A paradox is a statement that, despite apparently sound reasoning from true premises, leads to an apparently self-contradictory or logically unacceptable conclusion. A paradox involves contradictory yet interrelated elements that exist simultaneously and persist over time. Some logical paradoxes are known to be invalid arguments but are still valuable in promoting critical thinking. Some paradoxes have revealed errors in definitions assumed to be rigorous, and have caused axioms of mathematics and logic to be re-examined. One example is Russell's paradox, which questions whether a "list of all lists that do not contain themselves" would include itself, and showed that attempts to found set theory on the identification of sets with properties or predicates were flawed. Others, such as Curry's paradox, are not yet resolved. What inference can be made from the above?

A paradox is a statement that, despite apparently sound reasoning from true premises, leads to an apparently self-contradictory or logically unacceptable conclusion. A paradox involves contradictory yet interrelated elements that exist simultaneously and persist over time. Some logical paradoxes are known to be invalid arguments but are still valuable in promoting critical thinking. Some paradoxes have revealed errors in definitions assumed to be rigorous, and have caused axioms of mathematics and logic to be re-examined. One example is Russell's paradox, which questions whether a "list of all lists that do not contain themselves" would include itself, and showed that attempts to found set theory on the identification of sets with properties or predicates were flawed. Others, such as Curry's paradox, are not yet resolved. What inference can be made from the above? Correct Answer A paradox can be useful.

Option 1 is wrong, as no paradox can be called 'wrong'. It is a contradictory statement, but not wrong. Option 2 is also wrong, as the last sentence states that 'Others, such as Curry's paradox, are not yet resolved', which means that some of them have been resolved. Option 3 is correct, as paradoxes promote critical thinking, and cause the re examination of certain theories.

Hence, option 3 is the answer.

Related Questions

The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: Chat bots and other interfaces are saving employees and HR heads time for more productive activities by providing information and replies to diverse queries or concerns. A few years ago, business communication was driven by multiple faxes in a day and emails were the only quick mode of exchanging information. This information went through the organisation's who's who, while the others were mostly engaged in the daily rut of redundant activities, preventing them from directing their capabilities towards more productive areas. Which of the following arguments brig out the idea that introduction of chat bots and other interfaces is not helping in boosting up the processes? Arguments: I. Using these conversational interfaces, HR departments are successfully aligning themselves with the swiftly-changing organisational processes. These platforms represent people friendly technologies that keep employee experience at the centre, continuously evolving with them.  II. HR technologies are increasingly using advanced machine learning for measuring and analysing workforce engagement. Sentiment analysis is a unique way of gauging an employee's disposition towards the organisation, providing valuable insights essential for improving productivity and predicting attrition rates.  III. The seamless experience chat bots provide makes employees focus on activities that require critical abilities and strategic thinking. Besides enabling HR processes such as generating leave applications and reimbursement forms, the use of chatbots provides quick and smooth access to data from anywhere, anytime. 
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: A shortage of bank branches and ATMs across India’s hinterland is holding back Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s financial inclusion efforts and risks angering rural voters ahead of elections next year. After taking office in 2014, Modi set an ambitious target to open a bank account for every household to ensure welfare funds flow directly to India’s poor, while improving access to credit and insurance programs. He pushed policies that helped bring 310 million people into the formal banking system in just four years, according to the World Bank. Based on the arguments stated below and he information stated above, which of the following arguments state the reason for the problem, ‘But many of India’s villages still lack bank branches or ATMs to help service new customers, while the pace of building new financial infrastructure has actually slowed’.  Arguments: I. Because Modi’s government effectively forced poor citizens into the banking system by linking some welfare benefits to bank accounts, villagers have ended up stuck in long queues and struggling with ATMs that often run out of cash or break down.  II. With an election due next year, the mismatch between the government’s policies and the rural banking system is generating frustration among a key slice of India’s electorate. III. The banking system struggled to keep up, while some gains proved temporary. Nearly half of Indian bank accounts were inactive in 2017, meaning they weren’t used at all in the previous 12 months
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: India’s telecom watchdog has suggested regulation of all entities dealing with consumer data—devices such as iPhones, operating systems such as Android, browsers like Google’s Chrome and apps such as Facebook, Paytm, Uber or Zomato— by bringing them under licence conditions that apply to telecom service providers until a general data protection law is put in place by the government. Which of the following argument weakens the above statement in the best possible manner? Arguments: I. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai) said the framework for protection of personal information is ‘not sufficient’ and that the issue of data ownership, privacy, and security is complex and multi-dimensional. It suggested expanding the ambit of licence conditions governing telcos to all entities handling customer information and empowerment of customers to keep their data secure. II. The telecom watchdog further said that individual users owned their data, or personal information, and entities such as devices were ‘mere custodians’ and do not have primary rights over that information. III. Telcos and internet service providers (ISPs) though welcomed recommendations that sought to bring app makers under the same regulations. However, content providers have been opposed to being brought under more regulation.