XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math   
   From: user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid   
      
   On 11/28/25 12:06 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   > olcott kirjoitti 27.11.2025 klo 18.28:   
   >> On 11/27/2025 8:36 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>> This sentence is not true.   
   >>> It is not true about what?   
   >>> It is not true about being not true.   
   >>> It is not true about being not true about what?   
   >>> It is not true about being not true about being not true.   
   >>> Oh I see you are stuck in a loop!   
   >>>   
   >>> The simple English shows that the Liar Paradox never   
   >>> gets to the point.   
   >>>   
   >>> This is formalized in the Prolog programming language   
   >>> ?- LP = not(true(LP)).   
   >>> LP = not(true(LP)).   
   >>> ?- unify_with_occurs_check(LP, not(true(LP))).   
   >>> False.   
   >>>   
   >>> Failing an occurs check seems to mean that the   
   >>> resolution of an expression remains stuck in   
   >>> infinite recursion. This is more clearly seen below.   
   >>>   
   >>> In Olcott's Minimal Type Theory   
   >>> LP := ~True(LP)    // LP {is defined as} ~True(LP)   
   >>> that expands to ~True(~True(~True(~True(~True(~True(...))))))   
   >>> https://philarchive.org/archive/PETMTT-4v2   
   >>>   
   >>> The above seems to prove that the Liar Paradox   
   >>> has merely been semantically unsound all these years.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> *Final Resolution of the Liar Paradox*   
   >> https://philpapers.org/archive/OLCFRO.pdf   
   >   
   > Nothing is final in philosophy.   
      
   self-contradictory statement bro   
      
   clearly at least something much be final, because if nothing was final   
   then that premise would become final and contradict itself   
      
   >   
   > For the most common forms of formal logic this paradox is not possible   
   > because there is no syntax for definitions.   
   >   
      
   --   
   hi, i'm nick! let's end war 🙃   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)