tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post7895393782917843644..comments2023-06-19T04:35:06.263-07:00Comments on Skeptic's Play: If-then statementsmillerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05990852054891771988noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-36105771230403991342007-10-24T22:56:00.000-07:002007-10-24T22:56:00.000-07:00d-bunny, there are four cards, but you can only se...d-bunny, there are four cards, but you can only see one side of each.<BR/><BR/>Anony, I thought you'd never ask!<BR/><BR/>If we put the statement--let's call it statement S into symbolic logic, it would say "S⇒G".<BR/><BR/>If we expand that, we get "(S⇒G)⇒G". If we expand that, we get "((S⇒G)⇒G)⇒G" and so on. Since the statement is self-referential, it is impossible to ever fully expand it, and thus the statement is not well-defined. A statement that isn't well-defined is neither true nor false. Of course, there also exist self-referential statements that don't result in paradoxes, like "This statement is true", but that doesn't mean it is well-defined.<BR/><BR/>At least, that's my interpretation of the matter. If you want to look up what real logicians think, it's called Curry's Paradox or Lob's Paradox. My google search turned up very little I could understand, but maybe you'll have better luck.millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05990852054891771988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-86337550223871880302007-10-24T21:01:00.000-07:002007-10-24T21:01:00.000-07:00I was only able to read the first half before I go...I was only able to read the first half before I got lost... <BR/>but If there were *four* cards, wouldn't there be two of each "R" "W" "6" and "4"? or Is there supposed to be two cards on the table, or is there supposed to be a card underneath another card.<BR/>I don't know if you were able to understand that or not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9124539381685751273.post-20591784186831197562007-10-24T20:59:00.000-07:002007-10-24T20:59:00.000-07:00Please.Please.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com