Re: Deep Thoughts # 17: Liar Paradox is a Formal Metamathematical Theorem

From: Barb Knox (see_at_sig.below)
Date: 10/11/04 

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:30:55 +1300

In article <bde404c9.0410091454.9253b8d@posting.google.com>,
 QncyMI@netscape.net (Brian Quincy Hutchings) wrote:

>ny total tutorial in predicate logic was reading
>_The Laws of Form_ through to the middle
>of the chapter with second-order equations;
>it purports to be the unmentioned "arithmetic"
>of boolean/predicate logic. I agree.

Since I (and presumably most others) have not read that book, if you want to
have a serious conversation then you need to state the relevant ideas here.

> of course, I've come across examples, before & since.

A few well-chosen examples that illustrates whatever your point is would be
helpful too.

>my point was taht the "time dimension" is simply ignored,
>although it is naturally required, even to ennunciate the "paradox;"

So you say. As I said, it sure doesn't look that way. Please PROVIDE some
of the allegedly deeper analysis, rather than just asserting that there is
one.

>the same applies to Lord Berty's Village Barber conundrum;
>it's just a conundrum!

So where do you disagree with my analysis?
[unsnip]
>>And again, where is the explicit or implicit reference to time
>>in the Barber paradox?
>>
>>And the Liar seems much more intractable than the
>>Barber: the simple solution to the Barber paradox is that there can not be
>>any such barber (just as the usual solution to the Russell-set paradox is
>>that there can not be any such set). But applying that to the Liar would be
>>saying that there can not be any such statement, but in actual fact there it
>>is right before your eyes.

>Barb Knox <see@sig.below> wrote in message
>news:<ck7cam$b0n$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>...
>
>> It sure doesn't look that way: there is no explicit reference to time in
>> "This statement is false". By what deeper analysis to do you impute some
>> time reference?
>
>--ils duces d'Enron!
>http://larouchepub.com

(BTW, that isn't a useful link to include in a sci.logic/sci.math post,
unless you WANT to be thought of as a kook.) 

-- 
---------------------------
|  BBB                b    \     Barbara at LivingHistory stop co stop uk
|  B  B   aa     rrr  b     |
|  BBB   a  a   r     bbb   |    Quidquid latine dictum sit,
|  B  B  a  a   r     b  b  |    altum viditur.
|  BBB    aa a  r     bbb   |   
-----------------------------