The Liar Paradox
-
- Posts: 223
- Joined: June 9th, 2021, 12:39 am
The Liar Paradox
The paradox is important in part because it creates severe difficulties for logically rigorous theories of truth; it was not adequately addressed (which is not to say solved) until the 20th century.
-
- Posts: 499
- Joined: April 3rd, 2018, 9:23 am
- Contact:
Re: The Liar Paradox
-
- Posts: 499
- Joined: April 3rd, 2018, 9:23 am
- Contact:
Re: The Liar Paradox
-
- Posts: 499
- Joined: April 3rd, 2018, 9:23 am
- Contact:
Re: The Liar Paradox
vs.
This a terrible thread. I'm lying. It's a cool thread.
-
- Posts: 499
- Joined: April 3rd, 2018, 9:23 am
- Contact:
Re: The Liar Paradox
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhIdbRp6xeg
Borat - Not Joke (full scene)
-
- Posts: 499
- Joined: April 3rd, 2018, 9:23 am
- Contact:
Re: The Liar Paradox
-
- Posts: 499
- Joined: April 3rd, 2018, 9:23 am
- Contact:
Re: The Liar Paradox
-
- Posts: 499
- Joined: April 3rd, 2018, 9:23 am
- Contact:
Re: The Liar Paradox
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: The Liar Paradox
We have to predicate something of a subject, and then that claim will be true or false.
For example, we can predicate whiteness for a particular cat--"Fluffy is white." And a proposition such as that is what's true or false. If we add "true" or "false" to the sentence, it looks like this: "Fluffy is white is true." Or "Fluffy is white is false."
So, in other words, what comes before "is true" or "is false" has to be a proposition. It has to claim something. "True" and "false" tells you whether what was claimed obtains. "P is true"--that only makes sense if P is a proposition. And then "is true" tells us that (supposedly), the proposition P, what was claimed, what was predicated of a subject, is the case/it obtains.
"Lying" functions similarly to "false." If we're lying, it has to be with respect to something we claimed. And then "is (or was) lying" tells us that what was claimed wasn't what the person believes to be the case.
So if we ONLY say, "I am lying," we have a problem. "Am lying" is supposed to be about a proposition. But "I" isn't a proposition. It doesn't claim anything. So although "I am lying" in isolation may appear to be substantive, it might appear to be saying something, it really isn't. It's equivalent to saying something like "This is false" in isolation. "This" isn't claiming anything. It's not predicating something of a subject. It's not a proposition. So it can't be true or false. Only propositions can be true or false. The same would go for "This sentence is false." "This sentence" isn't a proposition.
Likewise "am lying" can only be about propositions. And "I" isn't a proposition.
So the solution is that "I am lying," said in isolation, and not about some particular proposition, is basically an "illegal formation," like dividing by zero.
- RJG
- Posts: 2674
- Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm
Re: The Liar Paradox
There is no real paradox here. The answer depends on what is being referred to. Does "it" refer to the statement itself, or to the person uttering the statement?WanderingGaze22 wrote:...if “I am lying” is true then it is false, and if it is false then it is true.
It is one or the other. Falsely equivocating the TWO different reference points as ONE in the same reference point is the "trick" behind this so-called paradox.
Not so. Paradoxes are not real (much like "magic" is not real). Paradoxes are just tricks/puzzles yet to be solved, nothing more significant than that!WanderingGaze22 wrote:The paradox is important in part because it creates severe difficulties for logically rigorous theories of truth; it was not adequately addressed (which is not to say solved) until the 20th century.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7618
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: The Liar Paradox
Best thing I've read in a week. Kudos to you.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑January 12th, 2022, 8:55 pm What's true or false is a proposition.
We have to predicate something of a subject, and then that claim will be true or false.
For example, we can predicate whiteness for a particular cat--"Fluffy is white." And a proposition such as that is what's true or false. If we add "true" or "false" to the sentence, it looks like this: "Fluffy is white is true." Or "Fluffy is white is false."
So, in other words, what comes before "is true" or "is false" has to be a proposition. It has to claim something. "True" and "false" tells you whether what was claimed obtains. "P is true"--that only makes sense if P is a proposition. And then "is true" tells us that (supposedly), the proposition P, what was claimed, what was predicated of a subject, is the case/it obtains.
"Lying" functions similarly to "false." If we're lying, it has to be with respect to something we claimed. And then "is (or was) lying" tells us that what was claimed wasn't what the person believes to be the case.
So if we ONLY say, "I am lying," we have a problem. "Am lying" is supposed to be about a proposition. But "I" isn't a proposition. It doesn't claim anything. So although "I am lying" in isolation may appear to be substantive, it might appear to be saying something, it really isn't. It's equivalent to saying something like "This is false" in isolation. "This" isn't claiming anything. It's not predicating something of a subject. It's not a proposition. So it can't be true or false. Only propositions can be true or false. The same would go for "This sentence is false." "This sentence" isn't a proposition.
Likewise "am lying" can only be about propositions. And "I" isn't a proposition.
So the solution is that "I am lying," said in isolation, and not about some particular proposition, is basically an "illegal formation," like dividing by zero.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023