"nor is it appropriate if the undecidability arises from the case itself."
On Sun, 29 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> I suppose that's IRRELEVANT.
>
> On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 1:09 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Doesn't this allow for making statements that include well-known
> logical paradoxes that have no bearing on the game itself? (Eg: A barber who
> must shave all who do not shave
> themselves and nobody else, cannot shave emself)
>
> On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Proposal: A Most Ingenious Paradox (AI=1.7)
> {{{
> Text in square brackets is not a part of this proposal and has no
> effect.
>
> Enact a new power-1 rule entitled "Win by Paradox":
>
> If a CFJ has been assigned a judgment of PARADOXICAL continuously
> for at least 7 days, and e has not done so already in respect of
> that CFJ, then that case's initiator CAN, by announcement, win the
> game.
>
> A player who wins in this fashion SHOULD submit a proposal to
> prevent the paradox from arising again.
>
> Amend rule 591 by replacing:
>
> The valid judgements for an inquiry case are as follows, based on
> the truth or falsity of the statement at the time the inquiry case
> was initiated (if its truth value changed at that time, then its
> initial truth value is used):
>
> with:
>
> The valid judgements for an inquiry case are as follows, based on
> the facts and legal situation at the time the inquiry case was
> initiated, not taking into account any events since that time:
>
> [This is to prevent changing facts not related to truth or falsity, e.g.
> availability of information, from affecting outcomes.]
>
> and by replacing:
>
> * DISMISS, appropriate if the statement is malformed, undecidable,
> if insufficient information exists to make a judgement with
> reasonable effort, or the statement is otherwise not able to be
> answered with another valid judgement.
>
> with:
>
> * DISMISS, appropriate if the statement is malformed, undecidable,
> if insufficient information exists to make a judgement with
> reasonable effort, or the statement is otherwise not able to be
> answered with another valid judgement. DISMISS is not
> appropriate if PARADOXICAL is appropriate.
>
> and by appending to the end:
>
> * PARADOXICAL, appropriate if the statement is logically
> undecidable as a result of a paradox or or other irresovable
> logical situation. PARADOXICAL is not appropriate if IRRELEVANT
> is appropriate, nor is it appropriate if the undecidability
> arises from the case itself.
>
> [The reference to IRRELEVANT is to prevent multiple wins from the same
> paradox.]
> }}}
>
> -Alexis
>
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada
>
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada
>
>
