Re: Liar paradox, one more time
From: Poker Joker (Poker_at_wi.rr.com)
Date: 07/30/04
- Next message: edens rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- Previous message: Poker Joker: "Re: Liar paradox, one more time"
- In reply to: Paul Holbach: "Re: Liar paradox, one more time"
- Next in thread: Paul Holbach: "Re: Liar paradox, one more time"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 22:33:17 GMT
"Paul Holbach" <paulholbachSPAMBAN@freenet.de> wrote in message
news:881c8779.0407301130.7f873e16@posting.google.com...
> > "Poker Joker" <Poker@wi.rr.com> wrote in message news:<
> > YkiOc.56407$vN3.20520@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>...
> > > "Paul Holbach" <paulholbachSPAMBAN@freenet.de> wrote in message
> > > news:881c8779.0407291735.34ac845a@posting.google.com...
>
> > > Would you mind revealing your definition of "semantically acceptable"?
>
> > Let's just say that a sentence is semantically acceptable if its meaning
> > is well understood.
>
> For example, the sentence "This sentence is hungry" is semantically
> incongruous, because sentences do not belong to the kind of things
> that can feel hunger.
> But "This sentence is not true" is not semantically incongruous,
> because (assertoric) sentences are exactly the things that can be true
> or false.
Too bad "This sentence is not true." isn't an assertion though.
Of course, you think it can be true or false. So if I claim its
true, you think I'm correct. If I claim its false, you think I'm
correct. You aren't normal dude.
- Next message: edens rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- Previous message: Poker Joker: "Re: Liar paradox, one more time"
- In reply to: Paul Holbach: "Re: Liar paradox, one more time"
- Next in thread: Paul Holbach: "Re: Liar paradox, one more time"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
