It isn't self referential though. Lets diagram a little, as only a surface level of contemplation could arrive at that viewpoint.
Possible sets of people:
- sith
- non sith
Known attributes sith have:
- deals in absolutes
Presumption of the phrase being used is that the phrase itself is an absolute, thus meaning the person speaking has to be a sith even if they claim not to be a sith.
But that is flawed, as there are more than just those sets of individuals as we well know. There are non sith that also deal in absolutes, so thus the statement can't be taken at face value. Thus cannot be self referential.
But as with all of this, it also misses the mark by ignoring that describing a state doesn't necessarily mean your state has changed. Its also nonsensical in that if the only definition needed to be in the sith set is to deal in absolutes, the category is likely overbroad and meaningless.
Think about it, if we take the statement at face value, everyone is a sith, as everyone at some point will deal in absolutes. Even yoda uses do or do not, there is no try. So we arrive at the fundamental flaw in attributing a description of a thing or group, to the thing being described.
Possible sets of people: - sith - non sith
Known attributes sith have: - deals in absolutes
Presumption of the phrase being used is that the phrase itself is an absolute, thus meaning the person speaking has to be a sith even if they claim not to be a sith.
But that is flawed, as there are more than just those sets of individuals as we well know. There are non sith that also deal in absolutes, so thus the statement can't be taken at face value. Thus cannot be self referential.
But as with all of this, it also misses the mark by ignoring that describing a state doesn't necessarily mean your state has changed. Its also nonsensical in that if the only definition needed to be in the sith set is to deal in absolutes, the category is likely overbroad and meaningless.
Think about it, if we take the statement at face value, everyone is a sith, as everyone at some point will deal in absolutes. Even yoda uses do or do not, there is no try. So we arrive at the fundamental flaw in attributing a description of a thing or group, to the thing being described.