Re: Source Code for OS?

[Roy and/or Janet Miller <millers@inetnebr.com>]

olcott wrote:

> Roy and/or Janet Miller wrote:
>
>  It is completely obvious (to me) that the
> Liar paradox errs, yet so far no one else has been
> able to see even this... The liar paradox makes the
> same error as the statement below. Tell me the truth
> or falsity of the statement immediately below this
> sentence.
>
> What time is it?
>
> What was the truth or falsity of the above statement, and why?

An interrogative is not an indicative. Therefore, it does not make a claim, and therefore,
it's claim cannot be tested as to whether or not it is false.  You really need to learn a
bit more about grammar. Only an indicative makes an unqualified claim of truth. To compare
an indicative to an interrogative is to compare apples and oranges. You are ducking the
question - again.

>
>
> > > Neither can you prove that the following statement is
> > > true of false, and for the same reason. On the next line
> > > after this sentence I will present a statement and ask
> > > you to tell me whether it is true or false, and why?
> > >
> > > What time is it?
> > >
> > > Now was that statement true or false, and why?
> >
> > 1. It it isn't a statement - it's a question.
> > 2. Therefore, it can't be proven true or false, because it doesn't make a statement
> > 3. The statement that QC made was a statement
>
> Am I lying here? (in this question itself, without any reference to anything else that I
> said)

You are neither lying, nor speaking the truth. Nor have you made a statement. If fact, you
haven't "said" anything, you have "asked" something. Your verbs are off, because your
grammar is off. Of course, in my opinion, you are off.

Roy

>
>
> >
> > 4. Therefore, your following was in error, "Neither can you prove that the following
> > statement is
> > true of false, and for the same reason."  Not that you will admit it of course. People
> > with a messianic complex never do.
> >
> > Roy