Is the self all that can be known to exist?

[Edwardo Piet]

You realize they call them paradoxes for a reason...right?  I don't think you're going to be the guy who solves the liars paradox Ham.  Certainly not in this manner.  Nor did you give an accurate description of what an equivocation was, above.  Meh.

I haven't solved the paradox. The paradox is insoluble. The paradox isn't about an example of a violation of a logical absolute the paradox is about an illusion. It's about the limits of our language and the limits of our conceptualization of logic leading to a sentence appearing true when we deem it false and appearing false when we deem it true.

It's not necessary for us to take up a position either way of it being true or false for it to be either one or the other. This is an issue of equivocation caused by vagueness and the limits of our language. That's how the paradox appears to happen. "This statement is true" doesn't mean anything and nor does "This statement is false". To say something is true is to say that it is rather than that it is not. "This statement is true"= "This statement is" is what? It's an incomplete statement. Likewise "This statement is false" means "This statement is not true" or "this statement is not" that statement is not what? It's an example of a mentioning of truth without a usage of it. It's an incomplete statement masquerading as a complete one. An apparently complete statement being grammatically correct =/= a complete truth-apt statement.