OK MARTY THIS IS THE LAST:
MARTY WROTE:
> Elephant,
> I have been trying to resist, but I must risk exposing my ignorance and jump
> in. I understand how a statement like "All rules are false" doesn't work
> because "all rules are false" is itself a rule and thereby by definition,
> false. But "Every rule has an exception" is different. Here's how I am
> seeing this:
> "All rules have an exception" is a rule, and therefore by definition, must
> have at least one exception. Therefore there has to be at least one rule with
> no exception. The rule with no exception is "All rules have exceptions." How
> is this illogical?
ELEPHANT:
...because if that rule has no exceptions, then, the rule in question being
the rule that all rules have exceptions, it follows that it has exceptions.
Having exceptions and not having exceptions at the same time it is a
contradiction. QED.
tt FOR EVER (on this one)
e
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:06 BST