ABSTRACT
The same type of reason as given in the entry for that other paradox can be given for treating constituent statements of A as failing to say anything. A (one-premiss) argument is sound in the sense relevant here when its premiss is true and its conclusion follows from that premiss. So to assess the argument for soundness we have to determine whether the premiss is true and whether the argument is valid. But in order to determine whether the premiss is true we have to determine whether the argument is sound. We cannot determine whether it is sound without first determining whether it is sound. So arguably we cannot properly attribute either soundness or unsoundness to the argument, and its constituents are ungrounded. And, if we are not really confronted with a genuine argument, the paradox disappears.
