On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Fool <fool1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is this (and a bunch of other CFJs on the topic of paradoxes) all about rule > 2358? Why not just change that?
Although Rule 2358 mostly depends on the traditional interpretation of paradoxes as causing fundamental logical indeterminacy, and might have to be changed if this CFJ finds otherwise, paradoxes don't depend on Rule 2358.
