So this seems like quite a parallel between “truth” and “existence, — J
What I'm trying to pin down is whether anyone has addressed specifically the apparent parallel between "Existence is not a predicate" and "Truth is not a predication." Does it ring any bells? — J
Can you possibly see how answering this (again) might be considered "feeding the trolls"? — bongo fury
So your comments aren't helping you or RussellA to understand the passage. — bongo fury
One line of reasoning that leads to contradiction relies on the schema (T)
S is true iff p.
Some versions of the liar involve falsity rather than truth.
Take the sentence (6)
(6) is false.
This sentence attributes falsity to itself.
By (T), (6) is true iff (6) is false.
"the whole outside sentence here attributes falsity no longer to itself but merely to something other than itself".
Let "The Pentastring" refer to "This sentence has five words". — TonesInDeepFreeze
The Pentastring has five words, since the Pentastring is "This sentence has five words" and "This sentence has five words" has five words. — TonesInDeepFreeze
"London" is a city. (false - "London" is a word, not a city) — TonesInDeepFreeze
"The Pentastring has five words" asserts that "This sentence has five words" has five words. — TonesInDeepFreeze
Suppose we define 'the Pentastring' as the "This string has five words". — TonesInDeepFreeze
"This sentence has five words" asserts that "This sentence has five words" has five words. — TonesInDeepFreeze
And I may stipulate that in the context of my post, "This sentence" refers to "This sentence has five words"...On what basis is it claimes "This sentence has five words" not meaningful? — TonesInDeepFreeze
Self-referential case
In the self-referential case, "this sentence, the sentence "this sentence contains five words", contains five words".
But we know that this sentence is the sentence "this sentence contains five words".
Therefore, "this sentence, the sentence "the sentence "this sentence contains five words" contains five words", contains five words".
Ad infinitum. Infinite recursion. Therefore meaningless. — RussellA
In " "this sentence is false" is false", "this sentence is false" is the inside sentence — bongo fury
No. Quine doesn't say that, and he doesn't say anyone else has said that. — bongo fury
But the whole outside sentence here attributes falsity no longer to itself but merely to something other than itself, thereby engendering no paradox.
here's Quine — bongo fury
But the whole outside sentence here attributes falsity no longer to itself but merely to something other than itself, thereby engendering no paradox. Quine
Wrong. "This sentence has five words" is "This sentence has five words". They are the same linguistic object. As RussellA himself says, the wording is identical. So they are the same sentence. — TonesInDeepFreeze
But that's not fair to the inquiry, since the fact that one dialectically incompetent poster can't come up with a good argument for his claim should not be taken to entail that no one can. — TonesInDeepFreeze
It’s really simple; the self-referential sentence “this sentence contains five words” is meaningful. I understand what it means, you understand what it means, and everyone else understands what it means. It’s not some foreign language or random combination of words. And we can count the words in the sentence to determine that it’s true. — Michael
It’s meaningful even when it’s referring to itself. — Michael
In philosophy—more specifically, in its sub-fields semantics, semiotics, philosophy of language, metaphysics, and metasemantics—meaning "is a relationship between two sorts of things: signs and the kinds of things they intend, express, or signify".
I maintain that barbers are people who shave people who are in the world.......................Therefore, if a barber tries to shave himself, there is an inherent contradiction. — bongo fury
The redundancy theory of truth usually applies to all sentences, whether it be "this sentence contains five words" or "it is raining". Seems strange to only apply it to self-referential sentences. — Michael
To say that "a horse is a horse" is true is saying no more than "a horse is a horse".
===============================================================================It is worthy of notice that the sentence "I smell the scent of violets" has the same content as the sentence "it is true that I smell the scent of violets". So it seems, then, that nothing is added to the thought by my ascribing to it the property of truth.
But even then, there's still nothing problematic with the sentence "this sentence contains five words". It is meaningful, despite your protestations to the contrary. — Michael
Which sentence were you referring to when you made these statements? — EricH
In context we do know. — Michael
If you want to be explicit, then: The self-referential sentence "this sentence contains five words" is true. — Michael
Gottlob Frege was probably the first philosophical logician to express something very close to the idea that the predicate "is true" does not express anything above and beyond the statement to which it is attributed. In 1892, he wrote:
One can, indeed, say: "The thought that 5 is a prime number is true." But closer examination shows that nothing more has been said than in the simple sentence "5 is a prime number." The truth claim arises in each case from the form of the declarative sentence, and when the latter lacks its usual force, e.g., in the mouth of an actor upon the stage, even the sentence "The thought that 5 is a prime number is true" contains only a thought, and indeed the same thought as the simple "5 is a prime number."[1]
In 1918, he argued:
It is worthy of notice that the sentence "I smell the scent of violets" has the same content as the sentence "it is true that I smell the scent of violets". So it seems, then, that nothing is added to the thought by my ascribing to it the property of truth.[2][3]
The words "has" and "contain" have identical meaning in the context of this discussion. — EricH
Conclusion? "This sentence contains five words" is true. QED — EricH
Do you think each of them is dependent on each other, or should we look at them individually? — javi2541997
The self-referential sentence "this sentence contains five words" is true because it contains five words.........................This is incredibly straightforward. — Michael
What is a belief, and what is an attitude? — Noble Dust
It's grounded in that we can count how many words are in the sentence "this sentence contains fifty words". There are five words, not fifty, and so the sentence is false. — Michael
"this sentence contains five words" is grounded and is true.
"this sentence contains fifty words" is grounded and is false.
"this sentence is false" is ungrounded and is neither true nor false. — Michael
I do know that. It refers to itself, it contains five words, and so it doesn’t contain fifty words. — Michael
I do know that. It refers to itself, it contains five words, and so it doesn’t contain fifty words. — Michael
They are discussing the liar paradox. We are not discussing the liar paradox. We are discussing the sentences "this sentence contains five words" and "this sentence contains fifty words". — Michael
===============================================================================The Liar Paradox is an argument that arrives at a contradiction by reasoning about a Liar Sentence. The Classical Liar Sentence is the self-referential sentence: This sentence is false.
From the SEP article on self-reference:... self-reference is not a sufficient condition for paradoxicality. The truth-teller sentence “This sentence is true” is not paradoxical, and neither is the sentence “This sentence contains four words” (it is false, though) — Michael
Kripke proposes a solution in the following manner. If a statement's truth value is ultimately tied up in some evaluable fact about the world, that statement is "grounded". If not, that statement is "ungrounded". Ungrounded statements do not have a truth value. Liar statements and liar-like statements are ungrounded, and therefore have no truth value.
It is quite possible you and Tones went through this exact point, but honestly if I read through all 8 pages I might develop dementia before I even hit middle age. — Lionino
But you weren't talking about the liar paradox. You were talking about the sentences "this sentence contains five words" and "this sentence contains fifty words". These two sentences are meaningful, with the first being true and the second being false. — Michael
That you blatantly skip this point over and over is intellectual dishonesty. — TonesInDeepFreeze
No it’s not. — Michael
No it doesn’t. It contains five words and so is false. — Michael
1. This sentence contains five words.
2. This sentence contains fifty words.
(1) is true and (2) is false. It's not complicated. I don't understand the problem you have. — Michael
1. It is raining.
2. "it is raining" is true iff it is raining.
(1) and (2) do not mean the same thing. (1) is true iff it is raining but (2) is true even if it isn't raining. — Michael
Yes? And the sentence would be false. — Michael
With the sentence "Jack is tall", the sentence makes the claim that Jack is tall...................With the sentence "This sentence has five words", the sentence makes the claim that "This sentence has five words" has five words. — TonesInDeepFreeze
"This sentence has five words" is the sentence in question. It is true if and only if "This sentence has five words" has five words. — TonesInDeepFreeze
"New York is in France" makes no mention of the number of words in "New York is in France". — TonesInDeepFreeze
"This sentence has five words" is the sentence in question. It is true if and only if "This sentence has five words" has five words. — TonesInDeepFreeze
So, the purpose of this thread is to submit memes, not to learn how to use 'postimages.org' — javi2541997
You think Mark Twain was someone other Samuel Clemens? — TonesInDeepFreeze
That baby was named "Samuel Langhorne Clemens" and was Samuel Clemens — TonesInDeepFreeze
"This string has five words" was named "The Pentastring", and "This string has five words" is the Pentastring. — TonesInDeepFreeze
"London" is a city. (false - "London" is a word, not a city) — TonesInDeepFreeze
In the expression "this sentence has five words", which sentence is "this" referring to?
Possibility 2
It could be referring to itself. In this case, the sentence "this sentence has five words" means that the expression "this sentence" has five words. Of course it's false, but per your reasoning it appears meaningful. — EricH
You said previously that "This sentence has five words" is true. Do you still hold that position. Yes or no? — EricH
"Mark Twain" is a name for the person Samuel Clemens. — TonesInDeepFreeze
Mark Twain is Samuel Clemens. — TonesInDeepFreeze
"The Pentastring" is a name for the expression "This string has five words". — TonesInDeepFreeze
The Pentastring is "This string has words". — TonesInDeepFreeze