Machiavelli wrote:
Anyway, if self-reference is not the point, then what is? It seems
like the only thing that could result in a turtle would be a single
clause within a rule that contradicts itself.
Which has happened. Here's a rundown from my Hall of Fame list:
* CFJ 3087 (self-contradic
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> Amend the rule 'Win by Paradox' by replacing
> actual or hypothetical, but not arising
> from that case itself, and not occurring after the initiation of
> that case
> with
> actual or hypothetical, but not arising
>
On 07/25/2012 12:30 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> and not involving self-reference or mutually recursive
> references.
Doesn't rule out loops of length 3 and up.
omd wrote:
> I don't think that would help much - as far as I recall, the recent liar's
> paradox wins all involved actions anyone could have taken by announcement.
Well, not *all* paradoxes need be interesting to set up, and it did point
out the problem with introducing "knowledge" and "truth
I don't think that would help much - as far as I recall, the recent liar's
paradox wins all involved actions anyone could have taken by announcement.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 25, 2012, at 2:05 PM, ais523 wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 13:55 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> Because it's far too e
On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 13:55 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Because it's far too easy.
>
> For example, using the very first paradox as an example, it was realized
> that by playing a sequence of cards, a paradox would be created. It
> turned out that at least three people independently discovered i
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, ais523 wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 10:43 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > 3. I think instead we should get rid of "hypothetical" win conditions.
> > Basically, if you can set it up "for real" you should get it, but just
> > saying "If ABC were true, then it would be undecide
On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 10:43 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> 3. I think instead we should get rid of "hypothetical" win conditions.
> Basically, if you can set it up "for real" you should get it, but just
> saying "If ABC were true, then it would be undecided" shouldn't be enough.
I don't see what thi
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> 1. Doesn't everything paradoxical include some degree of self-reference?
> Even the first one (was due to retroactivity, but was a retroactive
> cancellation of itself)?
Perhaps explicit self-reference should be needed, but generally, this
is
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Sean Hunt wrote:
> Proposal: No Klein Turtles (AI=1)
> {{{
> Amend the rule 'Win by Paradox' by replacing
> actual or hypothetical, but not arising
> from that case itself, and not occurring after the initiation of
> that case
> with
> actual or hypot
10 matches
Mail list logo
