I am unable to tell what you are talking about
in order of simplicity an din decreasing order of plausibility
option 1 if the claim is that paradoxical sentences or sequences such as
Yablo' sequences are generating contradictions they are false
if you adhere to cults such as dialetheism, hegelism and the like they are
true
option2 (tarskian moves) stop them from being sentences of L (language) and
deal with them in ML (metalanguage) IN ML all options are available to you
option 3 fixed point theories (see the Outline of 1979 by S A Kripke for a
quick summary, in JoPhil)
I am unsure about what Wittgenstein said, in the Tractatus his view is
false, while expressed in an aesthetically interesting way. In the middle
Wittgenstein (the 1930) only bullshit is produced (he knew this and not by
coincidence never published it)
after the 1930's the time of Untersuchungenm nothing of interest emerges on
the theory of truth or its non existence
Quatsch wird gelöscht, ohne gelesen zu werden
Kerem jojjenek maskor es kulonosen masho
הִשְׁתַּדֵּל הִזְדַּקֵּן
palma, a paolo shaul םֹשׁ ְרֵגּ
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 8:38 PM Paul Stone <pastone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What about the self-referential paradoxes?
Liars: This sentence is true.
Mathematical/logically based with a semantic root: Berry's, Richard's,
Grelling's
Epistemic: too many to count..."This sentence is not known to anyone."
Set-theoretic: Russell's, Cantor's, I think Hofstadter probably trashed
the former in his 200+ page screed against Russell, in his very thoughtful
"I am a Strange Loop"
Alas, I overstep my bounds. And since we are (kind of) on the topic of RP,
and therefore, Witters himself, they would both be aghast at the lack of
ultimate economy of language with which I am attempting to communicate.
I'm sorry for starting/continuing a philosophical discussion.
pas
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020, 2:21 PM adriano paolo shaul gershom palma, <
palmaadriano@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Quatsch wird gelöscht, ohne gelesen zu werden
Kerem jojjenek maskor es kulonosen masho
הִשְׁתַּדֵּל הִזְדַּקֵּן
sentential self reference has nothing to do with truth
consider
THIS SENTENCE IS WRITTEN IN SWEDISH
which is false.
what is your problem?
palma, a paolo shaul םֹשׁ ְרֵגּ
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 8:19 PM Paul Stone <pastone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What about sentences which are meta - that is, they talk about
themselves. Are these Schrodinger's sentences?
"I always lie!"
"Even when I'm serious I'm not."
Etc.
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020, 1:51 PM adriano paolo shaul gershom palma, <
palmaadriano@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This is an interesting inversion, I am of the opposite view
the "intelligible & non decidable" shows how weak decidability is
Quatsch wird gelöscht, ohne gelesen zu werden
Kerem jojjenek maskor es kulonosen masho
הִשְׁתַּדֵּל הִזְדַּקֵּן
palma, a paolo shaul םֹשׁ ְרֵגּ
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 7:34 PM Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Well if a statement is intelligible but not decidable then yes it
compromises that concept of truth.
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 4:39 PM adriano paolo shaul gershom palma <
palmaadriano@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
decidability got zippo to do with truth
for those with a philosophy training the easy examples are Goedelian
sentences (from the 1920's) - such sentences are true and non decidable
*~Bew*(*G*(*p*)) <-> P
Quatsch wird gelöscht, ohne gelesen zu werden
Kerem jojjenek maskor es kulonosen masho
הִשְׁתַּדֵּל הִזְדַּקֵּן
palma, a paolo shaul םֹשׁ ְרֵגּ
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 4:28 PM Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I am a good chess player in comparison to someone who just knows how
the horsie movies, but bad in comparison to a grandmaster. Without some
further qualification, the statement "Omar is a good chess player" while
intelligible, is not really decidable.
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 4:24 PM Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I am not sure that Robert subscribed to a binary notion of truth in
all contexts. Yes, pregnancy would be an example of binary truth, but
there
are plenty of examples in every-day life where it is non-binary -
Walter is
tall in comparison to whom ?
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 2:33 PM Walter Okshevsky <wokshevs@xxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi pas,
So, as Husserl was wont to say: Provide us with an example and
we'll
grant you all the rest. Give us a complex statement that is both
true
and false, i.e., truthy.
"Portions of truth"? "Truth" is not a count noun. You can't
dispense it
in portions as you would a cheese cake.
Cheers, Walter
---
On 2020-04-30 06:35, Paul Stone wrote:
One can't be a little bit pregnant, but I think one might beable to
speak portions of truth. I.E.: true/false as a binary only reallytruth is
works with very simple statements.
pas
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020, 4:52 AM Walter Okshevsky, <wokshevs@xxxxxx
wrote:
Cheers, Walter
P.S. In honour of Bob: My first sentence above assumes that
lower
qualitative/scalar, as if a statement can possess a higher or
------------------------------------------------------------------degree of truth. (As in "truthiness.") Of course, that's very
false.
Truth is binary, like pregnancy.
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation
on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
