= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
wedrifid 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)
What about
'all sentances are either true or false'.
This sounds like the sort of sentance we'd want to assign a truth value to. Yet we can instanciate it into
'this sentance is either true or false'
Which is problematic - and yet it seems that it must have a truth value if the first sentance did.
Why is that a problem? It is a true sentence.
I take it the problem is that it doesn't unpack even though it does have a truth value. Or at least it isn't obvious how to unpack it. It's a false negative candidate.
So the point is that it is a sentence that demonstrates a problem with using unpackability as a requirement for qualifying as meaningful English? That seems reasonable.
That's what I got from it.
Note that the universal "All sentences are either true or false" also, doesn't appear to meet the unpackability requirement, though I'm not confident I know how to make a Tarski sentence out of that.