On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Logical: "This statement is true." On the basis of logic alone, > either TRUE or FALSE is self-consistent. > > Legal: "Goethe was a player at <appropriate time c. December > 2006>". According to one legal interpretation, TRUE is consistent > and FALSE is not; according to another, FALSE is consistent and > TRUE is not.
I don't recall the details of Goethe's paradox; I think I was deregistered at the time. But in general, if something is purely a matter of legal interpretation, then neither UNDECIDABLE nor FLOYD would be appropriate. It's the judge's job in such a case to pick a legal interpretation and judge TRUE or FALSE based upon it. That's the whole purpose of the judicial system to begin with. -root
