In this essay I answer the question in the title with a very confident \u201cYes\u201d, I give multiple arguments for this answer.<\/p>\n
For the purposes of this essay a pluralistic proposition theory of truth carriers with sentences as secondary truth carriers is assumed.<\/p>\n
The background and the reason for writing this essay is that many people deny that they understand sentences that are contradictory. They deny to understand sentences such as:<\/p>\n
\u201cEmil is sitting in his favorite char and Emil is not sitting in his favorite chair.\u201d<\/p>\n
Or the contracted version:<\/p>\n
\u201cEmil both is and is not sitting in his favorite chair.\u201d<\/p>\n
They claim that:<\/p>\n
P1. For any sentence, if that sentence is contradictory, then it is meaningless.<\/p>\n
But still the very same people believe that such sentences are false. This is inconsistent.<\/p>\n
My claim is that P1 is false and that P2 and P3 are true:<\/p>\n
P2. For any sentence, if that sentence is contradictory, then it is meaningful.<\/p>\n
P3. There is a sentence such that it is contradictory and meaningful.<\/p>\n
For each argument used, there is a proof of that argument’s validity in the appendix.<\/p>\n