far, then presumably the rest of the discussion could be carried on when we
know something about the constitution of the "symbols" in the brain out of
neurons and their firings, as well as about the way that sentences become
converted into "codings".
This sketch of the neural substrate of the Epimenides paradox
suggests (to me, at least) that the resolution of the English version of the
Epimenides paradox might be similar to that for the Tarski version. The
resolution involves abandoning the notion that a brain could ever provide a
fully accurate representation for the notion of truth. The novelty of this
resolution lies in its suggestion that a total modeling of truth is impossible
for quite physical reasons: namely, such a modeling would require physi-
cally incompatible events to occur in a brain.Church, Turing, Tarski, and Others 585