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
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)
@@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.
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
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...
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
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".
1:41 - 1:53: Surprising how prevalent this paradox is in places. It’s like how a band or music project (e.g. Tangerine Dream) hire new members over time but old members either leave or pass away until it’s only the new members that form the group. Or how a character in media forms an alter ego made up of different characteristics or aspects they either formed or previously repressed, all as a result of something that happened to them. Maybe even adding a Pokémon to your team based on their appeal and identity they have in your eyes, but as they evolve their features and characteristics change in a way that they almost lose that original identity they had.
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.
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.
@@towel_gaminggod created physics so he can do whatever he wants. He can choose to make the rock so heavy. He can't lift it, and then he can choose to make it so heavy. He can still lift it.
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.
The act of giving MJ the shoes is the original origin of the shoes. The circle doesn’t have a start or end however at some point the circle was created, drawn or generated from one point and looped around ending at another.
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.
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".
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.
omnipotence allows to bypass all logic definitions but doesn't necessarily mean humans can understand the bypass omnipotence is a paradox by itself because its existence is illogical, but yet very possible
Disagree with like more than half of your statement. You can always make the barber one a paradox, why you just judge only based on what the TH-camr said and not the actual paradox if you are smart enough.
@ I did say " Would've been a paradox if he said "I HAVE to shave those who don't shave themselves"." So you're right, it is a paradox though the youtuber didn't formulate it perfectly it still stands. Not saying my arguments are god given, so if they're refutable I'd be glad to hear, it's fun talking about paradoxes and one is very rarely correct since their concept is litteraly 'being confusing' lmao
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
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.
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.
@@Ouyak 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
@@Ouyakremoving 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
I always thought about a paradox where a string of the same numbers could be considered randomly generated numbers (though also extremely rare) due to randomly occurring patterns in generative randomness. For example, you can see random patterns occurring in this random sequence of numbers I’ve just typed, like 9 & 8 being the most used numbers: 58395829395910184827485 But something like: 9999999999999999999999 Could still be considered a random pattern occurrence (albeit, an extremely long one), therefore despite being all the same number, it’s a large random pattern in a random string of numbers.
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.
@CreaWolf it's the other way around. Looking from outside it looks like it takes forever because the closer to the event horizon, the slower light moves. But the object enters in a finite time. It's Relativity at work.
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.
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.
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❤
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 thanks to Futurama I know how to solve the grandfather's paradox: It is possible for people to travel into future, but not back in time. It could be possible to go into future so far, that the universe collapses. After that, there is a possibility for another big bang, which would mean the universe is just repeating itself infinite number of times. Then you travel far enough to see your grandfather, you kill him and later in this timeline you wouldn't exist. You go once again into future to the time you started your time travel. Everything will be the same, except it's like you appear there out of nowhere, you won't know anyone, nor anyone will know you. It's like you just started existing. Pretty cool to think about it, huh? Edit: You can apply the same logic to the bootstrap paradox.
I have my own paradox, I call it the vows and oaths paradox. Imagine your friend ask you to play a game of dares, there are two rules: •you both swear on oath that both of you will do all dares that you were dared to •you both dare eachother and do those dares at the same time Your friend dares you to kill yourself, you, afraid to die, dares your friend to not dare you that. Then you'll break the oath, so which would you rather choose, suicide or breaking a -promise- vow.
I don't think you understand what a paradox is by definition because there isn't anything in the morbid game of truth or dare that is paradoxical in any way. Maybe Google what a paradox is and try it again.
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.
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.
But any barber shop in the area would go out of business because bob is so good. He would have to go way out of his way just to get a haircut. I would rather not drive while contemplating this dilemma.
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
I wanna introduce a paradox I came up with called the opposite day paradox. If some one says it's opposite day, and you ask them a yes or no question, and they respond with yes. That obviously means no. But because it's opposite day, that no becomes a yes. And that answer will contradict itself until it is not longer opposite day.
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?
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
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
For Sorites paradox, if you heat food in the microwave for 30 seconds or 29 seconds makes no difference, but 30 seconds or 1 seconds does make a difference
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
@@Gomamon64 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?
@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?
I'd like to think that in the Grandfather paradox, small little things prevent your grandfather from dying or not meeting your grandmother. Like if you wanted to shoot him in the head, your gun jams, or he bends over to pick up a coin right as you shoot it. Or if you wanted to get him onto a flight so he wouldn't meet grandma, the plane would break down and he would still meet said grandma. Fun stuff :D
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.
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"
God can do whatever he wants. This is the only theory that i 100% know. God can make something heavy enough. He can lift it and can't lift it at the same time. He can also create create something into thin air, without creating it into thin air. He can also defy reality without defying reality. Anything you ask him to do He can 100% do he can sin even though he can't sinning is a human thing, though. He can still do it.
I propose a new paradox theory: The introvert Paradox: you want to organize a public event and invite your introverted friends online, but they are super shy and have a phobia of interacting with each other face to face. You are willing to pay for their travel and hotels so no problem can prevent them from attending. Do these introverts meet?
@@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
For the ship it’s a simple answer there is always the one main part which for the ship is the piece of wood that is the base, it can not be replaced blanking on the name rn but that is the base of your ship whichever has that piece is your ship it’s like the body of a car
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.
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
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.
1. if someone says “I always lie” that in an of itself is a lie. they can often lie but that admittance in and of itself disproves them and while it makes them a liar, doesn’t make this true 100% of the time. 2. what makes theseus’ ship what it is is having been captained by theseus. if it was still captained by him throughout its repairs then it would still be his ship, but if it were to change owners or be put in a museum and undergo repairs, it would either not be his ship anymore or be a restoration of it. 3. depends on if multiple timelines exist. if there’s only one timeline either someone destroys the timeline or we prove there’s some guiding fate stopping us from doing anything paradoxical. if there’s multiple timelines I think it would just delete. 4. heap is subjective, perception is subjective. everything is changing and permenance is an illusion. 5. if everyone has to get his hair cut by him that’s a pretty clear caveat to nobody being able to cut their own hair. 7. it’s only contradictory if there’s evidence suggesting something else inspired the invention/product. otherwise it’s just a hidden part of the timeline. in the example of the circle it’s the same as MJ, you’d have to ask the creator. 8. I lack a college degree so I don’t even know about this. 9. isn’t a paradox it’s just a logical fallacy. 10. only works if this omnipotent being is confined to logic and reality, but if they created these things why would they be confined to it. 11. if there’s already the understanding that time can bend in predictable ways what’s paradoxical about it? twins refers to genetics. 12. no tolerance for intolerance
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
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
"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.
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
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.
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*
7:25
Zoro got such a terrible sense of direction that he wandered into an informative video about paradoxes 😂
😂😂😂😂
Zoro get the fuck back on the ship before I give you a circumcision.
Dude yes. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Rem and Ram got into there as well
😂😂
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...
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
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".
1:41 - 1:53:
Surprising how prevalent this paradox is in places. It’s like how a band or music project (e.g. Tangerine Dream) hire new members over time but old members either leave or pass away until it’s only the new members that form the group. Or how a character in media forms an alter ego made up of different characteristics or aspects they either formed or previously repressed, all as a result of something that happened to them. Maybe even adding a Pokémon to your team based on their appeal and identity they have in your eyes, but as they evolve their features and characteristics change in a way that they almost lose that original identity they had.
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
Just ask someone else to shave his beard
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
@@towel_gaminggod created physics so he can do whatever he wants. He can choose to make the rock so heavy. He can't lift it, and then he can choose to make it so heavy. He can still lift it.
The melons part caught me off guard
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.
The act of giving MJ the shoes is the original origin of the shoes. The circle doesn’t have a start or end however at some point the circle was created, drawn or generated from one point and looped around ending at another.
Answer to most of these paradoxes: don’t mess with time travel
lol bootstrap is ridiculous.
6:08 whenever I hear “Bootstrap Paradox”, I instantly think of the scene from Doctor Who where Peter Capaldi explains it
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
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.
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".
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.
omnipotence allows to bypass all logic definitions but doesn't necessarily mean humans can understand the bypass
omnipotence is a paradox by itself because its existence is illogical, but yet very possible
Disagree with like more than half of your statement. You can always make the barber one a paradox, why you just judge only based on what the TH-camr said and not the actual paradox if you are smart enough.
@ I did say " Would've been a paradox if he said "I HAVE to shave those who don't shave themselves"." So you're right, it is a paradox though the youtuber didn't formulate it perfectly it still stands. Not saying my arguments are god given, so if they're refutable I'd be glad to hear, it's fun talking about paradoxes and one is very rarely correct since their concept is litteraly 'being confusing' lmao
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
**Me try’s to sleep**
Brain: hay remember that video about every paradox?
Me: COURSE YOU
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?
that goes against the proposal of the paradox
don't cheat
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.
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.
@@Ouyak 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
@@Ouyakremoving 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
"Becoming your own grandfather is not problem in well resolved families" - Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
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 always thought about a paradox where a string of the same numbers could be considered randomly generated numbers (though also extremely rare) due to randomly occurring patterns in generative randomness.
For example, you can see random patterns occurring in this random sequence of numbers I’ve just typed, like 9 & 8 being the most used numbers:
58395829395910184827485
But something like:
9999999999999999999999
Could still be considered a random pattern occurrence (albeit, an extremely long one), therefore despite being all the same number, it’s a large random pattern in a random string of numbers.
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?"
My favorite paradox is my mom owning “not your mothers” hair products.
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
This popped up on my feed and I just started watching the good place today I’m on season 3 episode 5
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.
@CreaWolf it's the other way around. Looking from outside it looks like it takes forever because the closer to the event horizon, the slower light moves.
But the object enters in a finite time.
It's Relativity at work.
Thank you for completely distroying my mind
Destroying *
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.
It’s can he lift it using all his power
@@Ocksu121 ye I know I was replying to the guy that made this comment
@ oh ok
No he can lift anything because he created it, east
@ think of it as a video game dev they can change the property of something to max weight but they can still move it with their nouse
1:44 legally registered ship will be the repaired one, hence that’s your ship.
Unexpected hanging paradox is basically: you may have outsmarted me, but I outsmarted your outsmarting.
11:00 I did not expect to see Ram and Rem, a suprise but a welcome one.
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.
well this was the best thing i heard since school started
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❤
the paradox serves to boost your own identity
good point tho
This one isn't even a paradox it's just an aspect of physics that people don't understand 11:35
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.
The original liar paradox is referring to the phrase "I am lying right now"
He just tried another example but failed in this loophole
Sometimes it feels like we're living out the Paradox of Tolerance
Bob just gets shaved from someone else
“Damnit… where did zoro-ya go this time…” 7:25
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 thanks to Futurama I know how to solve the grandfather's paradox:
It is possible for people to travel into future, but not back in time. It could be possible to go into future so far, that the universe collapses. After that, there is a possibility for another big bang, which would mean the universe is just repeating itself infinite number of times. Then you travel far enough to see your grandfather, you kill him and later in this timeline you wouldn't exist. You go once again into future to the time you started your time travel. Everything will be the same, except it's like you appear there out of nowhere, you won't know anyone, nor anyone will know you. It's like you just started existing. Pretty cool to think about it, huh?
Edit: You can apply the same logic to the bootstrap paradox.
I clicked for ram and rem
please go outside
Same
I have my own paradox, I call it the vows and oaths paradox. Imagine your friend ask you to play a game of dares, there are two rules:
•you both swear on oath that both of you will do all dares that you were dared to
•you both dare eachother and do those dares at the same time
Your friend dares you to kill yourself, you, afraid to die, dares your friend to not dare you that. Then you'll break the oath, so which would you rather choose, suicide or breaking a -promise- vow.
That’s not a paradox, it’s just a bad situation lol. And a horrible friend
I don't think you understand what a paradox is by definition because there isn't anything in the morbid game of truth or dare that is paradoxical in any way. Maybe Google what a paradox is and try it again.
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.
For the unexpected hanging paradox, watch I Am MoBo, Surprise Attack is like the embodiment of it
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
@@Gomamon64 lol, I thought so cs, I remembered a different concept of this paradox
watching this, high as a kite, broke my brain temporarly
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?
Physics doesn't say that different timelines happen... Physics just says time travel is impossible in a first place so question is not important...
11:00 Re:Zero reference
The barber's paradox can be easily fixed with someones help, I now see two messages and I dont bother knowing rn
5:56 worst paradox ever just get somebody to shave yourself for you
Lmao that was my first thought
But any barber shop in the area would go out of business because bob is so good. He would have to go way out of his way just to get a haircut. I would rather not drive while contemplating this dilemma.
@ you can literally ask a random person to shave your beard and it’s easy so they would know
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?
I wanna introduce a paradox I came up with called the opposite day paradox. If some one says it's opposite day, and you ask them a yes or no question, and they respond with yes. That obviously means no. But because it's opposite day, that no becomes a yes. And that answer will contradict itself until it is not longer opposite day.
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?
The real question is, who is Thomas
@ thomas is… well… some things are better left forgotten…
The bootstrap is basically the grampa's paradox. Same principle about timelines
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
Ram and blue haired Ram
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
For Sorites paradox, if you heat food in the microwave for 30 seconds or 29 seconds makes no difference, but 30 seconds or 1 seconds does make a difference
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??
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
The liar paradox reminds me of the “opposite day” gimmick
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
@@Gomamon64 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
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
HOW DID I SEE NONE OF THEME REPLIES??? ANYGAYS HELLO FELLOW JASHTRAILIANS
I LOVE CHONNY
As someone who loves Dark, seeing the Triquetta on the Bootstrap Paradox makes me unreasonably happy.
“Did you become an adult when you got circumcised?” I was circumcised at 4, so definitely not 💀
That should be banned
@@LEO19495what should be
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?
@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?
I'd like to think that in the Grandfather paradox, small little things prevent your grandfather from dying or not meeting your grandmother. Like if you wanted to shoot him in the head, your gun jams, or he bends over to pick up a coin right as you shoot it. Or if you wanted to get him onto a flight so he wouldn't meet grandma, the plane would break down and he would still meet said grandma. Fun stuff :D
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 🍳
Sorites Paradox: As Mason said to Dixon, "You gotta draw the line someplace."
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.
As a ReZero fan, I love how you used the maid twins for the twin paradox.
The crazy thing about the bootstrap paradox is the item. It isn’t affected by entropy. It is eternal.
6:02 rules are meant to be broken 😂😂
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"
God can do whatever he wants. This is the only theory that i 100% know. God can make something heavy enough. He can lift it and can't lift it at the same time. He can also create create something into thin air, without creating it into thin air. He can also defy reality without defying reality. Anything you ask him to do He can 100% do he can sin even though he can't sinning is a human thing, though. He can still do it.
I propose a new paradox theory: The introvert Paradox: you want to organize a public event and invite your introverted friends online, but they are super shy and have a phobia of interacting with each other face to face. You are willing to pay for their travel and hotels so no problem can prevent them from attending. Do these introverts meet?
Again not a paradox. Try googling the definition of what a paradox is
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.
For the ship it’s a simple answer there is always the one main part which for the ship is the piece of wood that is the base, it can not be replaced blanking on the name rn but that is the base of your ship whichever has that piece is your ship it’s like the body of a car
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.
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
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
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.
13:07 basically new york
1. if someone says “I always lie” that in an of itself is a lie. they can often lie but that admittance in and of itself disproves them and while it makes them a liar, doesn’t make this true 100% of the time. 2. what makes theseus’ ship what it is is having been captained by theseus. if it was still captained by him throughout its repairs then it would still be his ship, but if it were to change owners or be put in a museum and undergo repairs, it would either not be his ship anymore or be a restoration of it. 3. depends on if multiple timelines exist. if there’s only one timeline either someone destroys the timeline or we prove there’s some guiding fate stopping us from doing anything paradoxical. if there’s multiple timelines I think it would just delete. 4. heap is subjective, perception is subjective. everything is changing and permenance is an illusion. 5. if everyone has to get his hair cut by him that’s a pretty clear caveat to nobody being able to cut their own hair. 7. it’s only contradictory if there’s evidence suggesting something else inspired the invention/product. otherwise it’s just a hidden part of the timeline. in the example of the circle it’s the same as MJ, you’d have to ask the creator. 8. I lack a college degree so I don’t even know about this. 9. isn’t a paradox it’s just a logical fallacy. 10. only works if this omnipotent being is confined to logic and reality, but if they created these things why would they be confined to it. 11. if there’s already the understanding that time can bend in predictable ways what’s paradoxical about it? twins refers to genetics. 12. no tolerance for intolerance
Might wanna talk about Zino,s paradox