A Critique of Self-Reference: What Gödel Theorem Really Proves

This article introduces a new perspective for the analysis of self-referential sentences, and proves the conditions under which they are inconsistent. The Liar Paradox, Grelling-Nelson Paradox, Russell's Predicate Paradox, Russell's Set Paradox and Richard Paradox are proved to meet such conditions. The same is proved of the ordinary language interpretation of Godel's undecidable formula if the corresponding formal calculus is complete. In consequence, Godel's Theorem VI only holds if that calculus is not complete, which makes the theorem unnecessary. All proofs and arguments in this article are developed within the framework of a simplified system of ordinary logic also defined in this paper.