Cod philosophy. For the following I will remind you of: self referencing sentences; the Epimenides' paradox; Russell's paradox; and maybe a bit of Cantor's diagonal argument vs. Jazz Butcher (though not yet).
  • Self reference: this statement refers to itself
  • Epimenides: this statement is false
  • Russell: what set does the set of all sets that don't contain themselves belong to?
  • Cantor Jazz Butcher: some infinities are bigger than others; when one gets up, goes out of the room, it gets replaced by another
So I have two self-referencing questions, the answers to which are always yes or no because they ask if something has a property (and that's the only choice you get), but the trick is that they ask if they themselves have a particular property - for example "is this question written in English?". 1 is the definition of yes; 2 is the pathological (in the epiminedes/russell sense) definition of no
  1. is the answer to this question affirmative? - answer yes, and the question answers itself, in a way that can't get more affirmative
  2. is 'the answer to this question negative? - answer no and you're lying, answer yes and you're wrong
2 is more interesting because I could always answer no to 1, but 2 circles recursively. Then I'll enumerate the set of all questions and show that there's always one question not numbered (not in the set of all questions, but still a question). Haven't worked this bit out yet, which is where Cantor comes in. Can't quite work out whether I'm taking the piss here. "Is it sugar?"

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Nearly got the state of the nation

I am diskgrinder

On being British