Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Ironic process theory (IPT), also known as the Pink elephant paradox [1] or White bear phenomenon, suggests that when an individual intentionally tries to avoid thinking a certain thought or feeling a certain emotion, a paradoxical effect is produced: the attempted avoidance not only fails in its object but in fact causes the thought or emotion to occur more frequently and more intensely. [2]
Pink Elephant or Pink Elephants may refer to: "Seeing pink elephants", a euphemism for a drunken hallucination; The Pink Elephant Paradox, another name for Ironic Process Theory. Pink Elephant, a 1975 cartoon from the Pink Panther series; Pink Elephants, a cartoon produced by the Terrytoons studio; Pink Elephants, a 1997 album by Mick Harvey
Brouwerij Huyghe in 2014. The association between pink elephants and alcohol is reflected in the name of various alcoholic drinks. There are various cocktails called "Pink Elephant", [7] and the Huyghe Brewery of Belgium put a pink elephant on the label of its Delirium Tremens beer.
Created Date: 8/30/2012 4:52:52 PM
Russell's teapot modelled on the Ichthys.. Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making empirically unfalsifiable claims, as opposed to shifting the burden of disproof to others.
I'm not going to lie: I never had a Philly cheesesteak until last week. Even though one of my best friends lives in The City of Brotherly Love and I've visited more times than I can count, they ...
The Grelling–Nelson paradox arises from the question of whether the term "non-self-descriptive" is self-descriptive. It was formulated in 1908 by Kurt Grelling and Leonard Nelson , and is sometimes mistakenly attributed to the German philosopher and mathematician Hermann Weyl [ 1 ] thus occasionally called Weyl's paradox or Grelling's paradox .
Philosopher Nick Bostrom argues that Pascal's mugging, like Pascal's wager, suggests that giving a superintelligent artificial intelligence a flawed decision theory could be disastrous. [10] Pascal's mugging may also be relevant when considering low-probability, high-stakes events such as existential risk or charitable interventions with a low ...