Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 12:35:22 +1200
From: john.morss-AT-stonebow.otago.ac.nz (John Morss)
Subject: Re: Liano's paradoxies


thankyou Liano, I think this is really helpful: some comments:

(Liano:)

>there is an important sense in which Achilles &Tortoise is in fact not a
>paradox in the
>same way that the Liar is a paradox.

sure, surely the A & T problem would be identical to the Achilles problem,
or Tortoise problem, its a problem about how it is possible to talk about
movement per se (not about how to talk specifically about relative
movement/speed)?
(does Deleuze's term 'speed' avoid or solve these issues? ok, I know theres
relavant stuff on Lewis Carroll in Diff and Rep.)
A&T is also, if one wishes it to be, a pedagogical demonstration of the
deceptiveness of our senses versus our intellect, A appears to overtake the
tortoise rather easily (unless some1 shouts "heel!") but of course it can
be 'shown' (sic) that he can't have done... he must, perhaps, already have
been in front and thus our memory is decieving us, etc etc. Still not a
paradox which surely involves a clash of two tokens of the same type/level
etc, a conflict between 2 things that should converge. The sort of thing
that causes computers to self-destruct on Star Trek., eg,  [as Liano points
out,]
"_This_ sentence is not true" or
>"I'm lying _now_".

Another point... if we were (per impossibile???) to 'do away with'
traditional (Aris) logic, ther'd then be no paradoxes...


John R Morss PhD
Senior Lecturer, Education Department
University of Otago, Box 56, Dunedin
NZ

tel (0)3-4798809
fax (0)3-4798349
john.morss-AT-stonebow.otago.ac.nz