[FOM] Another easy solution does not work

[Sandy Hodges]

> Just forbid liars.
>
> Matt Insall

Suppose there were such a prohibition (issued by whom, I wonder?)

Suppose Professor Insall hears Betty say:
1. The sentence Angela spoke yesterday was not true.

Does he (not knowing what Angela said) conclude that:
2. If what Betty says is true, then the sentence Angela spoke yesterday
was not true.

Does the idea that Liars are forbidden answer the question as whether 2
is a correct conclusion?   Or if it is not correct, does it say what the
correct conclusion would be?

--
Consider these sentences:

3.   Sentence 4 is a forbidden Liar paradox.
4.   Sentence 3 is a forbidden Liar paradox.

Are 3 and 4 both true?  How could they be?   So lets say 3 and 4 are
paradoxical and thus forbidden.   Whatever the consequences of being
forbidden are, they apply to 3 and 4.    I don't know what "forbid"
means, exactly, but whatever it is, 3 and 4 are it.   Thus:

5.   Sentence 4 is a forbidden Liar paradox.

Sentence 5 states our own position, that 4 is a Liar and is thus
forbidden.     Thus, 5 is true.    So 5 is true and 3 is forbidden. But
they're the same sentence!

------- -- ---- - --- -- --------- -----
Sandy Hodges / Alameda,  California,   USA
mail to SandyHodges at attbi.com will reach me.