Science and the Liars Paradox - Revision history

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-02T02:55:00Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:55, 1 January 2017
Line 16:		Line 16:
	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|science liars paradox]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|science liars paradox]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity\|science liars paradox]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T18:03:10Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:03, 1 January 2017
Line 12:		Line 12:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	Philosophical truth descends on contrast and paradox at the juncture of self-expression with internal content. In the statements ?I am lying? or ?I am telling the truth? fact cannot be resolved to a truth condition. If it is true, then it is false, if false then it is true, respectively. Scientific theory is allergic to the liars paradox-immunologically incompetent where it is concerned. Yet modern science seeks, in very paradoxical manner, to find a formula for living things from physics theory, to avoid the liars paradox, though not appearing immunologically upset at the truthful admission, if not confident and encouraged with the potential ability to do so. One might argue from the outset, as a hologram which contains the whole in each part, that, in order to have uniqueness, individual differences, apparently evolved by a mechanism of contrast and test, if genetic change/all change, as a forward transmission, does not speak of itself falsely in order to proceed? This question arises if one considers perspective in science.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		Philosophical truth descends on contrast and paradox at the juncture of self-expression with internal content. In the statements ?I am lying? or ?I am telling the truth? fact cannot be resolved to a truth condition. If it is true, then it is false, if false then it is true, respectively. Scientific theory is allergic to the liars paradox-immunologically incompetent where it is concerned. Yet modern science seeks, in very paradoxical manner, to find a formula for living things from physics theory, to avoid the liars paradox, though not appearing immunologically upset at the truthful admission, if not confident and encouraged with the potential ability to do so. One might argue from the outset, as a hologram which contains the whole in each part, that, in order to have uniqueness, individual differences, apparently evolved by a mechanism of contrast and test, if genetic change/all change, as a forward transmission, does not speak of itself falsely in order to proceed? This question arises if one considers perspective in science.

			[[Category:Scientific Paper\|science liars paradox]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-30T17:52:49Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = Science and the Liars Paradox
| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_4310.pdf Link to paper]
| author = [[Marvin Eli Kirsh]]
| published = 2007
| journal = [[General Science Journal]]
| num_pages = 5
}}

'''Read the full paper''' [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_4310.pdf here]

==Abstract==

Philosophical truth descends on contrast and paradox at the juncture of self-expression with internal content. In the statements ?I am lying? or ?I am telling the truth? fact cannot be resolved to a truth condition. If it is true, then it is false, if false then it is true, respectively. Scientific theory is allergic to the liars paradox-immunologically incompetent where it is concerned. Yet modern science seeks, in very paradoxical manner, to find a formula for living things from physics theory, to avoid the liars paradox, though not appearing immunologically upset at the truthful admission, if not confident and encouraged with the potential ability to do so. One might argue from the outset, as a hologram which contains the whole in each part, that, in order to have uniqueness, individual differences, apparently evolved by a mechanism of contrast and test, if genetic change/all change, as a forward transmission, does not speak of itself falsely in order to proceed? This question arises if one considers perspective in science.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]

[[Category:Relativity]]