Re: Where is the paradox in liar?
- From: "Newberry" <newberry@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 1 May 2006 07:19:40 -0700
This doesn't follow. What does follow is that every formal
logic in which you can represent "This sentence is false."
must have more than 2 truth values.
I will accept your correction. I will modify my statement: It is
wortwhile investigationg logics that allow the truth value
"meaningess." If you do not want to call "meaningless" a truth value
that's fine. Propose a term.
In mathematical logic, provability can be defined, but not
truth.
Your argument is circular. They arrived at this conclusion
investigating 2-valued logic.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Where is the paradox in liar?
- From: H. J. Sander Bruggink
- Re: Where is the paradox in liar?
- References:
- Re: Where is the paradox in liar?
- From: H. J. Sander Bruggink
- Re: Where is the paradox in liar?
- Prev by Date: Re: Where is the paradox in liar?
- Next by Date: Re: Where is the paradox in liar?
- Previous by thread: Re: Where is the paradox in liar?
- Next by thread: Re: Where is the paradox in liar?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|