| Alistair 2006-11-22, 6:55 pm |
|
docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
> In article <1164137174.076167.163430@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> Alistair <alistair@ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> My apologies for being obscure... 'Goedel-tightening stretch' is a
> reference to Goedel's Incompleteness Theorem (and a pun on the homonymity
> of Goedel and girdle).
>
> Zen is a product of a philosophical system which did not include the
> Aristotelean Principle of Non-Contradiction (loosely put, 'A thing cannot
> both be and not-be the same thing in regards to the same aspect at the
> same time')... and in that logic is a game played by a series of rules
> (Wittgenstein) then to judge the logical game (Zen) by a rule outside of
> its system (Non-Contradiction) might be similar, say, to judging a game of
> Patience (classic Solitaire) by the rules of Whist.
>
> Russell, on the other hand, *is* a product of a system based upon the
> Principle of Non-Contradiction... so to say that a set can be defined to
> include sets which, by definition, are excluded might seem to be a
> violation of that rule... but I'm sure that Greater Minds Than Mine have
> addressed this matter.
>
> DD
Thanks for the explanation.
|