Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: All computation & human reasoning encoded as finite string
 transformations --- Quine
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 07:05:28 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <8baaba2f7eebf465c4a07a3d9cd31c2ecad562f3@i2pn2.org>
References: <vu343r$20gn$2@dont-email.me> <vu3cb7$95co$2@dont-email.me>
 <vu5494$1urcb$1@dont-email.me> <vu6amj$2vn05$4@dont-email.me>
 <vu7m8j$956h$1@dont-email.me> <vu8nde$13jl5$4@dont-email.me>
 <vucthk$17en3$1@dont-email.me> <vue3dr$28iho$1@dont-email.me>
 <vufh49$3j05o$1@dont-email.me> <vugtvm$pke9$4@dont-email.me>
 <cbac79909cd10c912558a45e93f9b72c53e294a7@i2pn2.org>
 <vuj1j0$2lf64$7@dont-email.me> <vuks28$f9ur$1@dont-email.me>
 <vulse2$1bf1j$5@dont-email.me> <vum1ns$1q85$1@news.muc.de>
 <vumsme$2cgej$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 11:16:19 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2241325"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vumsme$2cgej$1@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 4528
Lines: 75

On 4/27/25 11:29 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 4/27/2025 2:49 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>> olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/27/2025 4:06 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2025-04-26 16:28:16 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>>>>> On 4/25/2025 8:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/25/25 5:14 PM, olcott wrote:
>>
>> [ .... ]
>>
>>>>>>> Apparently you prefer to remain ignorant.
>>>>>>> It is common knowledge that Quine is most famous for
>>>>>>> rejecting the analytic/synthetic distinction by this paper:
>>
>>>>>>> Two Dogmas of Empiricism --- Willard Van Orman Quine (1951)
>>>>>>> https://www.ditext.com/quine/quine.html
>>
>>
>>>>>> Yes, but not in the way you try to imply, because you just don't
>>>>>> understand what he says. Your problem is he is talking above your
>>>>>> knowledge and intelegence level, as you have seriouse problems with
>>>>>> some of the basic concepts of language theory.
>>
>>>>> He does not have a clue how words acquire meaning as proved
>>>>> by his failing to understand how Bachelor(x) gets its meaning.
>>
>>>> As he says a lot about how words acquire meaning he obviously had at
>>>> least a clue. You can't quote even one sentence that you could argue
>>>> against.
>>
>>>    Quine argues that all attempts to define and
>>>    understand analyticity are circular. Therefore,
>>>    the notion of analyticity should be rejected
>>>    https://iep.utm.edu/quine-an/
>>
>>> He is stupidly wrong a about this.
>>
>> He was a leading academic at a prestigeous university.  It is vanishingly
>> unlike that he was "stupidly wrong".  It is far more likely that you have
>> failed to understand his message; that it is you who is stupidly wrong.
>>
>>> Analytic knowledge exists in an acyclic directed graph tree of
>>> knowledge.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology_(information_science)
>>
>> An acyclic directed graph?  Highly implausible.  Any real system of
>> knowledge organised in a graph (if that is even possible) is going to
>> have cycles in it.  That's assuming "analytic knowledge" exists at all.
>>
>    Gödel agrees.
>    *A type hierarchy is a knowledge tree acyclic graph*
>    By the theory of simple types I mean the doctrine
>    which says that the objects of thought (or, in another
>    interpretation, the symbolic expressions) are divided
>    into types, namely: individuals, properties of individuals,
>    relations between individuals, properties of such relations, etc.
>    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_type_theory#G%C3%B6del_1944
> 

Which needs to have a formal system of definitions, which was the sort 
of things Godel worked in, NOT a system just define by Natural Language.

Thus, we have a fundamental listing of the axioms and definitions of the 
system. (Which can't be changed without changing the system).


>> [ .... ]
>>
>>> -- 
>>> Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
>>> hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
>>
> 
>