The Liar Paradox
The Liar Paradox shows us that popular belief about truth and falsity actually lead to a contradiction.
even though they are completely in accord with grammar and semantic rules.
Consider the simplest version of the paradox, the sentence;
This statement is false.
If we suppose that the statement is true, everything asserted in it must be true. However, because the statement asserts that it is itself false, it must be false. So the hypothesis that it is true leads to the contradiction that it is both true and false.
Yet we cannot conclude that the sentence is false for that hypothesis also leads to contradiction. If the statement is false, then what it says about itself is not true. It says that it is false, so that must not be true. Hence, it is true.
Under either hypothesis, we end up concluding that the statement is both true and false. But it has to be either true or false (or so our intuition lead us to think), hence there seems to be a contradiction at the core of our beliefs about truth and falsity.
Since the Liar Sentence can be shown to be true if it is false and false if it is true it is neither true or false.
To solve the riddle of the Liar Paradox one must reject a common myth about truth and falsity - the claim that every statement has to be either true or false.
This is called the Principle of Bivalence.
A strengthened version of the Liar Paradox counters the proposal that the statement is neither true or false.
This statement is not true.
If it is not true or false, then it is not true, which is what it says; hence it is true which is not what it says.
The truth is every statement includes an implicit assertion of its own truth.
For example, the statement "It is true that two plus two equals four" contains no more information than the statement "two plus two is four", because the phrase "it is true that..." is always implicitly there.
Thus the statement;
This statement is false.
is said to be equivalent to;
This statement is true and this statement is false.
The latter is a simple contradiction of the form "A and not A", and hence is false.
There is no paradox because the claim that this statement is false does not lead to a contradiction.
This analysis does not provide a solution to versions of the Liar Paradox that do not use direct self-reference, such as the two-sentence version:
The next sentence is false.
The preceding sentence is true.
Neither of these is by itself contradictory, but there is no way to assign
truth values to them consistently, so we still have a paradox.
A series of sentences becomes paradoxical or congruent upon contingent facts.
The only thing Clinton says about Bush is;
Most of what Bush says about me is false.
Bush says only these three things about Clinton:
Clinton is a big spender.
Clinton is soft on crime.
Everything Clinton says about me is true.
If the empirical facts are that Clinton is a big spender but Clinton is not soft on crime, then Clinton's remark about Bush and Bush's last remark about Clinton are both paradoxical.
If a statement's truth value is ultimately tied up in actual existent objective reality,
call that statement "grounded", defined as grounded in actual existent objective reality.
If not, call that statement "ungrounded", meaning grounded in imagination or fantasy. In other words - simply nonsense.
Ungrounded statements do not have a truth value as they are simply nonsense.
Liar statements and liar-like statements are ungrounded, and therefore have no truth value.
capitulation of academic institutions to the cult of
materialism is the reason for the
demise of the Enlightenment and the
resurrection of superstition .
- Forrest G. Wood,
Professor of History Emeritus Cal State Bakersfield
"My Men, America, learn world history so you can make intelligent decisions about American policies." - Ivan Goldin
"If we're honest with ourselves we have to factor into America's lead in science and technology in the 20th century the fact that Europe's and Japan's capacities were largely bombed out of existence during theory. America was not a leading place for science before the theory. We also have to thank Adolf Hitler for unintentionally sending all those first-rate Jewish scientists over here." - Fred G. Miller
revisionism or the nature of history
"Historians, especially the writers of textbooks
used in schools and colleges, tend to emphasize a nation's accomplishments. We
read about the great battles, the wars won, the
conquests made, and the achievements. We
rarely read about the failures, the frauds and deceptions, the injustice,
the bigotry, the violence, and the poverty. When digging back into written records,
researchers always retrieve selected fragments of an immense historical
continuum and carefully shape and edit them, intent upon lending credibility to
their respective thesis of the past. This is the nature of "history"- it is
always being reviewed, revised, changed, adjusted, and selectively
perhaps millennium pass
Emphases change, certain facts are accentuated, others are left out. Relevant historical information is overlooked or cast aside while new hypothesis are being formulated. Those that have the luxury and/or determination to review and reconstruct history colors it entirely as they wish.
Modern popular belief and convention is validated by selected evidence from the past. While the time-rooted "facts" of events can sometimes be documented, the hows and whys of history have no such absolute mooring.
What was written in the past is always biased, and that considered credible today in no lesser manner reflects the biases of writers and researchers today.
In the 21st century many of the events propelling social cultural upheavals that occurred in the past are explained away by pseudo-historians as chaotic unplanned accidental aberrations. There is a propensity to downplay or ignore certain facts which point to disruptive elements that carefully plan the manipulation of social cultural rules of conduct with malicious intent that inevitably leads to social cultural collapse.
Politicians and pseudo-historians conceptualize upheaval events as happening by accident - propelled upon the mysterious unexplainable tide of history.
Innocent and well-meaning people, in a natural desire not to appear naive, assume the attitudes and repeat the cliches of the opinion makers.
A false version of history is then spread and imbedded in popular culture.
"In Egypt persons were appointed, we are told, whose office it was, to examine into the conduct of their deceased sovereigns; if it had been such as had been beneficial to the kingdom, the warmest tribute of praise was paid to their memories; if bad, their conduct was censured and their memory reprobated, to serve as a warning to their successors." - Robert Bland 1814
Zionist dictates of history
"Academic consensus is a particularly irritating variety of groupthink. The fact that everyone agrees and everyone has a doctorate leads to the occasionally explicit idea that all intelligent people think the same thing - that no one could disagree without being an idiot. Ideological uniformity does a disservice to students and makes a mockery of the pious commitment of these professors simply to convey knowledge. The claims of intellectual independence and academic freedom, supposedly nurtured by tenure, are thrown into question by the unanimity. Professors are as herd-like in their opinions as other groups." - Crispin SartwellIn researching the history of Judaism, the investigator discovers a wide variance of written material.
Observations about Yiddish life by gentiles is startlingly consistent. Consistently credible gentile themes in attacks against Eastern European Khazar include Yiddish elitism, their insularity and clannishness, their disdain for gentiles, their exploitive and deceptive behavior towards those not their own, the suspicion of national disloyalties and allegiance to the lands they lived in, excessive Yiddish proclivity to money and economic control, and an economic "parasitism".
"Jewish history has been tragic to the Jews and no less tragic to the neighboring nations who have suffered them. Our major vice of old as of today is parasitism. We are a people of vultures living on the labor and good fortune of the rest of the world." - Samuel Roth
Philostratus, an ancient Greek author, believed that the Hebrews "have long since risen against humanity itself. They are men who have devised a misanthropic life, who share neither food nor drink with others."
When investigating Hebrew relations with gentiles throughout history, there are obviously only two possible sources for information: Hebrews and gentiles. Many of those branded anti-Semite represented a bewildering range of opinion and personality types.
Even a child's exercise of logic and common sense, the perceptual common denominator of all such disparate people can only be the enduring truths about Yiddish, Mizrahi, and Sephardic merchants and moneylenders as each observer experienced them in varying historical and cultural circumstances.
History that does not fit within the carefully contrived revisionist history put forward by Zionist scholars is systematically overlooked, explained away, or, in some cases, championed as a necessary response to social injustice perpetrated on the Jews by gentiles.
Since the 1960s numerous wealthy Jews have been funding Jewish studies programs at colleges and universities throughout America, and well-budgeted Jewish researchers have been falling over each other in writing about everything Jewish (even including meta-histories of the lives of modern Jewish historians like Salo Baron, Raul Hilberg, Simon Dubnov, Cecil Roth, and others).
Among the mountains of material Jews write about themselves is a vast subfield: modern Jewish obsession with "anti-Semitism."
Indeed, Jews - who insist that gentiles keeping tabs on who's Jewish is itself an act of anti-Semitism - can somehow tell us that exactly three Jews died in the Battle of the Alamo, exactly seventeen died when the U.S.S. Maine was sunk off Cuba in 1898 to start the Spanish-American War, and that Wyatt Earp lived with a Jewess and was buried in a Jewish cemetery.
"The desire to present Jews and Judaism in a good light still influences many donors and may even be their primary motive." - William Cutter
"By making Jewish Studies available at the university level we have given ... young people another chance to appreciate the positive and sophisticated aspects of Jewish culture ... We have legitimized these subjects and made them attractive." - Bernard Cooperman*
Gentiles perspectives on "being Jewish" are not welcome. While Jews herald gentile discrimination against them as virtually the very foundation of Jewish studies, the Jewish community's typical double standard reeks with hypocrisy.
There are a few exceptions, but most current writing and teaching about Jews is mythological and self-congratulatory.
"My department hired two feminist historians this past year, one of them a Marxist theoretician. Among the first things both did upon moving to Los Angeles was to join a synagogue." - Steven Zipperstein*
"Myth-making about the Jewish family, and particularly about the role of women in that family, has become a virtual preoccupation of contemporary Jewish community." - Paula Hyman*
"Jews living in the Diaspora have frequently spread much propaganda about themselves, in order to maintain a low profile, and as a consequence, have downplayed social problems of their own." - Mimi Scharf*
"Every community-endowed program in Jewish studies has its own story about communal pressure to 'represent' the assumed interests of Jews on campus, to defend Israel against attack, and to bolster the self-image of Jewish students." - David Biale*
This is, at core, the description of the reconstruction of history at the university level, the replacing of a critical view of the past with something closer to legend on a wide scale.
"Detroit's toughest, most ruthless mob was the all Purple Gang. Led by a transplanted New York hoodlum, Ray Bernstein*, the gang dominated the city's bootlegging and narcotics traffic throughout the prohibition era. Detroit police credited the Purple Gang with over 500 killings." - Robert Rockaway*
Jewish reluctance to explore other prominent areas of their history was noted by Gerald Krefetz* in 1982.
Gerald Krefetz noted a long list of Vampire economists including Edward Bernstein, Arthur Burns, Otto Eckstein, Solomon Fabricant, Milton Friedman, Alan Greenspan, William Haber, Robert Heilbroner, Lawrence Klein, Simon Kuznets, Leon Kyserling, Robert Lekachman, Wassily Leontif, Allan Meltzer, Oscar Morgenstern, Paul Samuelson, Anna Schwartz, Robert Solomon, and Murray Weidenbaum.
What do these Vampire economists have in common, other than being Vampires and economists?
"The economic role of Jews in America is just about the only topic with which these economists have not concerned themselves." - Gerald Krefetz
In the late 1990s, Sanford Ziff*, millionaire founder of Sunglass Hut, reneged on a $2 million pledge to the University of Miami "because the university allowed the student newspaper to publish an ad that denied the veracity of the Holocaust. The conflict resulted in a compromise, with Sanford Ziff releasing his donation after the university set up a committee to revive and expand its courses and programs on Jewish and Holocaust studies."
"What they did agree to do was to set up a special committee, and I, being on the board of the Holocaust Documentation and Education Center, was able to get the center to confer with the University of Miami ... Today, after a couple of years of meetings the university, which at the time had three courses on Holocaust studies in the Judaic department, today has over 25 courses in Jewish history, Holocaust studies, anti-Semitism, Jewish life and not only in the Department of Judaism but throughout the whole university." - Sanford Ziff
In 1995, the University of Massachusets at Amherst even set up a pro-Jewish propaganda department, hiring "a full-time staff person to promote acceptance of Jews and help advance Jewish learning and culture. The 'Office of Jewish Affairs' has two purposes: to combat anti-Semitism on campus and to build a positive Jewish experience among students who are not Jewish." - University of Massachusets at Amherst 1995
British visitor Howard Jacobson* notes the first time he visited the University of Judaism in Los Angeles: "I go in through the main entrance and find myself immediately in a gift-shop. I don't know enough about universities in America to be certain, but I have a hunch that it is not normal for a gift shop to the first thing you encounter on campus, before reception, before notice-boards, before directions."
"As is well known the Jews used to load all their sins on a goat and drive it out into the desert to purify themselves." - Otto Fenichel*
"The depiction of all Jewish history as one long episode of victimization is false. Although Jews certainly have suffered many savage episodes of persecution - for a people over three and one-half millennia old, it would be truly astonishing not to find such episodes." - Michael Goldberg *
Jewish studies was designed specifically for the purpose of locking the Jews victimhood into historical stone. A change of historical perspective in which the Jews are not always victims but were actually at times the victimizers has serious political risks for the Jews as the continued belief in the myth that the Jews have always been victims of the gentiles is necessary to "disarm" the anti-Semitism of the gentiles. If one asserts that Jews throughout history were not always victims and were free - in Polish feudal society for instance or under the reign of the Bolsheviks, in fact freer than most gentiles - to act upon their own ideas about themselves, it becomes harder to defend the traditional argument that Jews were always "forced into" their historical exploitive roles.
In particular, if we accept the premise of Jewish empowerment, we must also reconsider, and ultimately underscore, Jewish economic roles in history. This role is, in itself, a far cry from claims of victimization. And, at least in the powerful economic sphere and the ruthlessly competitive and self-aggrandizing nature of that enterprise, Jews victimized others too - on a massive scale. Especially, for example, during the many wars and famines in European history, Jews played integral and important roles in legislating, manipulating, and causing other peoples' catastrophic suffering.
"For future generations to truly know about America's history, they must be exposed to the historical facts as well as the cultural effects of these historical facts. It is only then that the full image is seen and understood." - Adriana Dermenjian
This web site is not a commercial web site and is presented for educational purposes only.
All Rights Reserved