Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mikko Newsgroups: sci.logic Subject: Re: This makes all Analytic(Olcott) truth computable Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 11:07:03 +0300 Organization: - Lines: 95 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 10:07:03 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3c3cda58ed7c128269c60e73272d160a"; logging-data="2948489"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19n7R7G5YSyji1C+i1cfNb0" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:0yy4FiSKStTEP2k2c4/ktjV4Ai8= Bytes: 5593 On 2024-08-18 12:18:02 +0000, olcott said: > On 8/15/2024 4:01 AM, Mikko wrote: >> On 2024-08-13 12:43:16 +0000, olcott said: >> >>> On 8/13/2024 6:24 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>> On 2024-08-12 13:44:33 +0000, olcott said: >>>> >>>>> On 8/12/2024 1:11 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>> On 2024-08-10 10:52:03 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 8/10/2024 3:13 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2024-08-09 15:29:18 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 8/9/2024 10:19 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 8/9/2024 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-08-08 16:01:19 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It does seem that he is all hung up on not understanding >>>>>>>>>>>> how the synonymity of bachelor and unmarried works. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> What in the synonymity, other than the synonymity itself, >>>>>>>>>>> would be relevant to Quine's topic? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> He mentions it 98 times in his paper >>>>>>>>>> https://www.ditext.com/quine/quine.html >>>>>>>>>> I haven't looked at it in years. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't really give a rat's ass what he said all that matters >>>>>>>>>>>> to me is that I have defined expressions of language that are >>>>>>>>>>>> {true on the basis of their meaning expressed in language} >>>>>>>>>>>> so that I have analytic(Olcott) to make my other points. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> That does not justify lying. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I never lie. Sometimes I make mistakes. >>>>>>>>>> It looks like you only want to dodge the actual >>>>>>>>>> topic with any distraction that you can find. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Expressions of language that are {true on the basis of >>>>>>>>>> their meaning expressed in this same language} defines >>>>>>>>>> analytic(Olcott) that overcomes any objections that >>>>>>>>>> anyone can possibly have about the analytic/synthetic >>>>>>>>>> distinction. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Expressions of language that are {true on the basis of >>>>>>>>> their meaning expressed in this same language} defines >>>>>>>>> analytic(Olcott) that overcomes any objections that >>>>>>>>> anyone can possibly have about the analytic/synthetic >>>>>>>>> distinction. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This makes all Analytic(Olcott) truth computable or the >>>>>>>>> expression is simply untrue because it lacks a truthmaker. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No, it doesn't. An algrithm or at least a proof of existence of an >>>>>>>> algrithm makes something computable. You  can't compute if you con't >>>>>>>> know how. The truth makeker of computability is an algorithm. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is either a sequence of truth preserving operations from >>>>>>> the set of expressions stipulated to be true (AKA the verbal >>>>>>> model of the actual world) to x or x is simply untrue. This is >>>>>>> how the Liar Paradox is best refuted. >>>>>> >>>>>> Nice to see that you con't disagree. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> When the idea that I presented is fully understood >>>>> it abolishes the whole notion of undecidability. >>>> >>>> If you can't prove atl least that you have an interesting idea >>>> nobody is going to stody it enough to understood. >>> >>> In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident proposition >>> is a proposition that is known to be true by understanding its meaning >>> without proof https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence >> >> Self-evident propositions are uninteresting. >> > > It turns out that self-evident the notion of {analytic truth} > and all of math and logic only deals in {analytic truth}. A large part of what math and logic deals in is not self-evident. For examle, most people would not regard it self-evident that in classical geometry it is impossible to construct a square that has the same area as a given circle. -- Mikko