*From*: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx*To*: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx*Date*: Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:16:27 EST

Yost: >It's my misconstrual of Buridan's thirteenth >sophism. >"I know this: 'p & ~p' is false." >"Ergo, "I know this: 'p & ~p' is false" cannot be true or false. For >If "I know this: 'p & ~p' is false" is true, a sentence conatining the predicate 'false' would be known. >If "I know this: 'p & ~p is false' " is false, it is not the case that I know this: 'p & ~p' is false" >And Ergo, "It is the case that I know this: 'p & ~p' is false" and "It is not the case that I know this: 'p & ~p' is false" would be equivalent. >Ergo, "I know this: 'p & ~p' is false" is not a proposition. Perhaps Yost may be able to find the original Latin sophisma. There is a pdf document that mentions TWO sections of sophisma, and I counted two different series of first, second, third. I understand the critical edition is by Scott, but not online apparently. Cheers, J. L. **************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest products. (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)

**Follow-Ups**:

- » [lit-ideas] Buridan, Sophisma XIII -- Summa Logicae (Latin)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Buridan, Sophisma XIII -- Summa Logicae (Latin)