you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BISH 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The paradox is, "Can a thing be something, that it isn't?"

Answer: No.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Correct, thats not a paradox at all, ''A' equals 'not A'' evaluates to false

[–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

"This sentence is false"

What's the answer? Is it true or false?

[–]BISH 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"This sentence is false"

What's the answer? Is it true or false?

It's a statement. The question creates paradoxical conditions that aren't inherent to the stand-alone statement.

The entire paradox is predicated on arbitrary rules that are assigned to the set.

"Bad things are good."

Is this a true/false statement?
Who cares. It's irrelevant, without a real world context.

These sets are designed to factor out real world issues, so the ruling class (Bertrand Russell, etc.) can pretend they're objective, and that their decisions are logically justifiable.

Heavy emphasis on in-group and out-group classification. Consistent with a culture of class-oriented scumbags.