-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How to Have Hours of Fun with Self-Referential Statements!
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
Yup. I even spotted one in the first sentence. So what's the logical self-referential thingy?
I can name two errors that I believe are there.
74x12
Well-Known Member
You repeat "the" and say show instead of shown?
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
Or are they just typos and not the intended error which were typoed into being correct?
"the" is also repeated twice. That was intentional -- to repat "the". The "misspelling of shown" was an actual typo.
Your analysis re: the tendency of self-referential statements to devolve into infinite epistemic regressions is correct. Huge weakness with many a self-referential statement.
Self-referential statements have a tendency to devolve into infinite epistemic and/or logical regressions. For example: There is only one error in the sentence (the word "the" is doubled). But that means there are now two errors (the doubling of "the" plus the error of saying there are two errors when there is only one). But if there are two errors, the sentence is true. But if the sentence is true, then the second error is not an error. But if the second error is not an error, etc. etc. etc. to infinity.
Correct. But the "show" was a real, honest typo. Sorry about that.
Then I have to amend my previous statement.
The only error that can be attributed to you is the misspelling of 'shown'. The rest are intentional. If they are intentional, are they truly errors?
Just thought I would throw that out there.
The first error is the repetition of "the." The second error is that this is actually just one error, but since the second error is a self-reference (i.e., saying there are two errors when there is only just one), it creates an infinite loop similar to what programmers get when they write code that results in an infinite regression that leads to a system failure.
My own two cents.
The first error is the repetition of "the." The second error is that this is actually just one error, but since the second error is a self-reference (i.e., saying there are two errors when there is only just one), it creates an infinite loop similar to what programmers get when they write code that results in an infinite regression that leads to a system failure.
My own two cents.
Yup!
PoetPhilosopher
Veteran Member
I once thought about storing the value of Pi on my phone. Then I realized I didn't have enough memory. Let me know if you can hook me up with the last ten digits.
/I jest
/I jest
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
I love taking shots in the dark that have no intention of being correct, just purely in jest, but end up being correct, lol.
I'm so good I'm right without even trying to be right to the point I think I'm trying deliberately to be wrong!
siti
Well-Known Member
My God I missed the second the - that means the original sentence was in fact correct which means it was incorrect but now you have corrected it making it incorrect which means it is now correct after all - so there are in fact no errors in the sentence. Correct?
Yes, I will name them Archie and George. What do I win?