Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Proosal

[Greg Ritter <gritter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 03:25 PM 1/19/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 02:42:06PM -0500, Greg Ritter wrote:
> > If Uncle Psychosis' Proposal 277/1 ("The dust you seldom see") passes and
> > Uncle Psychosis' Proposal 279 ("Walk unafraid") fails in repealing Rule 
> 10,
> > Uncle Psychosis will have created a paradox because both Rule 10 and the
> > rule resulting from Proposal 227 will declare that "This rule takes
> > precedence over all other rules."
> >
> > No two rules can simultaneously take precedence over each other.
>
> Sure they can. The one with the lower number (rule 10) wins.

(Note: typo in my previous statement -- 227 should be 277. Had to correct 
that.)

You can argue that Rule 10 takes precedence according to Rule 33, but that 
doesn't solve the paradox.

In that case the phrase "This rule takes precedence over all other rules" 
would be false, thus meaning that rule resulting from Proposal 277 would 
*not* take precedence over all other rules, which would be impossible since 
the rule says it takes precedence over all other rules. If it takes 
precedence over *all* other rules, then it cannot logically *also* cede 
precedence to Rule 10 (which is part of the set of "all other rules").

--gritter