XPost: comp.theory, sci.math, comp.ai.philosophy   
   From: mikko.levanto@iki.fi   
      
   olcott kirjoitti 29.11.2025 klo 18.10:   
   > On 11/29/2025 2:55 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >> dart200 kirjoitti 28.11.2025 klo 19.29:   
   >>> 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   
   >>   
   >> Nothing is final in philosophy.   
   >   
   > Semantic tautologies are always final even   
   > if no one understands them.   
      
   There always is or will be a philosopher who wants to add some   
   further consideration.   
      
   --   
   Mikko   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)