Re: Fitch's paradox and OWA

From: Marshall <>
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 09:21:39 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>

On Dec 30, 11:15 pm, Bob Badour <> wrote:
> Nam Nguyen wrote:
> > Daryl McCullough wrote:
> >> Marshall says...
> >>> I believe Nam is roughly of the opinion that if we can't know which
> >>> one of {true, false} a sentence is, then we have no basis for saying
> >>> it must be one or the other.
> >> But typically, for some statements such as "The Greek philosopher
> >> Plato was left-handed" I don't know whether the statement is true
> >> or not, and I also don't know whether anyone else knows whether it
> >> is true or not, and I don't know whether it is *possible*, at this
> >> late date, to find out whether it is true or not.
> >> But surely, it's either true or false, right?
> > No. Not surely. Since by our assumption here is nobody would know about
> > his handed-ness, his nervous system to both arms might not have functioned
> > at all to begin with and hence whether or not he was left-handed is moot
> > and is not-truth assignable. As well, there are people are strong equally
> > on both arms and therefore handed-ness is not applicable to them.
> The term is ambidextrous and ambidextrous is not left-handed so the
> predicate would be false if that were the case.
> It doesn't get tricky until handedness is equally strong in both arms
> but not for the same things like a person who writes left-handed but
> shoots right-handed etc.


Nam is a kook; you can safely ignore anything he says.


PS. Ah, the years of history! Too bad no one on sci.logic will get it. Received on Thu Dec 31 2009 - 18:21:39 CET

Original text of this message