From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!psinntp!psinntp!scylla!daryl Mon Nov  9 09:36:38 EST 1992
Article 7500 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!psinntp!psinntp!scylla!daryl
>From: daryl@oracorp.com (Daryl McCullough)
Subject: Re: The Paradox of the Unexpected Hanging
Message-ID: <1992Nov3.051001.21374@oracorp.com>
Organization: ORA Corporation
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 05:10:01 GMT
Lines: 27

In article <gm4FTB4w165w@CODEWKS.nacjack.gen.nz>,
system@CODEWKS.nacjack.gen.nz (Wayne McDougall) writes:

>> Now, as John Baez said, the induction aspect working backward from
>> Friday to Sunday is irrelevant. The heart of the paradox can be found
>> in a simplified version where the judge says to the prisoner: "You
>> will be executed today, but you will not be able to figure out that
>> you will be executed today."
>
>Excuse me, but it seems inappropriate to transform the judge's sentence 
>into a self-contradictory statement.

The statement "You will be executed today, but you will not be able to
figure out that you will be executed today" is *not*
self-contradictory. Suppose the prisoner thinks the judge might be
lying, then he can't figure out anything from what the judge says.
Therefore the judge's second statement "...you will not be able to
figure out that you will be executed today" will turn out to be true.
If in addition, the judge *does* hang the prisoner, then the first
statement "You will be executed today" will turn out to be true. If
everything the judge says turns out to be true, then it can't be
self-contradictory.

Daryl McCullough
ORA Corp.
Ithaca, NY



