We can say:
[A] 1 – 1
[B] One minus one.
[C] I think we should all go home.
[D] You look absolutely fabulous.
[E] In my opinion coffee is better than wine.
[F] We should go now.
[G] I am lying.
[H] I am telling the truth.
[I] This statement is a lie.
[J] This statement is false.
[K] This statement is really true.
The statements ‘I can never tell the truth’ or ‘I always tell lies’ or ‘Every word I speak is always a lie’ are obviously lies or untruth. If a person we know come up to us and he or she said nothing else but just ‘I am lying’ or ‘This statement I am making is a lie,’ the only conclusion we will make (if we are not insane or incompletely sane ourselves) is that this person is speaking utter nonsense, trying to be funny or trying to be smart by being a complete idiot. Now if a total stranger does that we will only conclude that that person belongs in an insane asylum. We are just not going to be trying to figure out whether this person is speaking the truth or is lying unless we too belong in an insane asylum.
Similarly with statement [A] and [B] you can say ‘1 – 1’ is true because the result is ‘0’ or you can say ‘1 – 1’ is false because the result is twelve.
Some other examples that can be postulated by replacing ‘This statement’ portion of ‘This statement is false’ with some other values for ‘This statement’:
A boy is false.
A girl is false.
This horse is false.
This house is false.
This elephant is false.
Running is false.
The continent Africa is false.
Tom, Dick, Mary and Jane are false.
Any and every whatsoever is false.
Some is false.
Any is false.
A horse is lying. (A horse is a lie).
The earth is lying. (The earth is a lie).
A boy is lying. (A boy is a lie).
Sound is lying (Sound is a lie).
The continent Africa is lying. (The continent Africa is a lie).
Any and every whatsoever is lying. (Any and every whatsoever is a lie)
Some is lying. (Some is a lie).
Any is lying. (Any is a lie).
One plus one is lying. (One plus one is a lie).
[L] If I see will you tomorrow then I shall come and visit you yesterday.
Logic and Evaluation
A horse is an animal. [premise - A horse]
Running is a form of exercise. [premise - running].
You can get the color orange by mixing the color red with yellow. [premises - mixing the color red and yellow].
Elephants because they are so heavy they are unable to jump. [premises - too heavy to jump].
A hungry shrew can eat a whole elephant. [premise- hungry enough to be able to eat a whole elephant].
Elephants can fly by flapping their ears. [premise - by flapping their ears].
A horse is an animal, it is true.
Elephants can fly by flapping their ears, it is true.
Rephrased another way:
It is true that a horse is an animal.
It is true that elephants can fly by flapping their ears.
So when we have a statement that goes:
This statement is true.
It follows that fully stated statement would read:
‘This statement is true, is true.’ Or ‘It is true that this statement is true.’
‘This statement is false’ fully stated would be ‘This statement is false, is true.’
So in other forms:
This statement is a lie, is true.
I am lying, it is true.
I am lying, it is true ====> I am lying and I am telling the truth.
This statement is a lie, is true ====> This statement which is a lie is actually true.
This statement is false, is true ====> This statement which is false is actually true.
Insisting On Evaluating The Liar’s Paradox.
A simple mathematic expression:
1 – 1 = 0
[a] This statement is a lie. (It is true).
[b] This statement is false. (It is true).
[c] This horse is a lie. (It is true).
[d] This cow is false. (It is true).
[e] The following statement is true. The preceding statement is false.
[f] The following statement is true. The following statement is true. The first statement is false.
[g] The following statement is false. The preceding statement is true.
x + 1 = x
The statement that carry a self assigned value of false, is true to say that its value is false.
This statement with a concluded or inferred value of false, is true (meaning it does carry a final or overall value of false).
Let me illustrate intent (conclusion) logic from stored value or content (premise) logic in simple mathematical algebra.
For the statement ‘This statement is false’ let us assign a value 'x' to false.
x = ‘False’
Since the statement declare itself to be false therefore its declarative or content value is 'x'.
x = ‘This statement’
The evaluation of that statement premise would then be:
Is x = x ?
Which would yield a value of yes, x is equal to x.
Alternatively (if we wish to be contentious) we can presume that its actual content value is true and the statement's conclusion is erroneous or wrong which would then render ‘This statement is false (it is true)’ to be incorrect (in error or false or to be lying).
Now isn’t this just so simple?
The GOD Paradox Solved!
We exist in our physical universe. This physical universe (inclusive of every definitive reality within it: all the attributes of matter and energy including all the laws that define its structure of existence) can also be termed as the temporary realm of our existence. The reason the realm of our existence is temporary is because it was created to be temporary.
GOD does not have HIS existence within and limited by our physical universe or realm of existence. The very concept of the word existence or exist has not reality meaning when use to conceptualize GOD except when use as a referential concept type in our realm of existence. GOD does not 'exist' within a 'realm,' all realms that can possibly exist, exist only within or is 'contained' within GOD. But this does not mean that GOD is in all things or is contain in all things.
Everything (both the known realms - our universe and the Spiritual 'universe' and whatever other realms there may be, which is not to say that there are any additional realm) that exists 'exist' within GOD. The concept of the word 'exist' as well as 'realm of existence' is not a super set to GOD but a subset. From this perspective we can say that GOD is the super set of all super sets. GOD is the defining reality for all other realities whether temporary or permanent.
GOD is unlimited (from the perspective of our reality of the concept of unlimited, but is not limited by it). Space, time and mass are all concepts of the limited realm and do not apply to GOD. Even the very concept encapsulated in the words 'infinity' (which is a limited concept of time and quantum in our realm of existence) and unlimited (which has it reality concept defined by the meaning of limited) have no reality meaning when used to refer to GOD.
The concept of GOD 'not existing' is an invalid concept therefore exist is not a concept that can be used in any manner at all to reference GOD. GOD IS, in order that the concept of 'exist' can have a reality.
Please read the chapter 'GOD IS' of 'Bible 101' by this author for the discussion of these truths as were revealed in the records of the Holy Christian Scriptures.
For example even as we can say the set of all whole numbers is an infinite set we cannot in reality quantify it. Our physical universe is not infinite even though it is extremely mind bogglingly large so that it might have the appearance of being infinite.
Assign the value of infinity (‘∞’) to GOD’s strength since GOD’s power is infinite.
GOD’s strength = ∞
Weight of rock that cannot be lifted = ∞
The question whether GOD can lift the rock that cannot be lifted translates into an equation as:
Is ∞ = ∞?
GOD’s power = ∞
Power of more powerful GOD = 2 x ∞
So we now compare the first clause with the second, is ∞ = 2 x ∞?
In both these God paradoxes the problem stems from not understanding what infinite means, thinking that a logical or real value can be assigned to something that does not exist in our finite realm and/or that computation can be carried out on an infinite (unlimited) value. Most logic paradoxes in language come from the assigning of the ‘cyclic infinite’ to a declarative statement or statements and from not being able to separate the declarative (conclusion) logic from the content (premise or value) logic.
Real Mystery To Science.
Temperature as defined by science as the thermal energy in a substance. Temperature, as the so called thermal energy, is again understood by science only as displacement effect (a measurement) in the energy level of matter.
All the things that make the existence of our universe possible have properties that are indicative of being infinite and that is why our scientist can never fully explain them, why they exist.
Even as science theorized about a fourth, fifth and even to an nth dimension and parallel universe the only way for science to understand these is still from the concept of the finite three dimension space.
First Posted: 2011 12 27
© Quah 2011 - 2013. All rights reserved.