Perplexed comments on Unsolved Problems in Philosophy Part 1: The Liar's Paradox - Less Wrong

4 Post author: Kevin 30 November 2010 08:56AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (130)
Tags: philosophy paradox unsolved

Comments (130)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ata 01 December 2010 04:03:31AM *  2 points [-]

Tarski left out some of the fine print. That "if and only if" works only under the prior assumption that "snow" designates snow, "white" designates white

Not really. If "snow" designates grass, and "white" designates green, then "'snow is white' is true if and only if snow is white" is still correct. Same if "snow" designates the sky and "white" designates green.

Comment author: Perplexed 01 December 2010 04:44:03AM 0 points [-]

I'm afraid I don't understand your point.

Comment author: timtyler 01 December 2010 09:23:06AM *  0 points [-]

It should have read: "Same if "snow" designates the sky and "white" designates blue."

It was apparently a nitpick of your first paragraph, ignoring your second paragraph.

Comment author: Perplexed 01 December 2010 06:36:16PM 0 points [-]

That can't be right. If he both misinterpreted 'prior assumption' and made a serious typo, his comment would not have been twice upvoted, would it?

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit