'' Paradox''

[Sifjar]

If A is telling to B '' I lie '' does it mean A is telling the truth to B ?

[Arthur Gordon Pym]

Originally Posted by Sifjar

If A is telling to B '' I lie '' does it mean A is telling the truth to B ?

No.

[Sifjar]

Originally Posted by Plethon

No.

Why it's no? Give me an example.

[Arthur Gordon Pym]

The Epimenides Paradox

Talk:Epimenides paradox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Weltschmerz]

Originally Posted by Plethon

No.

Well, what does it mean then?

[Arthur Gordon Pym]

Originally Posted by Seekers

Well, what does it mean then?

It means nothing. If A says: "I lie", then it could mean that he is lying about his lying and is actually telling the truth.

[Sifjar]

Originally Posted by Seekers

Well, what does it mean then?

Well he sent the link without motivating it, that all.

[Weltschmerz]

Originally Posted by Plethon

It means nothing. If A says: "I lie", then it could mean that he is lying about his lying and is actually telling the truth.

It doesn't mean nothing in my opinion. It was mentioned, by the author of the webpage that you provided, that he had not discovered a solution to this paradox. It is a paradox. In fact I think that it is misleading to talk about paradox as something that can be solved so as to no longer be what it was supposed to be, namely paradox.

In my opinion, there are paradoxes, and I also think that they are mirrors of some of our most existential conditions.

For example, the statement <<There is no truth.>> is difficult or even impossible to interpret. We are not allowed to say that it is true. Given that we assume that there is truth, and the statement is false, we are faced with the question of what is true, and it is a very difficult question.

There is conditional truth, that follows from conditions or presuppositions. But if these truths follow from their conditions, what then is this truth? What is truth? Is it just an outcome of an intellectual game, where the outcome 'true' was actually determined already by the conditions? I'm not saying that it is, and I don't think so, but what is it? Even empirical truth is labouring with conditions that call for this question. One can always resort to an experiential ground for truth, what is sometimes called a subjective foundation, however misleading the term subjective may be.

At any rate, we are faced with the dilemma that the no-truth-assumption is not acceptable, and still the nature of truth is very difficult or impossible to explicate.

[Arthur Gordon Pym]

Originally Posted by Seekers

It doesn't mean nothing in my opinion. It was mentioned, by the author of the webpage that you provided, that he had not discovered a solution to this paradox. It is a paradox. In fact I think that it is misleading to talk about paradox as something that can be solved so as to no longer be what it was supposed to be, namely paradox.

In my opinion, there are paradoxes, and I also think that they are mirrors of some of our most existential conditions.

For example, the statement <<There is no truth.>> is difficult or even impossible to interpret. We are not allowed to say that it is true. Given that we assume that there is truth, and the statement is false, we are faced with the question of what is true, and it is a very difficult question.

There is conditional truth, that follows from conditions or presuppositions. But if these truths follow from their conditions, what then is this truth? What is truth? Is it just an outcome of an intellectual game, where the outcome 'true' was actually determined already by the conditions? I'm not saying that it is, and I don't think so, but what is it? Even empirical truth is labouring with conditions that call for this question. One can always resort to an experiential ground for truth, what is sometimes called a subjective foundation, however misleading the term subjective may be.

At any rate, we are faced with the dilemma that the no-truth-assumption is not acceptable, and still the nature of truth is very difficult or impossible to explicate.

I entirely agree and I think that was the reason why Paul referred to it. (Titus, 1, 12)

[Weltschmerz]

What do you say, Sifjar? Was there any special reason why you brought it up? I think it's a very interesting topic.

[Engelbrecht]

Originally Posted by Sifjar

If A is telling to B '' I lie '' does it mean A is telling the truth to B ?

I would answer that you can not determine what A means, since the words I lie is not an absolute value. The words I lie just means that his does not mean what he says. Since truth here is just the opposite to lie it can be either way.

It is not really a question of philosophy in the pure sense, but a linguistic shortcoming.