Never read his work. A bit fluffy for my taste.
It would have been interesting to see if he had a rebuttal as there were ways out of his situation.
He really should have said 'no' though. There would have been ways out of that too.
It was a lingüistical logical trap. Lingüistic paradox?
I guess It's like this sentence:
"This sentence is false."
True or False?
You know is true that is false, but how can be true if the same sentence indicates the contrary (all the content of it, is false), then some sort of like endless loop gets generated by trying to [run] this sentence in your mind. The Levels of meaning of the sentences must be dealt with.
This is not a linguistic paradox.
"This sentence is false"
is true because meaning is not necessarily structured in the mind. There has to be tangible objects for meaning to apply to in some cases. This is one of those cases.
The sentence is turned into a metaphorical object. So, the sentence has existential truth. Thus, the sentence is true.