Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox

From	"Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math, comp.ai.philosophy
Subject	Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox
Date	2025-11-28 17:06 -0800
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<10gdgu4$2t12t$6@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <10g9u87$1iors$1@dont-email.me> <10gbl74$26had$1@dont-email.me> <10gcm5u$2k00p$3@dont-email.me> <10gdfi1$2t12t$4@dont-email.me> <10gdfuh$2ubft$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 11/28/2025 4:49 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
> Chris M. Thomasson has brought this to us :
>> On 11/28/2025 9:29 AM, dart200 wrote:
>>> On 11/28/25 12:06 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> olcott kirjoitti 27.11.2025 klo 18.28:
>>>>> On 11/27/2025 8:36 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> This sentence is not true.
>>>>>> It is not true about what?
>>>>>> It is not true about being not true.
>>>>>> It is not true about being not true about what?
>>>>>> It is not true about being not true about being not true.
>>>>>> Oh I see you are stuck in a loop!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The simple English shows that the Liar Paradox never
>>>>>> gets to the point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is formalized in the Prolog programming language
>>>>>> ?- LP = not(true(LP)).
>>>>>> LP = not(true(LP)).
>>>>>> ?- unify_with_occurs_check(LP, not(true(LP))).
>>>>>> False.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Failing an occurs check seems to mean that the
>>>>>> resolution of an expression remains stuck in
>>>>>> infinite recursion. This is more clearly seen below.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In Olcott's Minimal Type Theory
>>>>>> LP := ~True(LP)    // LP {is defined as} ~True(LP)
>>>>>> that expands to ~True(~True(~True(~True(~True(~True(...))))))
>>>>>> https://philarchive.org/archive/PETMTT-4v2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The above seems to prove that the Liar Paradox
>>>>>> has merely been semantically unsound all these years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox*
>>>>> https://philpapers.org/archive/OLCFRO.pdf
>>>>
>>>> Nothing is final in philosophy.
>>>
>>> self-contradictory statement bro
>>>
>>> clearly at least something much be final, because if nothing was 
>>> final then that premise would become final and contradict itself
>>
>> How many digits does PI have?
> 
> 10 in decimal.

It's funny. PO with his "artificial abort" would say PI went on for too 
many symbols, no matter what radix. But how would he know if it was 
reading from a buffer that had more symbols in it. It's finite, but PO 
cuts it off and says its non-halting even though he cut himself off at 
the knees before the buffer was fully read. The black box program is 
simply outputting symbols of pi. PO says that's too many, says 
non-halting. The program under consideration has many more symbols to 
process, but it got aborted...

Thread

Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-27 08:36 -0600
  Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-27 10:28 -0600
    Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-28 10:06 +0200
      Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-28 08:03 -0600
        Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-29 10:48 +0200
          Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 10:04 -0600
            Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-30 11:10 +0200
      Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-28 09:29 -0800
        Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-28 12:10 -0600
        Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-28 16:42 -0800
          Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox FromTheRafters <FTR@nomail.afraid.org> - 2025-11-28 19:49 -0500
            Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-28 16:57 -0800
            Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-28 17:06 -0800
        Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-29 10:55 +0200
          Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 10:10 -0600
            Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-29 11:00 -0800
              Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 13:16 -0600
            Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-30 11:12 +0200
          on "Nothing is final" dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-29 10:53 -0800
            Re: on "Nothing is final" olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 13:00 -0600
  Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-27 18:07 +0000
    Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-28 16:43 -0800
      Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 01:20 +0000
        Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-28 17:28 -0800
      Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-29 11:06 +0200
        Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 14:37 -0800
          Re: Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-30 11:16 +0200

csiph-web