= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Thomas comments on Unsolved Problems in Philosophy Part 1: The Liar's Paradox - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (130)
Interestingly, the Yablo's paradox vanishes when there is no infinity. If the last statement of the Yablo's sequence exists, it is true. And all at the preceding positions are false. Everything is well. Another reason, I am an infinity atheist.
The "last statement"? This would require that there exists a highest natural number. That seems like it would be a weirder occurrence than the mostly harmless Yablo's paradox.
Although I suppose we can always choose to work in "the natural numbers mod N", for some value of N, which is one way to banish "infinity".
There is no need for ridiculously large numbers. There is always the last statement in a row and this way and only this way, no Yablo paradox arises.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. "There is no need"? So is there a highest natural number, or not? Because if not:
If there is no infinity (the premise) then there must be.
If there is no infinity there must not be a highest natural number, but there could be if there is infinity?
s/not //
Edit: That looks bad. Let's see.
s/.ot /
That works.