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!
This is also a paradox because it is part of the constellation of the existence problems: A is B, is false if A is empty. Don't bother really. Frege et al. have been over all this a century ago. You have to postulate the axiom of comprehension, axiom of existence, axiom of infinity, and you need a meta-escape clause somewhere to satisfy the power set... Blah, blah, blah. CG _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
