============================== CFJ 1395 ==============================
This is not a CFJ.
Judge: Sir Toby
Called by teucer: 05 Jul 2002 17:41:46 GMT
Assigned to Sir Toby: 05 Jul 2002 20:59:15 GMT
Judged FALSE by Sir Toby: 08 Jul 2002 03:19:40 GMT
Judge Sir Toby's Arguments:
To determine if the self-referential statement in question is indeed a
CFJ, I look to rule 991: "A CFJ should be a single clearly-labeled
Statement whose truth or falsity can be determined using logical
reasoning, assuming perfect knowledge."
The sentence in question is a clearly-labeled Statement whose truth or
falsity is being determined by this self-referential bit of logical
reasoning. Since the sentence matches the definition of a CFJ, I conclude
that it is a CFJ and that the statement then is false.
Judge Sir Toby's Evidence:
Rule 991/5 (Power=2)
Any person may request formal resolution of a dispute pertaining
to this Nomic by submitting a Call for Judgement (CFJ) to the
Clerk of the Courts. The submission of a CFJ constitutes proof
of the existence of such a dispute.
A CFJ should be a single clearly-labeled Statement whose truth
or falsity can be determined using logical reasoning, assuming
perfect knowledge. A CFJ may be accompanied by Arguments,
Evidence, or other related material; the Judge is encouraged,
but not required, to take notice of these things.
The Clerk of the Courts shall publish the text of a CFJ, along
with any additional material submitted by the Caller (including
but not limited to Arguments and Evidence), no later than the
time e announces the identity of the first Judge assigned to