I have a question, in the Bible one of the key points is that there are no false statements. However, say in the bible they say, "Gravity doesn't exist" What's stopping them from saying it's a symbolism? In the Bible they said Abrum was 100 years old when having his children, but that most likely was false. He most likely was old, just not that old. What I'm asking is, is there any false statements? If so, how do you know it's not symbolism?
1:30 here is where dialectics comes into play. Dialectical logics abolishes the third law of formal logic, thus allowing it to better comprehend matters that are changing over time, so the correct answer would be: "It is the same ship while not being the same at the same time"
If ‘he is always lying’ is a lie, it doesn’t mean ‘he is always telling the truth’, it only means ‘he is not always lying’. So it can be ‘he is lying sometimes’, and ‘he is always lying’ is one of those lies
@@VictoryDance0the liar’s paradox in the video did in fact use a friend saying “I am always lying” as an example, which is an incorrect example of the paradox due to the mentioned loopholes. Please watch the video before telling someone they are wrong.
Dont forget about the rick astley paradox If you ask him to give you a copy of the movie Up, he cant give it to you, because hes never gonna give you up, but by doing so he lets you down, but he claims he will never gonna let you down
@@dreadabyyea, i would say that you Just have 2 ships then because when you used spare materials for your whole ship its like you just build a new one.
Well, wen more tham 50% of you are replaced, them is no longer you, is more this new something tham you. People for some reason not think in that solution.
Yah I didn't find this to be a paradox, literally it is not the same ship because the parts have been changed, but in concept and to the people who care about this new ship, it is symbolically still the same ship. This hypothetical paradox is invalid by definition of the fact that nothing stays the same (that we know so far)
for the grandfather paradox: 1. you go back and separate your grandparents 2. your father doesn't exist 3. you don't exist. 4. no one stops grandparents from meeting as you don't exist 5. grandparents meet 6. dad exists as grandparents meet 7. you exist 8. you go back and stop grandparents from meeting. and the loop continues. like, two parallel universes are created, where if in one you stop them, in the other you dont. and when you go back in time, it isn't in your universe, but in other's. ofc, was it really you who stopped grandparents from meeting, if (by predestination paradox) it was meant to happen and you were never supposed to exist in that universe? (ship of thesus paradox)
nah, your "original" grandfather was supposed to be yours, but you saw your grandma and thought: "you know what, i like her" so you become your own grandfather
I have another way of thinking about time travel paradoxes. If we assume whenever you time travel, it's always to different time line, there's never a paradox. You can time travel to an identical time line to yours, the only difference is that it was destined to be time traveled to by you from a different time line. When you prevent your own birth you're effectively doing that to a different you. Also the moment you abort to time travel, there's a time line where u return and one where you never do. In the case that you do return to your origin time line it's a you from different time line, identical but not the same.
Your grandma cheated on your grandpa and never told anyone and if you found out who it was it changes the timeline and your grandma cheated to an infinite number of people Or either somebody also went back in time and killed you
An example of the paradox of tolerance is human rights. A person's human rights are not absolute because they are limited by other people's human rights
A famous roman lawyer once answered the Theseus ship question simply by asking "Do you have tonpay tax for purchasing it?" When people answered no, he said "it's the same ship then".
Barber's Paradox is actually easy, his rule states that he will only shave those who don't shave themselves, it doesn't say that he shaves every person that doesn't shave himself, people who dont shave themselves can be shaved by some other barber, so if the barber goes to another barber he isnt breaking his rule
@@shinoxx.2019It never suggests that he is the only barber in the world. Even if he was, someone else could still do it even if they weren’t professionally trained.
I thought this was you pointing out something that just happened to look like that and then being annoying about it. Only to find out that this was actually a thing the person drew... wild Edit: And it's the most replayed part of the video too, ugh...
Even if the ship changes over time, its essence remains the same. It teaches us that while things may evolve, the value and memories tied to them still hold strong, making them just as admirable as before❤
1-If ‘he is always lying’ is a lie, it doesn’t mean ‘he is always telling the truth’, it only means ‘he is not always lying’. Not a paradox, but "This statement is false" is. 2-Define something being the same. In my definition, the ship is no longer the same when the first piece was taken out. Actually nothing stays the same at a microscopic level at all, and one should think deeper about how identity can be seen as fluid rather than fixed. Like it depends on how you define time, whether you subscribe to presentism and think it's not longer the same ship, or eternalism and think it has always been the same ship during all its states. 3-There are different time traveling schools of thought. One of them is the multiverse theory and it solves this paradox by stating that when you time travels, you create a new reality where you kill your grandfather and you effectively won't be born in this new reality, but there definitely is the first version of you that exists and when you go back to your reality, your grandfather is not dead, there now just is a reality where he is. 4-Sorites paradox just has to clarify the definition of a heap because personally I would call anything a heap if there is exactly enough to make a tetrahedron, so 4, as long as they're properly arranged as a tetrahedron, but that's just me and it really just boils down to how vaguely humans have defined the word "heap". 5-The barber said "I only shave those who don't shave themselves", not that he HAS to shave them. So he is not allowed to shave himself but he can just never shave himself. Would've been a paradox if he said "I HAVE to shave those who don't shave themselves". 6-If a new reality is created from the time travelling, there'd be one where it's a fact that MJ made the shoes and a reality where it's a fact that you gifted them to him, so not a paradox. 7-Yes, that's sickk 8-If no day is a surprise, then everyday is. If nothing is dirty nothing is clean, if nothing is bad nothing is good typa shit... at least that's how I linked it. This now is an actual paradox connected to broader philosophical ideas about expectation and surprise. It's a tricky paradox because it plays on the logical structure of knowledge and prediction. 9-A debunking of this paradox states that the definition of omnipotence is being able to do ANYTHING that is POSSIBLE even if very hard or if the means to arrive to it are unknown. Omnipotence doesn't mean you can create a square with two straight lines in a planar 2D universe, the concept in itself is a logical fallacy, so creating a rock you can't lift is not a paradox, it's just logically fallacious. 10-That's not a paradox, time doesn't pass the same for anybody, and astronauts do age a teeny teeeeeny bit slower, it's a mind-blowing science fact that challenges the definition and concept of time but is in no way self-contradictory. 11-"Tolerating too much might get you in trouble" is not a paradox. What the video might have meant is "would you tolerate ideas of anti-tolerance?" and the answer is yes, you won't apply those ideas, you're tolerant that people be anti-tolerant and you're still 100% tolerant.
1) "I always lie" is a lie. He instead only sometimes lies. 2) we identify the ship, not the ship's parts. When a plank of wood is removed from the ship of Theseus, it is no longer part of the ship. The wood could be said to be formerly a part of the ship. The wood's identity is linked to Theseus' identity. But the wood ≠ the ship. 3) if you go back in time, you are creating a new instance of the timeline. In this timeline, YOU exist. The future you doesn't, but you aren't the future you. The future you and the time traveling you are different instances of you. Meaning you're essentially different people. 4) 😂😂😂 I remember this from a Dinosaurs comic of all places. Utahraptor gives the paradox, and T-Rex gives the following solution: language is fuzzy. The point where a heap becomes a non-heap is unclear. But if we get the opinions of enough people, we can mathematically define the average. 5) if the rules are self contradictory, then the rules are the problem. You must either remove the contradictory rule or add additional rules to account for exceptions. 6) the boot strap paradox is overcome by the stable orbit solution (of my own creation). Consider a space ship approaching a planet. It is from somewhere completely different. But after reaching the planet, it makes lots of adjustments to course correct. Each orbit, it is making smaller and smaller adjustments. Until eventually the spaceship is in a self sustaining orbit. 7) when measuring points with mathematics, infinity is the limit. But when disassembling an object, planck length is the limit. 8) you can't rule out any day with certainty. Thus you can't get to the conclusion of never being hung. 9) Zeus makes a rock so heave even he can't lift it. Then he makes two universes, one where he can't lift it, and one where he can. Then he lifts both universes, rocks included. Then he backflips onto a motorbike and rides off. 10) not a paradox. Just advanced math vs our flawed understanding of math. 11) that's not the paradox..... A tolerant society is intolerant of intolerance. Which is just the same as the barber paradox.
I think I might have an answer for the socks version of the Sorties paradox. once the pile is equally half blue and half green, you take away one blue sock and replace it with green. that is when it becomes mostly green. And for the barber paradox, just go to a different Barber.
In the Barber's Paradox, you just explained how he would shave himself, regardless of his rule. If he wouldn't shave himself after a certain period of time, he would fall under the category of those who need to be shaved by Bob. Of course he would violate his rule because he is not acting as his barber when shaving himself, he is taking care of himself.
I think many of these paradoxes, like the Sorites Paradox depend on defined answers. Somtimes the answers are not clear cut, but exist in a gray zone between states. There is no switch where you suddenly become an adult because the word "adult" itself is a construct that is based on an oversimplified definition of human growth. Essentially, paradoxes reveal where human thinking is fallible. The reason it's so fallible is because our entire framework of thinking is based on constructs that don't actually exist in nature.
When something is sucked into a black hole, from the outside it looks like a matter of seconds, but for the object time will slow down infinitely the closer it gets to the black hole, meaning it will never reach it.
I was thinking of something like, the only way that's possible is that it wasn't true in the first place. I mean, surely we don't lie all the time, that would be impossible. We definitely don't tell the truth all the time anymore either.
@@csarineit could also mean he is never lying and i dont mean it in like "Always telling the truth" i mean never lying Like not telling a single wrong thing Not even true ones, so He is silent (messed up but possible).
That's missing the point. Is the following sentence true? "This sentence is false." Is a logic problem. You evaluate what's implied if it's true. And you evaluate what's implied if it's false. Saying "it means he sometimes lies" is thinking about semantics, not logic.
@@pedroamaralcouto That would be true if he had said one of the classical variations of the paradox "I am lying" or more abstractly "X: This statement X is false". You have to note that no accepted variations of the liar's paradox include the word "always" because it opens itself up to ambiguity or semantics which makes it become a different logical statement. This is what I'm trying to point out, hence "At least the one you put out". I even did a quick Wikipedia search to give you an example of this here, "The Epimenides paradox (c. 600 BC) has been suggested as an example of the liar paradox, but they are not logically equivalent. The semi-mythical seer Epimenides, a Cretan, reportedly stated that "All Cretans are liars."[1] However, Epimenides' statement that all Cretans are liars can be resolved as false, given that he knows of at least one other Cretan who does not lie (alternatively, it can be taken as merely a statement that all Cretans tell lies, not that they tell only lies)." Likewise, you've given the correct variation "This sentence is false" which is logically inequivalent to "I am always lying" because "always" adds a dimension of time into the statement which can be resolved with "sometimes". Thinking about logic is inextricable to thinking about semantics, if you're trying to get your point across with a paradox then you have to make it "amenable to more rigorous logical analysis".
My answer for ship of theseus: If you're able to say to someone "I got a new ship!", then it's new. If you're able to say "I got my ship repaired with new parts!", it's not new.
The solution to the omnipotence paradox is that they can do both. It's like playing Minecraft with cheats enabled. You can make it to where you can't fly, but you can fly at the same time.
Omnipotent means all capable. If you are not capable of something means you are not omnipotent. Other explanation would be if an omnipotent is immortal they shouldn't be able to unalive themselves since they wouldn't be omnipotent
@@sheepas So when you can't fly in minecraft, but make yourself able to fly - you were actually able to fly all along and could never make yourself not able to fly?
Simple, God cannot be affected by his creation, just like how a book cannot be smarter than its writer. Also what infinity + 1, infinity what is infinity +2, infinity. You cannot add anything to infinity. This "paradox" comes from a misunderstanding of omnipotence. Simple as that. Lets look at the question, can god create a rock that he cannot lift? God cannot be affected by the universe, as he created it, just like how a writer cannot write a book smarter than himself. Besides, lets say the rock represents 100, and god represents infinity. So what is infinity + 100? Infinity. Nothing can be added to Infinity.
@@flyingturret208thecannon5 You can /gamemode creative all you want. You can /op and /ban yourself. You become all capable for a moment trough cheats, meaning you were all capable before, but made yourself vulnerable therefore not completely omnipotent. But if you couldn't do any of that you wouldn't be omnipotent. The option for cheats or /op makes you omnipotent.
@@Mohammad1yt1 Regarding creations: tell that to OpenAI and GPT. Ofc it's not all there reasoning wise, yet certain solutions are provided faster than any person is capable (which is in itself scary and beautiful). Your math is inherently flawed. I can also argue that, since if they (P+inf = omnipotent) make themselves vulnerable (not omnipotent) -> P+(inf*0)=P or P+inf-inf=P (assuming P is their ability as a conscious being and inf means their infinite power), then without inf they are not more capable than P. It's the logic that, IF a god can make themselves vulnerable, they are no longer omnipotent. Of course they could 1. Summon such rock making themself vulnerable, 2. Attempt to move the rock and 3. Remove the rock from existence. That would make them stay omnipotent, unless they make the rock indestructible, making them no longer omnipotent. Therefore they cannot become "perfectly" omnipotent because both statements are true.
Omnipotence paradox (9:59) is easy, he could just create a rock that he can't lift with one hand, and can also lift it with 2 hands, making him not be able to lift it, and also be able to.
Yeah but that’s not the point of it. If that’s the case then he can make an even heavier rock. It’s not about finding a middle ground. And also, if you can lift something with 2 hands that means you can lift it even if you can’t do it with one. Like i deadlift 405 so I can lift it even though I can’t do it with one arm.
Liars Paradox: If he was truly always lying he couldn't say that. Therefore he's just a normal person. Ship of Theseus: Still the same ship made of different parts. Otherwise you wouldn't be yourself in 10 years because all your cells would be replaced by then. Grandfather Paradox: You can't alter the past because traveling to the past isn’t possible. Since going to the past is fiction, so are any rules to it. Sorites Paradox: Heap is a vernacular term and can not only differ from one person's perspective, but how they feel at the moment. It's called a case by case basis. Barber Paradox: He made the rules so that he would break them whether he shaves or not. It's not a mind blowing paradox, it's just poor rule making. Bootstrap Paradox: Basically the chicken or the egg (answer is egg) question. In this case, it's fiction, so any rules apply. Banach Tarksi Paradox: Sounds like we just messed up, because it's only theoretical and not physically possible. It seems more like a thiugut experiment than paradox because obviously we're the wrong ones. Either we got the law of conservation wrong, or our formulas or units wrong. The Unexpected Hanging Paradox: Every day (exceot Friday) can be unexpected due to the Prisoner assuming it won't take place the day of. Furthermore the whole
There’s also the light paradox (as I like to call it, I don’t actually know the name) Basically, let’s assume Tim and Tom are watching tv. Tim has poor eyesight, so he’s watching close to the tv. Tom is farsighted so he’s watching from afar. Now let’s say that Tom mentions this tv watching to Thomas and says they watched it at the same time. Did they really watch it at the same time if light reached Tom faster than Tim?
Definitely nowadays seeing Millennials to Gen Z being a more radical bunch. I won't get specific but seeing how social media has became pretty much a Warzone unlike any other, and those who are extreme tend to use the paradox of tolerance as their defence rather then the acknowledgement. A line has definitely gotta be known where it's at.
@@Scruffest The weird thing is, if you ask both sides what should be tolerated, they will have wildly different answers, implying that nobody can decide on what should and shouldn't be tolerated. For instance, a right wing Christian might argue that homosexuality shouldn't be tolerated because it's against their religion to tolerate it, while the homosexual might argue that Christianity shouldn't be tolerated, because it is intolerant of them. It's a paradox for sure with no easy solution: you either are forced to disrespect the former's beliefs or the latter's sexuality. This paradox pops up *everywhere* in politics. Society is essentially forced to take a side or play it completely neutral and hope that relations don't break down.
@@Justmonika6969 1. I like your name, it's nice to see dedicated DDLC fans 2. Though that comparison between Christianity and the LGB (leaving the TQ since I prefer identity and sexuality to be seperate therefore seen differently) to be... Idk... off? Not saying you're wrong it's just I think a better way is to view both is at their extremes to make your point make more sense unless you actually mean it in that way then I apologise for the misunderstanding. Because I met Christians and LBG (and TQ) folk who are tolerable but have limits, though it falls under the same spot as the point you make, just not as extreme. I guess you can say I just contradicted myself 💀
Question is where should that line be drawn, and who is at fault? Added to that in a case such as the one the DDLC pfp user outlined, what do you do when history also comes into play? Whilst there is a slight paradox, in this case it isn't perfect. Hell just due to religions and beliefs it isn't actually implemented in the first place
@@Scruffestremoving the tq from the lgb is like removing the a feom the us. it's a part of our shared culture and we fought alongside eachother during the civil rights movement
We are the ship of Theseus where every cell in our body slowly dies and gets replaced with a new cell as we grow up. But it is the history that makes the ship not the paintjob
Paradox solver for the first 2: - he was being genuine in giving his statement - yes, the new ship is your ship, not because of the material, but because its owner is you.
I’ll add that the liar paradox isn’t a paradox against the self either because unless another person is the liar you’ll always know that you’re not… Also the ship of rhesus isn’t a logical loop because it doesn’t take into account why the parts where replaced in the first place which is obsolescence, which explains that the new ship is an evolution. To believe in the ship of Theseus is to refute evolution and states of decay. This is actually a bigger paradox than the ship of Theseus itself 😂 It also assumes you can build a second ship with the broken parts which is a logical fallacy It’s an example of an engineered paradox rather the a true paradox.
@@ironhell813 The real question is why is this video claiming to be a breakdown of paradoxes when half of the things discussed are either just philosophical thought experiments or explorations of theoretical science. Might as well have tossed in the Fermi Paradox while they were at it. :P
@@TheCreCrethe one that no longer exists. It can’t be original if none of it is the same. A human being’s brain and spinal cord can not be transplanted. No human can change themselves beyond originality.
That violates the paradox and brings unmentioned information about the character into the question. It’s about taking what the character is saying for face value, not assuming that he only lies sometimes.
@@jiminplsletmehit7620 Humans aren't meant to dwell into such paradox's. Imagine being a life form that only thinks about a logical paradox. Humans have the gift of ignoring logic loops and actually setting priorities straight
The grandfather paradox in my opinion is the most interesting one. This is because one of 2 things happen if someone attempts to create it. Either it just branches off into a parallel universe, which depends on the butterfly effect being real. Or, the universe just kinda stops working, whether it be time just stopping or the universe just kinda implodes, which now that i think about it, may be how the universe ends then starts again. Someone create a paradox to test this.
Time travel is theoretically impossible. It's like the infinite paradoxes in math. Simply the paradox happens by assuming time travel itself. It's actually more interesting imo that when we start thinking about the boundaries of the universe, nothing makes sense anymore
@@pete4416 time travel IS possible and we literally know how to do it. To travel backwards in time, you travel faster than light. To travel forwards in time, you go near an insanely dense object such as a black hole.
@@GreenRacoonYT You can't travel faster than light, that's the thing it is LITERALLY impossible. Not just technologically. Light travels at the speed of light because it's literally the speed limit Edit: about going forward in time, this is true but you're still experiencing time (just slower) and it's like you're going on a vacation and returning way way later without aging much so I wouldn't think of it as the typical time travel we see in movies
A simpler version of the bootstrap paradox is inventing a time machine from instructions you gave yourself (it'll make sense in a moment), then going back in time and giving yourself those instructions. You gave yourself the instructions, but who made them first?
Ok, I know paradoxes aren’t supposed to be answered but I will try to answer as many of these paradoxes as possible like Wheatley did in portal 2. Liar paradox: your friend exaggerated the statement, he doesn’t ALWAYS lies, he just lies a lot Ship of Theseus: it’s the REPAIRED ship of Theseus, and a ship made from the old parts is the ship of Theseus rebuilt with its old parts Grandfather: you either make a new timeline and it purges you from it or you change yours so that the person what WOULD have been your grandma is not you grandma in a sort of Mandela effect, for example a large percentage of people remember the pokemon onix instead being spelt onyx (I’m one of them) Sorites: the sand part is tricky but for the sock part it switches to a most blue pile to a mostly green pile when one color of sock has more of its colour than the other, for the sand part, a heap is a a decent size so if you make it smaller it will go from a heap to a pile so taking away half will make it a decent size pile, and for the adult part you don’t go from baby to adult but there are multiple stages inbetween Barber: based on context he seemed to have stated that will refuse to shave CUSTOMERS that shave themselves so since he can’t be his own customer he CAN shave himself, or he can get himself a barber to do it Bootstrap: it’s just a chicken and the egg paradox so I will assume the it’s the same answer and Micheal created the Jordan’s first, it’s not a good answer but I’m going with it Banach-tarski: it’s simply impossible to do what the paradox says unless the object can reattach and regenerate itself Surprising hanging: it’s a surprise because you didn’t expect it to happen on that day because it wouldn’t normally happen on that day Omnipotence: he wouldn’t lift it fully, he would still technically be lifting it but not all the way like if you were to dead lift a hundred pounds up to your knees but not to you pelvis so you did lift it but not completely. Twins: it feels slower but the one who left, they didn’t age like they normally would, they would still be considered the same age as their twin Tolerance: you can’t have a society can’t be tolerant of everything, everyone has a line to what they tolerate so nobody can be completely tolerant no matter how tolerant they seem so a completely tolerant society is impossible So those are my answers for each of the paradoxes shown, they might not be satisfying but it’s an answer to questions that aren’t supposed to be answered.
Omnipotence is solved by choice. Create something, and refuse to lift it. If you refuse utterly, you can't lift it. It's possible to, but you can't because of the refusal.
I think the grandfather paradox is that maybe curtain things are set in stone, the version of yourself that stopped your grandparents' ever meeting is the one constant, however in the present, you have no history, u essentially spiderman yourself.
1:42 The way I see it is like this: Every few days, your outermost layer of skin is replaced. No matter how many times this happens, however, you still consider the skin attached to you as your true skin. This is doesn’t stop your shed skin from being your skin, but we stop thinking as such when our skin becomes dust. If the old boards are removed, this doesn’t stop the boards from being considered a part of the ship until they rot away. TLDR: The main body will always be the main body, no matter what is replaced. The pieces are still considered pieces of the main body until they become so unrecognizable that it’s hard to tell what they were.
1. Your friend is sometimes lying (you got pranked) 2. It is still the same ship per se, but with new parts (it's different "same" for a ship, that was just disassembled and assambled again). Ship assembled from old parts is another ship (with owner whoever assembled it), probably unusable, because old part were replaced for a reason. 3. Depends on which theories we talk about: a) multiverse - no time paradox, since you dont go back, but to another universe b) you go back, but create another time line. c) one time line, which prevent you from doing you about to do in first place (like you go to jail for a life time or have accidents, that prevent you from interaction) d) one time line, but the moment you go back, the future collapses. Think of this like that - you have a pasta string (time) with you as a grain of rice on it (matter). For you to to go back you have to snap this pasta (sorry Italians) at any point, and it is automatically replaced with new part (old part is disregarded forever [you cant go to old future, just new future]). 4. If you count it (and is above one), it is heap of sand with fixed number of sand grains, without count (but still above one) it is a heap of sand. We can argue just because people can have different perspectives. With sock its mostly blue/green whenever color of sock is dominant (2 pairs of blue, 3 green - mostly green, 3 pairs of blue, 2 pairs of green - mostly blue, 2 pair of blue and green socks - equal number). With baby adult situation it is tricky, because it depends of your current law in your country when you are considered an adult (18, 21 in america...) (if having a beer [or being circumcised] was an adult indicator, then I was quite a young adult) 5. He goes to another barber (like he is only barber in the world). Or just have long beard, he followed the rule of not shaving himself, not breaking the rule if he decides not to shave beard himself (he is still under a category of "people who needs to be shaved by Bob", but it is his decision not to. (I just wonder how he offers his services to himself? Barber go to himself and ask?) 6. Same as 3, first invent time machine. With circle it is established that it have no starting point, no corners, etc (I'm talking about theoretical perfect circle). On a piece of paper - answer depends on what you want to hear. Do you ask where I *started to* make a circle (if you draw it it should have point where you started) or drawing is just representation of perfect circle (stamps?) where there is no starting point. Egg came first for two reasons: 1. We could talk about not chicken egg. 2. Evolution make non-yet chicken lye an egg of first chicken. 7. Yea, theoretical paradox. No comments. 8. Don't hang people. But for a sake of argument: a) every day from hearing about surprise hang day is a surprise hang day. He can expext wvery day to be surprise, but since he dont know which one he can't say he could expect it. b) tell them they will be hangend on random day this week. It could be today afternoon, tomorrow in morning. They will know when they see a new necktie. c) if they tell for example "I will expect Monday to hanged" them they will not be hanged on Monday, then surprise, surprise... d) put him in a auto-hanging cell (with a floor that falls down on random day), the information about surprise should be pre-recorded and played the moment he enters a cell. e) tell him that he is free to go, then hang him f) put him into clinic coma, wake him up on random day (he doesn't have to know which day it is) 9. The question itself is weird. Is like asking "can you create 2 stones, that are 3 stones?" or "can you tell a truth, that is a lie?" But what if he creates a rock and didn't move it, because he don't want to (telling you he can lift it because of weight). Or he just tell you "One at the time..." or asked "So which it should be?" 10. Yep, it is relative. Sister on earth will be older than the one in space, even if they were born in same year. Just put watch on their hand and by it measure how much time has passed for each one individually. 11. It is not really a paradox, if it is a statement. If every one is tolerant of everything, then yes, bring your "unique" dish to a party, you probably will eat it alone. Also be tolerant if people throw you out of the house. It goes back to number one. If a friend tell you that he is lying all the time, he is not lying all the time (like sometimes). If he is lying all the time, then he can't tell this sentence in the first place (he can say "I'm sometimes lying" or "he always tells the truth") or the statement is false in first place. (Sometimes I think, this is how statistic works.)
Wasn't 9 solved with two types of answers: 1. God can, but he won't since it's against his nature and he wants to stay all powerful. 2. Making a rock he can both lift and not lift makes him both all powerful and not all powerful at the same time, which is nonsense/word salad or spaghetti or something like that
An example of the bootstrap paradox can be in the Loki series, where Ouroboros credits He Who Remains, who in turn credits Ouroboros for their achievements.
@02:20 how does an object identify itself as anything? It's an object. People determine what it is. So, wouldn't functionality then be the only argument that actually makes sense?
Ship of Theseus: The best way to resolve this is to name a part that is core to the ship as the ship, and every other part as an accessory. In the case of a ship, the keel should be that core. It cannot be replaced without taking the ship apart.
7:19 I have the answer to that. If you're talking about any usual egg then the egg came first (dino egg) and if you're talking about chicken egg, then the chicken obviously came first to get a chicken egg. And if you're wondering from where the chicken came from without a chicken egg, it was evolved by hybrid breeding of dino like creatures.
I will just specifically answer the question "chicken or egg first?" will not explain beyond that question. Answer : chicken 🐔 first, egg 🥚 ain't gonna hatch 🐣 by itself.
@@Mr_Doritos the question was which one came first, not how it came into existence. And by your reasoning, then nothing is exist unless egg also magically poppep into existence. Since both exist, then you're definitely wrong. Additional explanation for my answer : We can choose whatever beginning/origin (1) Let's just say both 🐔 and 🥚 can magically popped into existence. (2) Or we can follow either creationism or evolutionism. > If 🐔 came first : 🐔 lays 🥚, then hatch 🐣... *Reproduction and sustainability* > If 🥚 came first, it can't hatch itself so it stays 🥚 until it decay or someone make it an 🍳
I had a thought for the ship of theseus, we difine something as a thing unchanged on a local level that we can see. To explain further, we identify an object like a plank of wood as the plank itself and not the many atoms and molecules that make it up. But those molecules and atoms change and get replaced over time. Say you had an object that you kept for years. This object has had every atom replaced, but the shape is still the same, and you have not had to repair or add on to it. Almost everyone would say that it is the same object because of how our perspective was built/developed. So the ship of theseus is the same ship that you had. Also by this logic, since you replaced the ship and observed the changes on a local level it is not the same ship and the ship you build out of the old parts are also not the same ship.
This is not what the twin paradox says Time isn't the same for everyone, understanding that is the premise of special relativety. The paradox happens when you jump into the perspective of the twin who stayed home. At that point in time when the travelling twin arrives to their destination, both twins (in their own perspective) are much younger than the other one at the edge of the universe, so when the traveling twin comes back home, the paradox is that we don't know which one of the two is younger since from each twin's perspective, the other should be older. In this specific scenario the paradox can be solved by understanding acceleration but it becomes an actual paradox when both twins are moving in opposite directions
The omnipotence paradox can be solved by saying that the being can't physically lift the rock, but can give the rock the ability to lift itself. Because of that it can be surmised that the being lifted the rock without lifting the rock which makes both outcomes true.
8:19 yes it is impossible but nothingness is either a rip in the space time continuum or outside of the universe. The “nothing” you’re referring to is chemicals invisible to naked eye, which are something therefore you can make something out of ‘thin air’ because air is something. 10:33 simple, he makes a clone weaker that doesn’t know it’s the clone of a god, the original creates the rock, the clone cannot lift it, but the original can, so the answer depends on if the challenge is then split because the clone is technically him, or if it is only for the original then in that case you create a rock at first to heavy to lift, first one down, then you lighten it and lift it, second down.
He would make something he can't lift,accept his limit, go train then return to succeed. implanting the idea that one can work to reach his level but knowing that it was all a ruse and nobody can ever reach that level or surpass it.
Paradox of tolerance is exactly what happened in Rapture from Bioshock. Doing pretty much anything with no limits DESTROYED the whole society. Limits need to exist.
The "paradox of tolerance" only exists when you view tolerance as some sort of moral code. Tolerance is a social contract. Break the contract by being intolerant and you are no longer protected by it
For the Barber Paradox, it'sn't a paradox. The rules for his shop only apply to his customers. He is not a customer to himself. If he wants to follow his rule that badly of not shaving anyone who shaves themself, then he can just go to a different barber. His rule only starts that you can't shave yourself if you want his service, not that those who don't shave themselves have to go to his barber.
It's a paradox found by Bertrand Russell, implying issues with the theory of sets when self-references are used. The barber is a member of the set "all men". He shaves all men who don't shave themselves, and only those men. If the barber doesn't shave himself, he shaves himself. If he shaves himself, he doesn't shave himself. It's a similar issue found in the liar's paradox.
Not really since the Supersonics never came back (yet). A better example is the Baltimore Ravens/ Cleveland Browns. Which team gets the success the Browns had in the early days of the league? The original team (the Ravens) or the team named the Browns currently
P1: I always lie P2: Does 1+1=2? P1: Yes His original statement is null because he didn't lie P1: I always lie P2: Does 1+1=2? P1: No His original statement is null because if he always lied then the original statement is also a lie
First of all, it's *you're, and it's not "acoustic", it's "autistic". Please don't use autistic as a slur, it's really lame and cringe. Sincerely, an actually autistic person@@G500-m2b
The barber paradox is easy to solve, as it perfectly descrives the life of someone too scared to make decisions. Since both choices will lead to the same results, then you should pick the one that benefits you the most.
Solution to the sorites paradox: If the sand grain is at least two layers, it is a heap. As a heap is a 'pile' of things, there must be a secondary layer of sand to be a heap. Therefore, a 50 by 50 grain of sand must have more than 2500 grains of sand to be a heap. Otherwise its a incredibly organised file of sand
1: Call bullshit because your friend doesn't ALWAYS lie, thus while the statement is a lie, it's not the truth 2: The ship made of the old parts is like a shedded skin, and the repaired parts is the new one. 3: Split timeline Theory. 4: Label different sizes based on approximate numbers/ranges 5: Have Bob find a apprentice and after studying Bob for so long, have the apprentice do the job instead. Bob's not the one shaving himself, the apprentice is. 6: Standard inconsequential time loop. 7: less of a paradox, more of a quantum theory 8: Personally, every day of the week is a weekday,even the ends. HOWEVER the simple logic is that the person was too vague on the restriction and said Thursday NIGHT. Literally there was 4-5 days that could be chosen at random, and it's unexpected because they thought they could choose when they couldn't be hung, which is dumb. 9: when something has an "infinite" upper limit, nothing can surpass, only match. 10: idk who thinks they wouldn't be twins if they age different, that seems like they're losing the grasp on what a twin is 11: Tolerance as a social construct is to respect people for who they are, but as some think of it as a double edged sword, it's more of a spiked shield. "I won't bother you if you don't bother me"
@@TheJeet5225 "I always lie" can't be truth as this sentence would indicate that in fact you don't always lie but it also cant' be a lie as it would indicate that the statement is false
Banach - Tarski paradox reminded me of that one chocolate bar trick where you cut it diagonally and take each piece out as though you never did, but over time the gap kept getting larger though
![PASULOL รามเกียรติ์ ตอนที่ 4 นนทกพบรัก [Ramakien Ep.4: Nonthok in love]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/tMUQgmZzf_A/mqdefault.jpg)
Join us at - discord.com/invite/n8vHbE29tN
I call the grandfather paradox the banana cream pie paradox, why? Comics
1:57 GYATTTTT.
I have a question, in the Bible one of the key points is that there are no false statements. However, say in the bible they say, "Gravity doesn't exist" What's stopping them from saying it's a symbolism? In the Bible they said Abrum was 100 years old when having his children, but that most likely was false. He most likely was old, just not that old. What I'm asking is, is there any false statements? If so, how do you know it's not symbolism?
1:30 here is where dialectics comes into play. Dialectical logics abolishes the third law of formal logic, thus allowing it to better comprehend matters that are changing over time, so the correct answer would be:
"It is the same ship while not being the same at the same time"
If ‘he is always lying’ is a lie, it doesn’t mean ‘he is always telling the truth’, it only means ‘he is not always lying’. So it can be ‘he is lying sometimes’, and ‘he is always lying’ is one of those lies
Yeah exactly. That's how a lier wrap you in his web by confusing you by his tactics
That's why it's better to use someone who only speaks in direct opposites instead of lies.
That’s not the statement it’s “this statement is a lie” which means the statement HAS to be a lie so it’s the truth and so on
You just melted my brain more than this video
@@VictoryDance0the liar’s paradox in the video did in fact use a friend saying “I am always lying” as an example, which is an incorrect example of the paradox due to the mentioned loopholes. Please watch the video before telling someone they are wrong.
Dont forget about the rick astley paradox
If you ask him to give you a copy of the movie Up, he cant give it to you, because hes never gonna give you up, but by doing so he lets you down, but he claims he will never gonna let you down
It's like the barber paradox
He cannot run away as he would desert you
He can't just dodge the question by leaving formally either as hes never gonna say goodbye
@@Moonlite_Kitsune he can just say it without saying "goodbye" there are certainly other ways
Giving someone a copy of the movie Up is not the same as giving up on someone.
Paradox solves
"ship of thicceus"
this will forever live rent free into my head
But will it always be the same ship?
Good evening gentle listener!!!!!
@user-zh3du8xx9t no you just made a new ship from the old ship
@@dreadabyyea, i would say that you Just have 2 ships then because when you used spare materials for your whole ship its like you just build a new one.
Well, wen more tham 50% of you are replaced, them is no longer you, is more this new something tham you. People for some reason not think in that solution.
Physically, the ship is different. Conceptually, it is the same
What is the difference between the two and why is there a difference between them?
@@emperorzombie1420 the difference is they’re physically made of different parts but still thought of at the same ship
Yah I didn't find this to be a paradox, literally it is not the same ship because the parts have been changed, but in concept and to the people who care about this new ship, it is symbolically still the same ship. This hypothetical paradox is invalid by definition of the fact that nothing stays the same (that we know so far)
And if you use old parts to make new one, now you have two ships, because both are yours
Your body cells are not the same but you as all are the same because it's a difference between the cells and you
for the grandfather paradox:
1. you go back and separate your grandparents
2. your father doesn't exist
3. you don't exist.
4. no one stops grandparents from meeting as you don't exist
5. grandparents meet
6. dad exists as grandparents meet
7. you exist
8. you go back and stop grandparents from meeting.
and the loop continues.
like, two parallel universes are created, where if in one you stop them, in the other you dont. and when you go back in time, it isn't in your universe, but in other's.
ofc, was it really you who stopped grandparents from meeting, if (by predestination paradox) it was meant to happen and you were never supposed to exist in that universe? (ship of thesus paradox)
nah, your "original" grandfather was supposed to be yours, but you saw your grandma and thought: "you know what, i like her" so you become your own grandfather
@captainpolar2343 bro what
I have another way of thinking about time travel paradoxes. If we assume whenever you time travel, it's always to different time line, there's never a paradox. You can time travel to an identical time line to yours, the only difference is that it was destined to be time traveled to by you from a different time line. When you prevent your own birth you're effectively doing that to a different you. Also the moment you abort to time travel, there's a time line where u return and one where you never do. In the case that you do return to your origin time line it's a you from different time line, identical but not the same.
Why hasn’t anyone thought that if u stop your grandpa from meeting ur grandma that you would just exist from a different parent?
Your grandma cheated on your grandpa and never told anyone and if you found out who it was it changes the timeline and your grandma cheated to an infinite number of people
Or either somebody also went back in time and killed you
I love the rem and ram for the symbol for the twin paradox
Let's goo i found a fellow rezero enjoyer
@@allin1show465 can't wait for season 3
Let's Go! Another RZ Fan!
Who is rem ???
@@Bird55511 *restart noise plays*
An example of the paradox of tolerance is human rights. A person's human rights are not absolute because they are limited by other people's human rights
"If I have the right of the pursuit of happiness, and I enjoy other people's suffering, then only one of us can be happy."
Equal rights, equal consequences.
No, you don’t have the human right to hurts others’ human rights.
It just describing america’s problems
That’s why the only rights you have are life liberty and property. You have no other rights.
A famous roman lawyer once answered the Theseus ship question simply by asking "Do you have tonpay tax for purchasing it?" When people answered no, he said "it's the same ship then".
7:25
Zoro got such a terrible sense of direction that he wandered into an informative video about paradoxes 😂
😂true
😂😂😂😂
Zoro get the fuck back on the ship before I give you a circumcision.
Dude yes. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Rem and Ram got into there as well
Barber's Paradox is actually easy, his rule states that he will only shave those who don't shave themselves, it doesn't say that he shaves every person that doesn't shave himself, people who dont shave themselves can be shaved by some other barber, so if the barber goes to another barber he isnt breaking his rule
I actually thought of this when I first saw the paradox 😂
yes but what if he is the only barber in town ? (or in the entire world)
@@shinoxx.2019 he asks somebody to burn his beard
5:16 umm, yes it does?
@@shinoxx.2019It never suggests that he is the only barber in the world. Even if he was, someone else could still do it even if they weren’t professionally trained.
5:51 Bob's wife: Bob I'm begging you please stop asking philosophical questions and shave your beard
The bbl stickman 😭
I thought this was you pointing out something that just happened to look like that and then being annoying about it.
Only to find out that this was actually a thing the person drew...
wild
Edit: And it's the most replayed part of the video too, ugh...
@@anotherpersonfromnorfolk1587 LMAO
thiccdanny reborn
GYATT
Imagine bbl stickman r34...
Even if the ship changes over time, its essence remains the same. It teaches us that while things may evolve, the value and memories tied to them still hold strong, making them just as admirable as before❤
1-If ‘he is always lying’ is a lie, it doesn’t mean ‘he is always telling the truth’, it only means ‘he is not always lying’. Not a paradox, but "This statement is false" is.
2-Define something being the same. In my definition, the ship is no longer the same when the first piece was taken out. Actually nothing stays the same at a microscopic level at all, and one should think deeper about how identity can be seen as fluid rather than fixed. Like it depends on how you define time, whether you subscribe to presentism and think it's not longer the same ship, or eternalism and think it has always been the same ship during all its states.
3-There are different time traveling schools of thought. One of them is the multiverse theory and it solves this paradox by stating that when you time travels, you create a new reality where you kill your grandfather and you effectively won't be born in this new reality, but there definitely is the first version of you that exists and when you go back to your reality, your grandfather is not dead, there now just is a reality where he is.
4-Sorites paradox just has to clarify the definition of a heap because personally I would call anything a heap if there is exactly enough to make a tetrahedron, so 4, as long as they're properly arranged as a tetrahedron, but that's just me and it really just boils down to how vaguely humans have defined the word "heap".
5-The barber said "I only shave those who don't shave themselves", not that he HAS to shave them. So he is not allowed to shave himself but he can just never shave himself. Would've been a paradox if he said "I HAVE to shave those who don't shave themselves".
6-If a new reality is created from the time travelling, there'd be one where it's a fact that MJ made the shoes and a reality where it's a fact that you gifted them to him, so not a paradox.
7-Yes, that's sickk
8-If no day is a surprise, then everyday is. If nothing is dirty nothing is clean, if nothing is bad nothing is good typa shit... at least that's how I linked it. This now is an actual paradox connected to broader philosophical ideas about expectation and surprise. It's a tricky paradox because it plays on the logical structure of knowledge and prediction.
9-A debunking of this paradox states that the definition of omnipotence is being able to do ANYTHING that is POSSIBLE even if very hard or if the means to arrive to it are unknown. Omnipotence doesn't mean you can create a square with two straight lines in a planar 2D universe, the concept in itself is a logical fallacy, so creating a rock you can't lift is not a paradox, it's just logically fallacious.
10-That's not a paradox, time doesn't pass the same for anybody, and astronauts do age a teeny teeeeeny bit slower, it's a mind-blowing science fact that challenges the definition and concept of time but is in no way self-contradictory.
11-"Tolerating too much might get you in trouble" is not a paradox. What the video might have meant is "would you tolerate ideas of anti-tolerance?" and the answer is yes, you won't apply those ideas, you're tolerant that people be anti-tolerant and you're still 100% tolerant.
i love the fact that the Twin Paradox beein symbold by the Twins in Re:Zero, Rem & Ram
This channel keeps making anime references anyway
Who's Rem?
/jk
Haha indeed finally someone who mentioned it🗣️
Yay rezero fan found
Isn't the one of the openings of re zero titled paradisus paradoxum
The melons part caught me off guard
1) "I always lie" is a lie. He instead only sometimes lies.
2) we identify the ship, not the ship's parts. When a plank of wood is removed from the ship of Theseus, it is no longer part of the ship.
The wood could be said to be formerly a part of the ship. The wood's identity is linked to Theseus' identity. But the wood ≠ the ship.
3) if you go back in time, you are creating a new instance of the timeline. In this timeline, YOU exist. The future you doesn't, but you aren't the future you. The future you and the time traveling you are different instances of you.
Meaning you're essentially different people.
4) 😂😂😂
I remember this from a Dinosaurs comic of all places.
Utahraptor gives the paradox, and T-Rex gives the following solution: language is fuzzy. The point where a heap becomes a non-heap is unclear. But if we get the opinions of enough people, we can mathematically define the average.
5) if the rules are self contradictory, then the rules are the problem. You must either remove the contradictory rule or add additional rules to account for exceptions.
6) the boot strap paradox is overcome by the stable orbit solution (of my own creation).
Consider a space ship approaching a planet. It is from somewhere completely different. But after reaching the planet, it makes lots of adjustments to course correct. Each orbit, it is making smaller and smaller adjustments. Until eventually the spaceship is in a self sustaining orbit.
7) when measuring points with mathematics, infinity is the limit.
But when disassembling an object, planck length is the limit.
8) you can't rule out any day with certainty. Thus you can't get to the conclusion of never being hung.
9) Zeus makes a rock so heave even he can't lift it. Then he makes two universes, one where he can't lift it, and one where he can. Then he lifts both universes, rocks included.
Then he backflips onto a motorbike and rides off.
10) not a paradox. Just advanced math vs our flawed understanding of math.
11) that's not the paradox.....
A tolerant society is intolerant of intolerance.
Which is just the same as the barber paradox.
9) Alternatively, they just smite you and go on
I think I might have an answer for the socks version of the Sorties paradox. once the pile is equally half blue and half green, you take away one blue sock and replace it with green. that is when it becomes mostly green.
And for the barber paradox, just go to a different Barber.
In the Barber's Paradox, you just explained how he would shave himself, regardless of his rule. If he wouldn't shave himself after a certain period of time, he would fall under the category of those who need to be shaved by Bob. Of course he would violate his rule because he is not acting as his barber when shaving himself, he is taking care of himself.
I think many of these paradoxes, like the Sorites Paradox depend on defined answers. Somtimes the answers are not clear cut, but exist in a gray zone between states. There is no switch where you suddenly become an adult because the word "adult" itself is a construct that is based on an oversimplified definition of human growth.
Essentially, paradoxes reveal where human thinking is fallible. The reason it's so fallible is because our entire framework of thinking is based on constructs that don't actually exist in nature.
Answer to most of these paradoxes: don’t mess with time travel
lol bootstrap is ridiculous.
The barber paradox is solve by getting a another barber to cut bob’s hair
But doing so negates the premise that Bob is the only barber in town
@@ORBITingAroundYouthen Bob could just go to a different town… 😂
@@ORBITingAroundYouBob doesn't shave
What if Bob rips his hair out?
When something is sucked into a black hole, from the outside it looks like a matter of seconds, but for the object time will slow down infinitely the closer it gets to the black hole, meaning it will never reach it.
The liar paradox means he's sometimes a liar
At least the one that you put out
I was thinking of something like, the only way that's possible is that it wasn't true in the first place. I mean, surely we don't lie all the time, that would be impossible. We definitely don't tell the truth all the time anymore either.
@@csarineit could also mean he is never lying and i dont mean it in like "Always telling the truth" i mean never lying Like not telling a single wrong thing Not even true ones, so He is silent (messed up but possible).
That's missing the point.
Is the following sentence true?
"This sentence is false."
Is a logic problem. You evaluate what's implied if it's true. And you evaluate what's implied if it's false.
Saying "it means he sometimes lies" is thinking about semantics, not logic.
@@pedroamaralcouto That would be true if he had said one of the classical variations of the paradox "I am lying" or more abstractly "X: This statement X is false".
You have to note that no accepted variations of the liar's paradox include the word "always" because it opens itself up to ambiguity or semantics which makes it become a different logical statement. This is what I'm trying to point out, hence "At least the one you put out".
I even did a quick Wikipedia search to give you an example of this here,
"The Epimenides paradox (c. 600 BC) has been suggested as an example of the liar paradox, but they are not logically equivalent. The semi-mythical seer Epimenides, a Cretan, reportedly stated that "All Cretans are liars."[1] However, Epimenides' statement that all Cretans are liars can be resolved as false, given that he knows of at least one other Cretan who does not lie (alternatively, it can be taken as merely a statement that all Cretans tell lies, not that they tell only lies)."
Likewise, you've given the correct variation "This sentence is false" which is logically inequivalent to "I am always lying" because "always" adds a dimension of time into the statement which can be resolved with "sometimes".
Thinking about logic is inextricable to thinking about semantics, if you're trying to get your point across with a paradox then you have to make it "amenable to more rigorous logical analysis".
Im convinced 'the analyst' is 'the evaluters' younger brother
No, just a copier that appeared 14 days after his channel was created.
@@North_Dakota you must be very fun at parties
someone said it 😭🙏
I didn’t expect to have my mind put into a blender today, but here we are
My answer for ship of theseus:
If you're able to say to someone "I got a new ship!", then it's new.
If you're able to say "I got my ship repaired with new parts!", it's not new.
1:44 legally registered ship will be the repaired one, hence that’s your ship.
The solution to the omnipotence paradox is that they can do both. It's like playing Minecraft with cheats enabled. You can make it to where you can't fly, but you can fly at the same time.
Omnipotent means all capable. If you are not capable of something means you are not omnipotent. Other explanation would be if an omnipotent is immortal they shouldn't be able to unalive themselves since they wouldn't be omnipotent
@@sheepas So when you can't fly in minecraft, but make yourself able to fly - you were actually able to fly all along and could never make yourself not able to fly?
Simple, God cannot be affected by his creation, just like how a book cannot be smarter than its writer. Also what infinity + 1, infinity what is infinity +2, infinity. You cannot add anything to infinity. This "paradox" comes from a misunderstanding of omnipotence. Simple as that. Lets look at the question, can god create a rock that he cannot lift? God cannot be affected by the universe, as he created it, just like how a writer cannot write a book smarter than himself. Besides, lets say the rock represents 100, and god represents infinity. So what is infinity + 100? Infinity. Nothing can be added to Infinity.
@@flyingturret208thecannon5 You can /gamemode creative all you want. You can /op and /ban yourself. You become all capable for a moment trough cheats, meaning you were all capable before, but made yourself vulnerable therefore not completely omnipotent. But if you couldn't do any of that you wouldn't be omnipotent. The option for cheats or /op makes you omnipotent.
@@Mohammad1yt1 Regarding creations: tell that to OpenAI and GPT. Ofc it's not all there reasoning wise, yet certain solutions are provided faster than any person is capable (which is in itself scary and beautiful).
Your math is inherently flawed. I can also argue that, since if they (P+inf = omnipotent) make themselves vulnerable (not omnipotent) -> P+(inf*0)=P or P+inf-inf=P (assuming P is their ability as a conscious being and inf means their infinite power), then without inf they are not more capable than P.
It's the logic that, IF a god can make themselves vulnerable, they are no longer omnipotent. Of course they could 1. Summon such rock making themself vulnerable, 2. Attempt to move the rock and 3. Remove the rock from existence. That would make them stay omnipotent, unless they make the rock indestructible, making them no longer omnipotent.
Therefore they cannot become "perfectly" omnipotent because both statements are true.
Omnipotence paradox (9:59) is easy, he could just create a rock that he can't lift with one hand, and can also lift it with 2 hands, making him not be able to lift it, and also be able to.
Yeah but that’s not the point of it. If that’s the case then he can make an even heavier rock. It’s not about finding a middle ground.
And also, if you can lift something with 2 hands that means you can lift it even if you can’t do it with one.
Like i deadlift 405 so I can lift it even though I can’t do it with one arm.
11:00 I did not expect to see Ram and Rem, a suprise but a welcome one.
If somebody says that they're always lying this is not invoke a paradox. They could just be lying most of the time, and this could be one of the lies.
Liars Paradox: If he was truly always lying he couldn't say that. Therefore he's just a normal person.
Ship of Theseus: Still the same ship made of different parts. Otherwise you wouldn't be yourself in 10 years because all your cells would be replaced by then.
Grandfather Paradox: You can't alter the past because traveling to the past isn’t possible. Since going to the past is fiction, so are any rules to it.
Sorites Paradox: Heap is a vernacular term and can not only differ from one person's perspective, but how they feel at the moment. It's called a case by case basis.
Barber Paradox: He made the rules so that he would break them whether he shaves or not. It's not a mind blowing paradox, it's just poor rule making.
Bootstrap Paradox: Basically the chicken or the egg (answer is egg) question. In this case, it's fiction, so any rules apply.
Banach Tarksi Paradox: Sounds like we just messed up, because it's only theoretical and not physically possible. It seems more like a thiugut experiment than paradox because obviously we're the wrong ones. Either we got the law of conservation wrong, or our formulas or units wrong.
The Unexpected Hanging Paradox: Every day (exceot Friday) can be unexpected due to the Prisoner assuming it won't take place the day of. Furthermore the whole
You forgot the omnipotent one. He imposes a limitation on himself and after he did you say “ hahaha you can’t lift it”
@laboot747 I think you missed the whole point about paradoxes.
@@paulvonnapolski5024 Lol fr just avoided all the rules of paradoxes
Also its the chicken not the egg
Bro doesn’t understand what a paradox is
liar paradox is easy. instead of always lying, they just sometimes lie
the last example works way better
The entire point is that they said that they always lie tho
Even if, You still don't know if they lied or not, now it turned into a schrodinger effect
@@kingbred01yeah
@@alkafps they lie about always lying, doesn't mean you always tell the truth
Sometimes it feels like we're living out the Paradox of Tolerance
Thank you for completely distroying my mind
Destroying *
There’s also the light paradox (as I like to call it, I don’t actually know the name)
Basically, let’s assume Tim and Tom are watching tv. Tim has poor eyesight, so he’s watching close to the tv.
Tom is farsighted so he’s watching from afar.
Now let’s say that Tom mentions this tv watching to Thomas and says they watched it at the same time.
Did they really watch it at the same time if light reached Tom faster than Tim?
I never knew how much I needed Stick-Figure Roronoa Zoro in my life until today!
The tolerance paradox is very applicable nowadays
Definitely nowadays seeing Millennials to Gen Z being a more radical bunch. I won't get specific but seeing how social media has became pretty much a Warzone unlike any other, and those who are extreme tend to use the paradox of tolerance as their defence rather then the acknowledgement. A line has definitely gotta be known where it's at.
@@Scruffest The weird thing is, if you ask both sides what should be tolerated, they will have wildly different answers, implying that nobody can decide on what should and shouldn't be tolerated. For instance, a right wing Christian might argue that homosexuality shouldn't be tolerated because it's against their religion to tolerate it, while the homosexual might argue that Christianity shouldn't be tolerated, because it is intolerant of them. It's a paradox for sure with no easy solution: you either are forced to disrespect the former's beliefs or the latter's sexuality. This paradox pops up *everywhere* in politics.
Society is essentially forced to take a side or play it completely neutral and hope that relations don't break down.
@@Justmonika6969 1. I like your name, it's nice to see dedicated DDLC fans
2. Though that comparison between Christianity and the LGB (leaving the TQ since I prefer identity and sexuality to be seperate therefore seen differently) to be... Idk... off? Not saying you're wrong it's just I think a better way is to view both is at their extremes to make your point make more sense unless you actually mean it in that way then I apologise for the misunderstanding.
Because I met Christians and LBG (and TQ) folk who are tolerable but have limits, though it falls under the same spot as the point you make, just not as extreme. I guess you can say I just contradicted myself 💀
Question is where should that line be drawn, and who is at fault? Added to that in a case such as the one the DDLC pfp user outlined, what do you do when history also comes into play? Whilst there is a slight paradox, in this case it isn't perfect. Hell just due to religions and beliefs it isn't actually implemented in the first place
@@Scruffestremoving the tq from the lgb is like removing the a feom the us. it's a part of our shared culture and we fought alongside eachother during the civil rights movement
As a ReZero fan, I love how you used the maid twins for the twin paradox.
Might wanna talk about Zino,s paradox
Unexpected hanging paradox is basically: you may have outsmarted me, but I outsmarted your outsmarting.
The twin paradox isn't a paradox, it's a bad interpretation of the relativity
The twin paradox in the video isn't the actual one.
Also the paradox itself can be explained but only in specific scenarios
@@pete4416 lol, I thought so cs, I remembered a different concept of this paradox
We are the ship of Theseus where every cell in our body slowly dies and gets replaced with a new cell as we grow up. But it is the history that makes the ship not the paintjob
Paradox solver for the first 2:
- he was being genuine in giving his statement
- yes, the new ship is your ship, not because of the material, but because its owner is you.
I’ll add that the liar paradox isn’t a paradox against the self either because unless another person is the liar you’ll always know that you’re not…
Also the ship of rhesus isn’t a logical loop because it doesn’t take into account why the parts where replaced in the first place which is obsolescence, which explains that the new ship is an evolution.
To believe in the ship of Theseus is to refute evolution and states of decay. This is actually a bigger paradox than the ship of Theseus itself 😂
It also assumes you can build a second ship with the broken parts which is a logical fallacy
It’s an example of an engineered paradox rather the a true paradox.
@@ironhell813 The real question is why is this video claiming to be a breakdown of paradoxes when half of the things discussed are either just philosophical thought experiments or explorations of theoretical science.
Might as well have tossed in the Fermi Paradox while they were at it. :P
the question isn't it which one is yours, it's which one is the original
@@TheCreCrethe one that no longer exists. It can’t be original if none of it is the same. A human being’s brain and spinal cord can not be transplanted. No human can change themselves beyond originality.
As someone who loves Dark, seeing the Triquetta on the Bootstrap Paradox makes me unreasonably happy.
13:07 basically new york
well this was the best thing i heard since school started
1:00 IS THAT A CHONNY JASH REFERENCE?????
HOLY SHIT I LOVE YOU /P
no, but chonny jash is pretty cool, glory to chonnys charming chaos compendium
Pin
1:30 this is similar to the question "when all of the atoms in my body have been replaced with new ones am I still me?"
The liar paradox can be resolved simply by abandoning dogmatic belief and understand that he “lies often and sometimes tells the truth”.
That violates the paradox and brings unmentioned information about the character into the question. It’s about taking what the character is saying for face value, not assuming that he only lies sometimes.
@@jiminplsletmehit7620 Humans aren't meant to dwell into such paradox's. Imagine being a life form that only thinks about a logical paradox. Humans have the gift of ignoring logic loops and actually setting priorities straight
The grandfather paradox in my opinion is the most interesting one. This is because one of 2 things happen if someone attempts to create it. Either it just branches off into a parallel universe, which depends on the butterfly effect being real. Or, the universe just kinda stops working, whether it be time just stopping or the universe just kinda implodes, which now that i think about it, may be how the universe ends then starts again. Someone create a paradox to test this.
Time travel is theoretically impossible.
It's like the infinite paradoxes in math.
Simply the paradox happens by assuming time travel itself.
It's actually more interesting imo that when we start thinking about the boundaries of the universe, nothing makes sense anymore
@@pete4416 time travel IS possible and we literally know how to do it. To travel backwards in time, you travel faster than light. To travel forwards in time, you go near an insanely dense object such as a black hole.
@@GreenRacoonYT
You can't travel faster than light, that's the thing it is LITERALLY impossible.
Not just technologically.
Light travels at the speed of light because it's literally the speed limit
Edit: about going forward in time, this is true but you're still experiencing time (just slower) and it's like you're going on a vacation and returning way way later without aging much so I wouldn't think of it as the typical time travel we see in movies
11:00 Re:Zero reference
"Becoming your own grandfather is not problem in well resolved families" - Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
5:56 worst paradox ever just get somebody to shave yourself for you
The amount of times I've replayed this video to understand what you were saying is unbelievable
The crazy thing about the bootstrap paradox is the item. It isn’t affected by entropy. It is eternal.
A simpler version of the bootstrap paradox is inventing a time machine from instructions you gave yourself (it'll make sense in a moment), then going back in time and giving yourself those instructions. You gave yourself the instructions, but who made them first?
I clicked for ram and rem
please go outside
Same
great video as always!
“Did you become an adult when you got circumcised?” I was circumcised at 4, so definitely not 💀
That should be banned
4:22 this paradox is also like evolution, you can’t tell when this stops and that begins
Ok, I know paradoxes aren’t supposed to be answered but I will try to answer as many of these paradoxes as possible like Wheatley did in portal 2.
Liar paradox: your friend exaggerated the statement, he doesn’t ALWAYS lies, he just lies a lot
Ship of Theseus: it’s the REPAIRED ship of Theseus, and a ship made from the old parts is the ship of Theseus rebuilt with its old parts
Grandfather: you either make a new timeline and it purges you from it or you change yours so that the person what WOULD have been your grandma is not you grandma in a sort of Mandela effect, for example a large percentage of people remember the pokemon onix instead being spelt onyx (I’m one of them)
Sorites: the sand part is tricky but for the sock part it switches to a most blue pile to a mostly green pile when one color of sock has more of its colour than the other, for the sand part, a heap is a a decent size so if you make it smaller it will go from a heap to a pile so taking away half will make it a decent size pile, and for the adult part you don’t go from baby to adult but there are multiple stages inbetween
Barber: based on context he seemed to have stated that will refuse to shave CUSTOMERS that shave themselves so since he can’t be his own customer he CAN shave himself, or he can get himself a barber to do it
Bootstrap: it’s just a chicken and the egg paradox so I will assume the it’s the same answer and Micheal created the Jordan’s first, it’s not a good answer but I’m going with it
Banach-tarski: it’s simply impossible to do what the paradox says unless the object can reattach and regenerate itself
Surprising hanging: it’s a surprise because you didn’t expect it to happen on that day because it wouldn’t normally happen on that day
Omnipotence: he wouldn’t lift it fully, he would still technically be lifting it but not all the way like if you were to dead lift a hundred pounds up to your knees but not to you pelvis so you did lift it but not completely.
Twins: it feels slower but the one who left, they didn’t age like they normally would, they would still be considered the same age as their twin
Tolerance: you can’t have a society can’t be tolerant of everything, everyone has a line to what they tolerate so nobody can be completely tolerant no matter how tolerant they seem so a completely tolerant society is impossible
So those are my answers for each of the paradoxes shown, they might not be satisfying but it’s an answer to questions that aren’t supposed to be answered.
well for the omnipotence one, he wouldn't be able to create something he can't lift at all or be unable to lift it at all
Omnipotence is solved by choice. Create something, and refuse to lift it. If you refuse utterly, you can't lift it. It's possible to, but you can't because of the refusal.
@@ThatRPGuywithtoomanyOCs all that does is try to hide the lack of omnipotence
@@ThatRPGuywithtoomanyOCs that’s just refusing to accept that ur not omnipotent
The barber is a 3rd degree burn victim, after that, he made the barber's oath.
I think the grandfather paradox is that maybe curtain things are set in stone, the version of yourself that stopped your grandparents' ever meeting is the one constant, however in the present, you have no history, u essentially spiderman yourself.
Even tho most of these are so confusing i could watch 10000 parts on these please make a pt 2, 3, 4, 5, 100
1:42 The way I see it is like this: Every few days, your outermost layer of skin is replaced. No matter how many times this happens, however, you still consider the skin attached to you as your true skin. This is doesn’t stop your shed skin from being your skin, but we stop thinking as such when our skin becomes dust. If the old boards are removed, this doesn’t stop the boards from being considered a part of the ship until they rot away.
TLDR: The main body will always be the main body, no matter what is replaced. The pieces are still considered pieces of the main body until they become so unrecognizable that it’s hard to tell what they were.
The liar and the grandfather paradox confuse me the most
Well, you can't be always a liar, especially if you say that you're always a liar.
but u understand the banach-tarski??
What's confusing about the grandfather paradox?
The answer to the grandfather paradox is simple: time travel into the past isn't possible
@@lostplanet1931maybe you aren't always a liar but you lied once while talking about lying
1. Your friend is sometimes lying (you got pranked)
2. It is still the same ship per se, but with new parts (it's different "same" for a ship, that was just disassembled and assambled again). Ship assembled from old parts is another ship (with owner whoever assembled it), probably unusable, because old part were replaced for a reason.
3. Depends on which theories we talk about:
a) multiverse - no time paradox, since you dont go back, but to another universe
b) you go back, but create another time line.
c) one time line, which prevent you from doing you about to do in first place (like you go to jail for a life time or have accidents, that prevent you from interaction)
d) one time line, but the moment you go back, the future collapses. Think of this like that - you have a pasta string (time) with you as a grain of rice on it (matter). For you to to go back you have to snap this pasta (sorry Italians) at any point, and it is automatically replaced with new part (old part is disregarded forever [you cant go to old future, just new future]).
4. If you count it (and is above one), it is heap of sand with fixed number of sand grains, without count (but still above one) it is a heap of sand. We can argue just because people can have different perspectives. With sock its mostly blue/green whenever color of sock is dominant (2 pairs of blue, 3 green - mostly green, 3 pairs of blue, 2 pairs of green - mostly blue, 2 pair of blue and green socks - equal number). With baby adult situation it is tricky, because it depends of your current law in your country when you are considered an adult (18, 21 in america...) (if having a beer [or being circumcised] was an adult indicator, then I was quite a young adult)
5. He goes to another barber (like he is only barber in the world). Or just have long beard, he followed the rule of not shaving himself, not breaking the rule if he decides not to shave beard himself (he is still under a category of "people who needs to be shaved by Bob", but it is his decision not to. (I just wonder how he offers his services to himself? Barber go to himself and ask?)
6. Same as 3, first invent time machine.
With circle it is established that it have no starting point, no corners, etc (I'm talking about theoretical perfect circle). On a piece of paper - answer depends on what you want to hear. Do you ask where I *started to* make a circle (if you draw it it should have point where you started) or drawing is just representation of perfect circle (stamps?) where there is no starting point.
Egg came first for two reasons: 1. We could talk about not chicken egg. 2. Evolution make non-yet chicken lye an egg of first chicken.
7. Yea, theoretical paradox. No comments.
8. Don't hang people. But for a sake of argument:
a) every day from hearing about surprise hang day is a surprise hang day. He can expext wvery day to be surprise, but since he dont know which one he can't say he could expect it.
b) tell them they will be hangend on random day this week. It could be today afternoon, tomorrow in morning. They will know when they see a new necktie.
c) if they tell for example "I will expect Monday to hanged" them they will not be hanged on Monday, then surprise, surprise...
d) put him in a auto-hanging cell (with a floor that falls down on random day), the information about surprise should be pre-recorded and played the moment he enters a cell.
e) tell him that he is free to go, then hang him
f) put him into clinic coma, wake him up on random day (he doesn't have to know which day it is)
9. The question itself is weird. Is like asking "can you create 2 stones, that are 3 stones?" or "can you tell a truth, that is a lie?"
But what if he creates a rock and didn't move it, because he don't want to (telling you he can lift it because of weight).
Or he just tell you "One at the time..." or asked "So which it should be?"
10. Yep, it is relative. Sister on earth will be older than the one in space, even if they were born in same year. Just put watch on their hand and by it measure how much time has passed for each one individually.
11. It is not really a paradox, if it is a statement. If every one is tolerant of everything, then yes, bring your "unique" dish to a party, you probably will eat it alone. Also be tolerant if people throw you out of the house.
It goes back to number one.
If a friend tell you that he is lying all the time, he is not lying all the time (like sometimes).
If he is lying all the time, then he can't tell this sentence in the first place (he can say "I'm sometimes lying" or "he always tells the truth") or the statement is false in first place. (Sometimes I think, this is how statistic works.)
Just my thoughts (don't hate me for it).
Some people just looking for problems 😅
Wasn't 9 solved with two types of answers:
1. God can, but he won't since it's against his nature and he wants to stay all powerful.
2. Making a rock he can both lift and not lift makes him both all powerful and not all powerful at the same time, which is nonsense/word salad or spaghetti or something like that
Your creative skills are great! What software do you use to paint your imaginations?
An example of the bootstrap paradox can be in the Loki series, where Ouroboros credits He Who Remains, who in turn credits Ouroboros for their achievements.
@02:20 how does an object identify itself as anything? It's an object. People determine what it is. So, wouldn't functionality then be the only argument that actually makes sense?
Ship of Theseus: The best way to resolve this is to name a part that is core to the ship as the ship, and every other part as an accessory. In the case of a ship, the keel should be that core. It cannot be replaced without taking the ship apart.
Or the ship has to be registered, and obviously no matter how many parts you change it will still be recognized as the same ship (legally)
7:19 I have the answer to that. If you're talking about any usual egg then the egg came first (dino egg) and if you're talking about chicken egg, then the chicken obviously came first to get a chicken egg. And if you're wondering from where the chicken came from without a chicken egg, it was evolved by hybrid breeding of dino like creatures.
Hmmmm...... might just be me, but I'm pretty sure things aren't as easy as that
I will just specifically answer the question "chicken or egg first?" will not explain beyond that question.
Answer : chicken 🐔 first, egg 🥚 ain't gonna hatch 🐣 by itself.
@@fruitspunch8859 But then I could answer: a chicken cannot exist without hatching from am egg. Unless it just magically popped into existence
egg came first: prehistoric animal laid an egg that was a mutation, turning it into a chicken
@@Mr_Doritos the question was which one came first, not how it came into existence.
And by your reasoning, then nothing is exist unless egg also magically poppep into existence. Since both exist, then you're definitely wrong.
Additional explanation for my answer :
We can choose whatever beginning/origin
(1) Let's just say both 🐔 and 🥚 can magically popped into existence.
(2) Or we can follow either creationism or evolutionism.
> If 🐔 came first : 🐔 lays 🥚, then hatch 🐣... *Reproduction and sustainability*
> If 🥚 came first, it can't hatch itself so it stays 🥚 until it decay or someone make it an 🍳
I had a thought for the ship of theseus, we difine something as a thing unchanged on a local level that we can see. To explain further, we identify an object like a plank of wood as the plank itself and not the many atoms and molecules that make it up. But those molecules and atoms change and get replaced over time. Say you had an object that you kept for years. This object has had every atom replaced, but the shape is still the same, and you have not had to repair or add on to it. Almost everyone would say that it is the same object because of how our perspective was built/developed. So the ship of theseus is the same ship that you had. Also by this logic, since you replaced the ship and observed the changes on a local level it is not the same ship and the ship you build out of the old parts are also not the same ship.
W zoro and rem ram reference 🗣️
This is not what the twin paradox says
Time isn't the same for everyone, understanding that is the premise of special relativety.
The paradox happens when you jump into the perspective of the twin who stayed home.
At that point in time when the travelling twin arrives to their destination, both twins (in their own perspective) are much younger than the other one at the edge of the universe, so when the traveling twin comes back home, the paradox is that we don't know which one of the two is younger since from each twin's perspective, the other should be older.
In this specific scenario the paradox can be solved by understanding acceleration but it becomes an actual paradox when both twins are moving in opposite directions
The omnipotence paradox can be solved by saying that the being can't physically lift the rock, but can give the rock the ability to lift itself. Because of that it can be surmised that the being lifted the rock without lifting the rock which makes both outcomes true.
I don't know what that mumbo jumbo is even trying to say, but dude, it is literally a paradox, by definition a paradox HAS NO ANSWER
@@NeroDefoggerTherefore, this is not a paradox, because it has an answer.
@@GabrielBrooks-k6x it is a paradox because it has NO ANSWER
Welcome to the paradox paradox..
Since a paradox is something that can’t be explained or answered when a paradox is explained was is always a paradox to begin with?
8:19 yes it is impossible but nothingness is either a rip in the space time continuum or outside of the universe. The “nothing” you’re referring to is chemicals invisible to naked eye, which are something therefore you can make something out of ‘thin air’ because air is something.
10:33 simple, he makes a clone weaker that doesn’t know it’s the clone of a god, the original creates the rock, the clone cannot lift it, but the original can, so the answer depends on if the challenge is then split because the clone is technically him, or if it is only for the original then in that case you create a rock at first to heavy to lift, first one down, then you lighten it and lift it, second down.
4:37 when it is more than 50% green
"Liar paradox" from The Labyrinth as a kid wrecked my brain 🤯😂
Ship of theseus:
If I throw away a part of myself, the part I threw away isn't me anymore, everything I keep with me is
He would make something he can't lift,accept his limit, go train then return to succeed. implanting the idea that one can work to reach his level but knowing that it was all a ruse and nobody can ever reach that level or surpass it.
1 hour of paradox please 🙏🏻
Paradox of tolerance is exactly what happened in Rapture from Bioshock. Doing pretty much anything with no limits DESTROYED the whole society. Limits need to exist.
" you'll die on wednesday •ω• "
The "paradox of tolerance" only exists when you view tolerance as some sort of moral code. Tolerance is a social contract. Break the contract by being intolerant and you are no longer protected by it
1:59 HELP THE MELONS😭
watching this, high as a kite, broke my brain temporarly
For the Barber Paradox, it'sn't a paradox. The rules for his shop only apply to his customers. He is not a customer to himself. If he wants to follow his rule that badly of not shaving anyone who shaves themself, then he can just go to a different barber. His rule only starts that you can't shave yourself if you want his service, not that those who don't shave themselves have to go to his barber.
If he shave himself does it technically he is a customer of himself? Then if his hair grows out again, that is where the paradox begin.
It's a paradox found by Bertrand Russell, implying issues with the theory of sets when self-references are used.
The barber is a member of the set "all men". He shaves all men who don't shave themselves, and only those men.
If the barber doesn't shave himself, he shaves himself. If he shaves himself, he doesn't shave himself.
It's a similar issue found in the liar's paradox.
The Seattle SuperSonics/OKC Thunder thing is a good representation of ship of Theseus
Not really since the Supersonics never came back (yet). A better example is the Baltimore Ravens/ Cleveland Browns. Which team gets the success the Browns had in the early days of the league? The original team (the Ravens) or the team named the Browns currently
Solution to liar paradox: ask the friend “does one plus one equal two?”
Your acoustic
@@G500-m2b*You’re
@@G500-m2bnahh💀💀💀
P1: I always lie
P2: Does 1+1=2?
P1: Yes
His original statement is null because he didn't lie
P1: I always lie
P2: Does 1+1=2?
P1: No
His original statement is null because if he always lied then the original statement is also a lie
First of all, it's *you're, and it's not "acoustic", it's "autistic". Please don't use autistic as a slur, it's really lame and cringe.
Sincerely, an actually autistic person@@G500-m2b
The barber paradox is easy to solve, as it perfectly descrives the life of someone too scared to make decisions.
Since both choices will lead to the same results, then you should pick the one that benefits you the most.
For the grandfather paradox you make a new time line
Solution to the sorites paradox: If the sand grain is at least two layers, it is a heap. As a heap is a 'pile' of things, there must be a secondary layer of sand to be a heap.
Therefore, a 50 by 50 grain of sand must have more than 2500 grains of sand to be a heap. Otherwise its a incredibly organised file of sand
1: Call bullshit because your friend doesn't ALWAYS lie, thus while the statement is a lie, it's not the truth
2: The ship made of the old parts is like a shedded skin, and the repaired parts is the new one.
3: Split timeline Theory.
4: Label different sizes based on approximate numbers/ranges
5: Have Bob find a apprentice and after studying Bob for so long, have the apprentice do the job instead. Bob's not the one shaving himself, the apprentice is.
6: Standard inconsequential time loop.
7: less of a paradox, more of a quantum theory
8: Personally, every day of the week is a weekday,even the ends. HOWEVER the simple logic is that the person was too vague on the restriction and said Thursday NIGHT. Literally there was 4-5 days that could be chosen at random, and it's unexpected because they thought they could choose when they couldn't be hung, which is dumb.
9: when something has an "infinite" upper limit, nothing can surpass, only match.
10: idk who thinks they wouldn't be twins if they age different, that seems like they're losing the grasp on what a twin is
11: Tolerance as a social construct is to respect people for who they are, but as some think of it as a double edged sword, it's more of a spiked shield. "I won't bother you if you don't bother me"
**Me try’s to sleep**
Brain: hay remember that video about every paradox?
Me: COURSE YOU
0:22 not always lying doesn’t mean always tell the truth. So no, not a paradox
Yes it is bro
If you are not lying then you are telling the truth there is no in between
@@TheJeet5225 "I always lie" can't be truth as this sentence would indicate that in fact you don't always lie but it also cant' be a lie as it would indicate that the statement is false
@@MapleSheik yeah I know that, I get the sentence. I was talking about in general that if someone is not lying then they are telling the truth.
@@TheJeet5225Kurt Gödel is laughing down at you in the heavens.
Banach - Tarski paradox reminded me of that one chocolate bar trick where you cut it diagonally and take each piece out as though you never did, but over time the gap kept getting larger though
Lost me there 2:25