Post : All Liar, No Paradox http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/08/01/all-liar-no-paradox/ Date : August 1, 2015 at 10:30 am
| A statement S_0 asserts that a statement S_1 is a statement that S_1 is false. | | The statement S_0 violates an axiom of logic and it doesn't really | matter whether the ostensible statement S_1, the so-called “liar”, | really is a statement or has a truth value. Peircers, When I endeavored some years ago to examine the so-called “liar paradox” from what I take to be a pragmatic, semiotic, sign relational standpoint, I arrived at a way of understanding it that dispelled, for me, every air of paradox about it. I wrote out an articulation of that analysis under the same title I'm using here and shared it in several discussion groups. The couplet above is a maximally trimmed down rendering of that analysis. The more rambling version can be found at these locations: • http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.misc.ontology.general/1094 • http://forum.wolframscience.com/archive/topic/266.html Regards, Jon -- academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/ inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/ isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
