I think your argument doesn’t stand. Take this paradox:
1) the next sentence is false 2) the previous sentence is false
I can conceive a word where one only one of the two is correct, and indeed it will be consistent, but it is the conjunction of the two that creates the paradox. Extrapolating from both the branches of the paradox is obviously not a problem, but this doesn’t mean that a conjunction is always the trivial, as your example seems to entail.
This is an old debate: can God create logical inconsistencies? If not, can it be really said that it is omnipotent?
I think your argument doesn’t stand. Take this paradox:
1) the next sentence is false
2) the previous sentence is false
I can conceive a word where one only one of the two is correct, and indeed it will be consistent, but it is the conjunction of the two that creates the paradox.
Extrapolating from both the branches of the paradox is obviously not a problem, but this doesn’t mean that a conjunction is always the trivial, as your example seems to entail.
This is an old debate: can God create logical inconsistencies? If not, can it be really said that it is omnipotent?