Abstract

Abstract: Throughout this paper, by representing some paradoxes and their



associated proofs and arguments, we try to show the cases which proving



some assertions doesn’t conclude the truth of them . In the next step, we



try to find out Which proofs could be considered as reliable in a way that it



shows the Truth of their related assertion, specially We claim that math-



metical proofs could be considered as reliable ones in this sense.



Nevertheless, we claim that the validation of the previous assertion is



comparable to validation of Church Thesis in Computability Theory. So, we



could use it and we consider these proofs as reliable ones but we should be



doubtful about their truth. At last we give a possible explanation for this



subject (based on local arguments and global arguments, the concepts which



we introduce them throughout this paper), and we investigate the validity of this



explanation. What we should bold it here is: In this approach we know the proofs



in these paradoxes as correct proofs, but the point which we want to stress on that



would be: the proof doesn’t show



the truth.







.