LaTonya Byrd-Price
March 13, 2011

PHL 103

Dr. Erick Aguilar

Metaphysics: Law of Non-contradiction
Introduction
The Law of non-contradiction as a principle states that something cannot be true and not true simultaneously within the same context. For instance, a chair cannot be made of wood and not made of wood at the same time. This law is applied where there are two or more sets of statement that refer to the same subject, either of the statements in the set cannot counteract the fact of the other statement in the same set. For instance, when one says ‘I sat for the examination’ and ‘I passed the examination.’ The two statements are independent and none of them makes the other impossible since the occurrence of either of them do not rule out the possibility of the other happening. The two statements jointly would state that I sat for the exam and passed. In order to make the statements contradictory, they would be stated as: ‘I sat for the exam’ and ‘I did not sit for the exam.’ In this case the two statements are contradictory since the occurrence of either of them rules out the possibility of the other (Molner, 2000).
A personal daily struggle A personal daily struggle is a case of the law of non-contradiction that can be well illustrated with the school work or daily activities in the work place. For instance in my life personal daily struggle is demonstrated in my schooling and associated work. As a student, one would like to work and learn at the same time. A student becomes at crossroads or in a dilemma of choosing between work and classes. In the personal daily struggle, I am left to decide between a job and learning. In this case, my contradicting statements would state: ‘I would like to work while schooling’ and ‘I would not like to work while schooling.’ These two statements are examples of the law of non-contraction each of the statements occurring rules out the possibility of the other. One would not like to work while schooling and at the same time like to work while schooling. A student will find it challenging to choose between the two because each has its own benefits. For example, working while at school gives one more experience in the job market and possibly gain a competitive edge over the non-working students after graduation. At the same time, working while at school could impact negatively on the general performance of the student in school (Beall, 2006).
Challenges
The decisions and beliefs that a student has in my view face various challenges in daily life. Sometimes the student would be forced to make false statements depending on the situation. For instance, when a potential employer asks me whether I would like or not working while in school, I would definitely say yes. In another situation, for instance when discussing my performance with a tutor, I will possibly say that I would like to concentrate on my studies before I start working (Lowe, 2002). Another challenge in my decisions arises from the differences in logics and reasoning. Just because a person believes that a particular line of argument is logical, does not necessarily make it so. This would be assuming that something is real if a person thinks it is. Reason is the comparative ability to interpret the laws of logic to get valid conclusions. In my case, this common misunderstanding arises. Although, the laws of logic are absolute, the ability to apply them is not certain. Just because I believe that working and schooling at the same time is, logical does not make it so. This depends on my ability to apply the laws, which is definitely subject to errors. A drop in my grades can prove that my line of thought is not logical (Beall, 2006). The fact that truth and validity are different also affects my decisions and beliefs. If the bases of a line of argument are consistent and the conclusion is accurate, then the conclusion is termed as valid. For instance, in my case, certain basis for argument might not hold. If one argues that working while learning at the same time would affect my grades, this will only hold if I perform poorly in class. If I perform well while working, then the conclusion would not be valid. Similarly, arguing that working while learning would give me some experience will only hold if I gain the said experience or skills (Beall, 2007).
Conclusion
The essay unfolds that the law of non-contradiction is a metaphysics principle. The main idea is that the law of non-contradiction is a broad principle derived from how things interact and exist in the universe. For example, the existence of particular constraints as to the type of properties something may possess. The law of non-contradiction is important in making any speech significant. This is because nothing would have a meaning unless it rules out its reversal. For instance, in my case, ‘I would like to work while working’ will not be significant if there is no difference between working and not working while schooling.

References
Beall, R. (2006). Logical Pluralism. Oxford: Clarendon Press
Beall, P. (2007). Not so deep Inconsistency: a reply to Eklund, Australian Journal of Logic 5:74-84
Lowe, E. J. (2002). A survey of Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Molnar, G. (2000). Truthmakers for Negative Truths, Australian Journal of Philosophy 78 (1): 72-86
Priest, G. (1999). Perceiving contradictions, Australian Journal of Philosophy 77 (4): 439-446