2

I have a question about following excerpt from wikipedia explaining how Bhartṛhari reasoned about Liar Paradox:

Bhartrhari's solution fits into his general approach to language, thought and reality, which has been characterized by some as "relativistic", "non-committal" or "perspectivistic".[17] With regard to the liar paradox (sarvam mithyā bravīmi "everything I am saying is false") Bhartrhari identifies a hidden parameter that can change unproblematic situations in daily communication into a stubborn paradox. Bhartrhari's solution can be understood in terms of the solution proposed in 1992 by Julian Roberts: "Paradoxes consume themselves. But we can keep apart the warring sides of the contradiction by the simple expedient of temporal contextualisation: what is 'true' with respect to one point in time need not be so in another ...

Could somebody elaborate what Julian Roberts by the phrase that "Paradoxes consume themselves"?

3
  • Truth is implicitly "committal", thus by "relativistic" approach paradoxes dissolve themselves to be not paradoxical any longer (in time), thus 'consumes' here just means 'dissolves', 'ceases to be'. As the Shurangama sutra hinted long ago: ...But both the false and the true are false themselves. If there is neither truth nor untruth, How can there be perceiver and perceived?... Commented Mar 8 at 7:02
  • @user267839 "Bhartrhari's perspectivism The Indian grammarian-philosopher Bhartrhari (late fifth century AD) . . . by accepting a simultaneous, opposite function (apara vyāpāra) undoing the previous one." A charitable interpretation is that it is total nonsense. Just a waste of time. Commented Mar 8 at 17:01
  • Seems like they’re just indexing truth to time. So sentences are not true simpliciter, but true at some time t. But that seems like a really bad answer; what about the sentence “This sentence is false at any time”? Commented Mar 8 at 17:17

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .