5 ms·

There are many statements we would agree to be neither true nor false; here are a couple: 1. The sun will rise tomorrow. 2. This statement is false. I'd agree

There are many statements we would agree to be neither true nor false; here are a couple: 1. The sun will rise tomorrow. 2. This statement is false. I'd agree with you the validity of a statement is not dependent on the palatability of its consequences.

stcredzero 12y ago
There are many statements we would agree to be neither true nor false; here are a couple: 1. The sun will rise tomorrow. 2. This statement is false. Note that this is not the kind of information which is controversial in our society and germane to decision making. (Other than that we will assume the sun will rise tomorrow as a given, but we can't stop with that.)
wyager 12y ago
>There are many statements we would agree to be neither true nor false; If they are neither true nor false, they are ill-defined. >The sun will rise tomorrow. Definitionally ill defined. >This statement is false. Inconsistent statement.
- stcredzero 12y ago
  It's trivial to poke such holes in human language. Please demonstrate your perfect system, or go on about something less tautological.
- pjc50 12y ago
  If you're going be that pedantic, you rule out all statements of moral or value judgement, all statements pertaining to the future, and most things relating to abstract nouns. This makes it impossible to discuss anything political at all.
  - wyager 12y ago
    No, you don't. You just need to state your moral beliefs as explicit axioms.
    - pjc50 12y ago
      Then they're not valid for anyone else who doesn't have exactly the same set of axioms. You can only form sentences of the form "I believe it is wrong for me to ..." and not "I believe it is wrong for you to ..."
  - stcredzero 12y ago
    wyager either doesn't want to construct such a logical language system and is just pedant-trolling us, or he's too naive about the underlying inconsistency of human languages to bother talking to.
dragonwriter 12y ago
> There are many statements we would agree to be neither true nor false; here are a couple: > 1. The sun will rise tomorrow. This is either true or false -- it may not be knowable which of those it is, but that's different than it neither being true nor false.

stcredzero 12y ago

There are many statements we would agree to be neither true nor false; here are a couple: 1. The sun will rise tomorrow. 2. This statement is false. Note that this is not the kind of information which is controversial in our society and germane to decision making. (Other than that we will assume the sun will rise tomorrow as a given, but we can't stop with that.)

wyager 12y ago

>There are many statements we would agree to be neither true nor false; If they are neither true nor false, they are ill-defined. >The sun will rise tomorrow. Definitionally ill defined. >This statement is false. Inconsistent statement.

stcredzero 12y ago
It's trivial to poke such holes in human language. Please demonstrate your perfect system, or go on about something less tautological.
pjc50 12y ago
If you're going be that pedantic, you rule out all statements of moral or value judgement, all statements pertaining to the future, and most things relating to abstract nouns. This makes it impossible to discuss anything political at all.
- wyager 12y ago
  No, you don't. You just need to state your moral beliefs as explicit axioms.
  - pjc50 12y ago
    Then they're not valid for anyone else who doesn't have exactly the same set of axioms. You can only form sentences of the form "I believe it is wrong for me to ..." and not "I believe it is wrong for you to ..."
- stcredzero 12y ago
  wyager either doesn't want to construct such a logical language system and is just pedant-trolling us, or he's too naive about the underlying inconsistency of human languages to bother talking to.

dragonwriter 12y ago

> There are many statements we would agree to be neither true nor false; here are a couple: > 1. The sun will rise tomorrow. This is either true or false -- it may not be knowable which of those it is, but that's different than it neither being true nor false.