The Berry Paradox
The Berry paradox is given as:
‘The smallest natural number that cannot be defined by seventeen words or by less than seventeen words’
Analyzing this, we can see that it is an attempt to define something by:
- defining it semantically, by considering what expressions constitute the definition of a natural number according to the syntax of the given language,
and at the same time,
- defining it with no consideration of the semantics, instead defining it by the physical properties of the sequence of symbols.
In the first case (a), we are defining an expression in the normal way within the language, defining it by the semantic meaning of the expression according to the rules of syntax of the language. In such a definition, we can observe that one can have multiple different expressions that have the same meaning in that language, but which are expressions of different combinations of symbols. Clearly there can be many such expressions which have different lengths of sequences of symbols, or which contain different numbers of words, but which are all equivalent expressions in that language. And any expression can be substituted for any other equivalent expression without altering the meaning in that language.
In the second case (b), however, we are defining an expression in meta-mathematical terms, by defining an expression purely in terms of the physical properties of the sequence of symbols that make up that expression, and ignoring any meaning whatsoever of the expression. This can be done in several ways; in this case it is by the number of words that constitute the expression.
In a natural language. such as English, this is a case of the language acting both as the language itself, but at the same time also as a meta-language to itself. And so the expression attempts to be, at the same time, an object in English, and also valid syntax of English. This means that the expression is not a logically valid proposition.
In a well-defined formal system, this cannot happen, but in natural language, it can. It is pointless asking how to create a “solution” to the paradox for natural language, since in a natural language such as English, such paradoxes are always possible, since such paradoxes arise from the ambiguity of natural language that allows expressions to be at the same time, objects of the language, and valid syntax of the language. This allows what are called the self-referential paradoxes - paradoxes where an expression appears to refer to itself; see also the Liar Paradox for more on this.
As site owner I reserve the right to keep my comments sections as I deem appropriate. I do not use that right to unfairly censor valid criticism. My reasons for deleting or editing comments do not include deleting a comment because it disagrees with what is on my website. Reasons for exclusion include:
Frivolous, irrelevant comments.
Comments devoid of logical basis.
Comments with excessive number of different points.
Questions about matters that do not relate to the page they post on. Such posts are not comments.
Comments with a substantial amount of mathematical terms not properly formatted will not be published unless a file (such as doc, tex, pdf) is simultaneously emailed to me, and where the mathematical terms are correctly formatted.
Reasons for deleting comments of certain users:
Bulk posting of comments in a short space of time, often on several different pages, and which are not simply part of an ongoing discussion. Multiple anonymous user names for one person.
Users, who, when shown their point is wrong, immediately claim that they just wrote it incorrectly and rewrite it again - still erroneously, or else attack something else on my site - erroneously. After the first few instances, further posts are deleted.
Users who make persistent erroneous attacks in a scatter-gun attempt to try to find some error in what I write on this site. After the first few instances, further posts are deleted.
Difficulties in understanding the site content are usually best addressed by contacting me by e-mail.