It’s interesting to me that Augustus DeMorgan’s view of “a paradoxer” is someone who “attacks the consequences, direct and indirect, of the mathematical method.

It’s interesting to me that Augustus DeMorgan’s view of “a paradoxer” is someone who “attacks the consequences, direct and indirect, of the mathematical method.” (gentle paraphrase) Why is that the central tenet of being a paradoxer? To me, that’s how I learn and internalize things. I take the premise under study, find some consequence that feels absurd, and turn it this way and that in my mind until the flaw in my own previous thinking becomes clear to me. Are there better ways of learning? Does this make me more prone to being a paradoxer?