From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!gatech!concert!sas!mozart.unx.sas.com!sasghm Tue Nov 24 10:52:15 EST 1992
Article 7659 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai.philosophy:7659 sci.logic:2331
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!gatech!concert!sas!mozart.unx.sas.com!sasghm
>From: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com (Gary Merrill)
Subject: Re: Self-Reference and Paradox (was Re: Human intelligence...)
Originator: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com
Sender: news@unx.sas.com (Noter of Newsworthy Events)
Message-ID: <BxtBwx.LvH@unx.sas.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:22:09 GMT
References:  <1992Nov14.151559.13227@oracorp.com>
Nntp-Posting-Host: theseus.unx.sas.com
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
Lines: 22


In article <1992Nov14.151559.13227@oracorp.com>, daryl@oracorp.com (Daryl McCullough) writes:

|> In my opinion, the problem with such sentences are not with their
|> self-referential character, but with their use of an unrestricted
|> notion of truth (or falsity).

Of course this was Tarski's idea as well.

|> 
|>     This sentence is false.
|> 
|> refers to an unrestricted notion of falsity, and is therefore
|> meaningless. We can replace "false" by a restricted notion of falsity

This sort of thing has been tried before.  One problem is that the displayed
sentence is *not* meaningless in any normal sense of this term.  We
know perfectly well what it means -- and that's the problem.
-- 
Gary H. Merrill  [Principal Systems Developer, C Compiler Development]
SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC  27513 / (919) 677-8000
sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com ... !mcnc!sas!sasghm


