On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, Zefram wrote:
> The appropriate response to conflicting judgements, including where the
> judgements are on their own validity, is a fresh CFJ to decide the issue
> de novo in an ontologically unequivocal manner.
Hmm, you're right, but it misses my reason for proposing this. Even if
resolved de novo (which I agree works fine), it's still a paradox,
subject to Win. I'd like to remove this motive by making such attempts
"not paradoxical". Suggestions? Bonus if it also bars the various
version of self-contained-in-judgement paradox ("This statement is false"
etc.)
-Goethe
