My apologies for not responding to this sooner. Since the comments on the page seem not to occur too frequently, I have not been keeping tabs on them.
I think that your issue (in terms of not knowing what we mean by falsehood or truth) is deep and interesting. One may consider Quine's paradox, which goes as follows:
"yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation" yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation.
We may take here falsehood as being (as you say) the opposite of a truth - informally or otherwise. Then we have context, we understand what "points at" what, and yet there is paradox.
Dear Radheevar,
My apologies for not responding to this sooner. Since the comments on the page seem not to occur too frequently, I have not been keeping tabs on them.
I think that your issue (in terms of not knowing what we mean by falsehood or truth) is deep and interesting. One may consider Quine's paradox, which goes as follows:
"yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation" yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation.
We may take here falsehood as being (as you say) the opposite of a truth - informally or otherwise. Then we have context, we understand what "points at" what, and yet there is paradox.
Best,
Maarten