads us to conclude that the statement is false. This is a contradiction, so the option of the statement being true is not possible. This leaves the second Abilene paradox critique If we assume the statement is false and that Epimenides is lying about all Cretans being liars, then there must exist at least one Cretan who is honest.

This does not lead to contradiction since it is not required that this Cretan be Epimenides. This means that Epimenides can say the false statement that all Cretans are liars while knowing at least one honest Cretan and lying about this particular Cretan.

Hence, from the assumption that the statement is false, it does not follow that the statement is true. So we can avoid a paradox as seeing the statement "all Cretans are liars" as a false statement, which is made by a lying Cretan, Epimenides.

The Epimenides paradox can be slightly modified as to not allow the kind of solution described above, as it was in the first paradox of Eubulides but instead leading to a non-avoidable self-contradiction.

Abilene paradox critique

Paradoxical versions of the Epimenides problem are closely related to a class of more difficult logical problems, including the liar paradoxSocratic paradoxand the Burali-Forti paradoxall of which have self-reference in common with Epimenides.

Indeed, the Epimenides paradox is usually classified as a variation on the liar paradox, and sometimes the two are not distinguished. The study of self-reference led to important developments in logic and mathematics in the twentieth century.

In other words, it is not a paradox once one realizes "All Cretans are liars" being untrue only means "Not all Cretans are liars" instead of the assumption that "All Cretans are honest". Perhaps better put, for "All Cretans are liars" to be a true statement, it does not mean that all Cretans must lie all the time.

In fact Cretans could tell the truth quite often but still all be liars in the sense that liars are people prone to deception for dishonest gain. So arguably the original proposition is not so much paradoxical as invalid.

A contextual reading of the contradiction may also provide an answer to the paradox. The original phrase, "The Cretans, always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies! A stereotyping of his people not intended to be an absolute statement about the people as a whole.

Rather it is a claim made about their position regarding their religious beliefs and socio-cultural attitudes.

[BINGSNIPMIX-3

Within the context of his poem the phrase is specific to a certain belief, a context that Callimachus repeats in his poem regarding Zeus. Further, a more poignant answer to the paradox is simply that to be a liar is to state falsehoods, nothing in the statement asserts everything said is false, but rather they're "always" lying.

This is not an absolute statement of fact and thus we cannot conclude there's a true contradiction made by Epimenides with this statement.In the Abilene paradox, a group of people collectively decide on a course of action that is counter to the preferences of many or all of the individuals in the group.

Similarly, in "The Abilene Paradox," people end up going where they do not want to go, because they think the others want to go there and failed to express their honest preferences.

In Groupthink, what is achieved is a false sense of consensus. ria in Abilene, when none of us had really wanted to go. In fact, to be more accurate, with a major corollary of the paradox, which is that the inability to manage agreement is a ma- the web of the Abilene Paradox.

That inability to . The morality of transformational leadership has been sharply questioned, particularly by libertarians, “grass roots” theorists, and organizational development consultants.

The morality of transformational leadership has been sharply questioned, particularly by libertarians, “grass roots” theorists, and organizational development consultants.

The morality of transformational leadership has been sharply questioned, particularly by libertarians, “grass roots” theorists, and organizational development consultants.

Epimenides paradox - Wikipedia