Đang chuẩn bị liên kết để tải về tài liệu:
A Budget of Paradoxes, Volume I (of II)

It is not without hesitation that I have taken upon myself the editorship of a work left avowedly imperfect by the author, and, from its miscellaneous and discursive character, difficult of completion with due regard to editorial limitations by a less able hand. Had the author lived to carry out his purpose he would have looked through his Budget again, amplifying and probably rearranging some of its contents. He had collected materials for further illustration of Paradox of the kind treated of in this book; and he meant to write a second part, in which the contradictions and inconsistencies of orthodox learning would have been subjected. | A Budget of Paradoxes Volume I of II by 1 PROJECT GUTENBERG A BUDGET OF PARADOXES VOLUME I Augustus de Morgan A Budget of Paradoxes Volume I of II by Augustus De Morgan This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org Title A Budget of Paradoxes Volume I of II Author Augustus De Morgan Editor David Eugene Smith Release Date October 20 2007 EBook 23100 Language English Character set encoding ISO-8859-1 START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A BUDGET OF PARADOXES Produced by David Starner Keith Edkins and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http www.pgdp.net Transcriber s note A few typographical errors have been corrected they are listed at the end of the text. A Budget of Paradoxes Volume I of II by BY AUGUSTUS DE MORGAN 2 A BUDGET OF PARADOXES REPRINTED WITH THE AUTHOR S ADDITIONS FROM THE ATHENAEUM SECOND EDITION EDITED BY DAVID EUGENE SMITH WITH A NEW INTRODUCTION BY ERNEST NAGEL PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY UNABRIDGED EDITION--TWO VOLUMES BOUND AS ONE Volume I DOVER PUBLICATIONS INC. NEW YORK PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 1872 It is not without hesitation that I have taken upon myself the editorship of a work left avowedly imperfect by the author and from its miscellaneous and discursive character difficult of completion with due regard to editorial limitations by a less able hand. Had the author lived to carry out his purpose he would have looked through his Budget again amplifying and probably rearranging some of its contents. He had collected materials for further illustration of Paradox of the kind treated of in this book and he meant to write a second part in which the contradictions and inconsistencies of orthodox learning would have been subjected to the same scrutiny and castigation as heterodox ignorance had already received. It will be