If somebody says they always lie are they telling the truth?

Question

i know its kind of a paradox but i think about it

Answer 1

lol

If they are telling the truth, then what they are saying is a lie, so it can't be true.
If they are not telling the truth (they DON'T always lie), then they are not telling the truth. They lied this time, but that doesn't mean they ALWAYS lie.

It only works if they are not telling the truth.

Answer 2

This is what's called "The Cretan Paradox" or "The
Epimenides paradox":

"Epimenides was a Cretan who made one immortal statement: "All Cretans are liars."
If one interprets the word "liar" to mean that every statement made by a liar is necessarily false, then the statement "All Cretans are liars," if uttered by the Cretan Epimenides, cannot be consistently true.
Several interpretations and analyses are available, if the statement is considered false. It might be contended that the truth-value "false" can be consistently assigned to the simple proposition that "All Cretans are liars," so that this statement by itself, when deemed false, is not, strictly speaking, paradoxical. Thus, if there ever existed a Cretan (not Epimenides in this instance) who even once spoke the truth, the categorical statement "All Cretans are (always) liars," would be false, and Epimenides might be simply regarded as having made a false statement himself. But if Epimenides' statement is understood as in essence asserting its own falsehood, then the statement cannot consistently be false, either, because its falsehood would imply the truth of its self-asserted falsehood.
An interesting asymmetry is possible under one interpretation: the statement's truth clearly implies its falsehood, but, unless the statement is interpreted to refer specifically to itself (rather than referring categorically to all statements by Cretans), the statement could be contingently false without implying its own truth.
Paradoxical versions of the Epimenides problem are closely related to a class of more difficult logical problems, including the liar paradox, Russell's paradox, and the Burali-Forti paradox, all of which have self-reference in common with Epimenides. Indeed, the Epimenides paradox is usually classified as a variation on the liar paradox, and sometimes the two are not distinguished. The study of self-reference led to important developments in logic and mathematics in the twentieth century."

There's also the "liar's paradox"

In philosophy and logic, the liar paradox encompasses paradoxical statements such as:
I am lying now.
This statement is false.
These statements are paradoxical because there is no way to assign them a consistent truth value. Consider that if This statement is false. is true, then what it says is the case; but what it says is that it is false, hence it is false. On the other hand, if it is false, then what it says is not the case; thus, since it says that it is false, it must be true.
To avoid having a sentence directly refer to its own truth value, one can also construct the paradox as follows:
The following sentence is true. The preceding sentence is false.
However, it is arguable that this reformulation is little more than a syntactic expansion. The idea is that neither sentence accomplishes the paradox without precisely its counterpart. In this sense, the two can be thought of as a somewhat atomic structure."

For more, please see link 2.

Answer 3

Nobody in this world ever lived with 100% truth and 100% false. So telling always truth or always lie is impossible so "Always telling a lie/truth is always a lie". All are in between any doubt? ask yourself.

Answer 4

Bollocks.

It isn't paradoxical at all.

The person sometimes lies and sometimes doesn't.
Their given statement is a lie; the next might not be.
Problem solved.

Answer 5

Lies and truths are just relative terms .Nothing is true and nothing is a lie . It all decided by the circumstances under which they are expressed .

Answer 6

Yes.

If they always lie then saying so is the truth, so by saying that they are being truthful which means that they don't always lie which means that the statement is a lie which means that I have a headache now thanks & it's 7:45 a.m. & it's time for my Froot Loops! Tee hee!

Peace out.
:)
amp

Answer 7

Absolutely yes, they're telling the truth for their lie

Answer 8

If somebody really always lie, then the truth is they do indeed always lie.

Answer 9

I think they are probably lying...because of the word "always"...i am sure they don't "always" lie...so the statement is still a half truth..

Answer 10

Logically, it is impossible for the statement, "I always lie" to be true. Simple as that.