Armchair Warriors and Objectivist 'Science'

Bill,

Thanks for spelling out -- in post 26 -- both the solution to Zeno's paradox of first having to go through an infinite number of actual halfway points (before you go all the way); and the solution to Russell's vacuously-true antinomy of sets including themselves!

That's 2 less things that I have to worry about now! In fact, I already feel myself making greater progress in life. When Thoreau said: "How many a man has dated a new era in his life from the reading of a book." ... I'm sure that the truth stated equally applies to the kind of poignant clarifications available to a diligently-discerning cyber-surfer.

Thanks for the poignant clarification of something that used to be confusing!

Ed

Post 81

Thursday, February 7, 2008 - 8:06am

Ed,

You're welcome, and thanks for the acknowledgment!

- Bill

Post 82

Thursday, February 7, 2008 - 3:57pm

Binswanger, as you summarize him in #26, has some interesting remarks on the liar paradox side-by-side with some serious inaccuracy. It is not the same as Russell's paradox, and one is not an example of the other. By contrast to Russell's, it's been around since classical times and the most famous modern treatment is Tarski's. Both are paradoxes of self-reference, and some similarities hold. Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead are both novels by Rand, and some similarities hold, but if somebody tells me Atlas Shrugged follows the career of an architect, I'm not going to take him seriously as a Rand expert.

Post 83

Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 6:39am