From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!markh Thu Jan 16 17:19:56 EST 1992
Article 2667 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai.philosophy:2667 sci.philosophy.tech:1823 sci.logic:789
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.logic
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!markh
>From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark William Hopkins)
Subject: Re: How to outdo Roger Penrose
Message-ID: <1992Jan13.194942.14072@uwm.edu>
Sender: news@uwm.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
References: <1992Jan7.212922.20851@oracorp.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 19:49:42 GMT
Lines: 18

In article <1992Jan7.212922.20851@oracorp.com> daryl@oracorp.com writes:
>In this thought experiment, I put both you and Roger Penrose in an
>examination room and give you each an answer sheet and a sharpened
>pencil. I then ask you both to write on your respective sheets the
>answer to the following question: Will Roger Penrose ever write the
>word "no" on his answer sheet? Only yes-no answers are allowed, and
>you can only give one answer, after which your answer sheet is taken
>from you.
>
>Using introspection, intentionality, consiousness, reflection, and
>non-algorithmic intuition, you reason that the answer is "no", so you
>write that down. On the other hand, if Roger Penrose answered "no",
>then he would be lying. Assuming that Roger is going to play fair,
>then he will never write "no" on his answer sheet, so your answering
>"no" is correct...

Of course, his answer to that will be "Just say no".  He'll make a point by
not playing fair.


