On Aug 20, 2013, at 1:43 PM, Chuck Grimes wrote:
... These can be modeled on the liar's
paradox which leads to a contradiction in the formation of
definitions.
Example. This statement is false. (A)\
But---what statement does "this statement" refer to? If some prior
statement, no problem or paradox. If the statement is "this statement
is false" then we must say " 'this statement is false' is false."
Again, no paradox because the contradiction in Aristotelian logic is
between false and not-false, and not-false in no way implies true: a
statement may be performative, emotional, or meaningless and as such
neither true nor false.One version of the liar paradox is attributed
to the Greek philosopher
...Eubulides reportedly asked, "A man says that he is lying. Is what
he says true or false?"
Obviously false, because he has made no meaningful statement (nobody
can say what the "lie" in question was) and therefore cannot have
been intentionally or recklessly stating what is not the case (which
is the definition of lying)--unless he said it while recumbent, in
which case it is true!
Shane Mage
"Thunderbolt steers all things." Herakleitos of Ephesos, fr. 64
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
