Quine's paradox is a paradox concerning truth values, stated by Willard Van Orman Quine.[1] It is related to the liar paradox as a problem, and it purports to show that a sentence can be paradoxical even if it is not self-referring and does not use demonstratives or indexicals (i.e. it does not explicitly refer to itself). The paradox can be expressed as follows:
If the paradox is not clear, consider each part of the above description of the paradox incrementally:
With these tools, the description of the paradox may now be reconsidered; it can be seen to assert the following:
In other words, the sentence implies that it is false, which is paradoxical—for if it is false, what it states is in fact true.