Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!watdcsu!dmcanzi
From: dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Russell's set... paradox... stone too big to lift
Message-ID: <3724@watdcsu.waterloo.edu>
Date: Wed, 5-Aug-87 20:43:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: watdcsu.3724
Posted: Wed Aug  5 20:43:44 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 7-Aug-87 07:19:32 EDT
References: <1404@cullvax.UUCP> <902@bsu-cs.UUCP> <4901@j.cc.purdue.edu> <4760@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Reply-To: dmcanzi@watdcsu.waterloo.edu (David Canzi)
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 21
Xref: utgpu sci.philosophy.tech:343 talk.religion.misc:3174

In article <4760@sdcrdcf.UUCP> markb@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Mark Biggar) writes:
>The real problem with "Can God create a stone too big to lift?" is that
>"lift" is ill-defined.  Lift above what?

And what kind of stone should it be?  Granite, shale, basalt, or
something else?  Where should the rock be created?  On earth, or some
other planet?  Should the stone be created from nothing, or should it
be built from matter that already exists?  When should he create it?
How about Friday?  Yessir, I can see lots of ways in which the problem
is ill-defined.

Get serious.

You can always find some stupid detail left unspecified in *any*
statement of *any* problem.  Do you ignore *all* problems you hear
because they are "ill-defined", or just this one?

Followups to rant.religion.misc.

-- 
David Canzi