Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: Mathematical incompleteness has always been a misconception ---
 Tarski
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2025 22:56:38 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <f21ec9bbcb462680fb27a492d244e2786839b9e1@i2pn2.org>
References: <vnh0sq$35mcm$1@dont-email.me> <vni4ta$3ek8m$1@dont-email.me>
 <vnikre$3hb19$1@dont-email.me> <vnkov9$1971$1@dont-email.me>
 <vnl9vj$4f8i$1@dont-email.me> <vnndqs$kef3$1@dont-email.me>
 <vnpd96$vl84$1@dont-email.me> <vnqm3p$1apip$1@dont-email.me>
 <vnqsbh$1c5sq$1@dont-email.me> <vnsm90$1pr86$1@dont-email.me>
 <vnte6s$1tra8$1@dont-email.me> <vnv4tf$2a43e$1@dont-email.me>
 <vo0249$2eqdl$1@dont-email.me> <vo1qae$2s4cr$1@dont-email.me>
 <vo2i10$302f0$1@dont-email.me> <vo4nj4$3f6so$1@dont-email.me>
 <vo5btf$3ipo2$1@dont-email.me> <vo7ckh$q2p$1@dont-email.me>
 <vo7tdg$36ra$6@dont-email.me> <voa09t$idij$1@dont-email.me>
 <7e532aaf77653daac5ca2b70bf26d0a3bc515abf@i2pn2.org>
 <voceuj$14r1q$1@dont-email.me> <vocp21$16c4e$1@dont-email.me>
 <vof6hb$1nh1f$1@dont-email.me> <voflif$1q1mh$2@dont-email.me>
 <vohsmu$29krm$1@dont-email.me> <vp10ic$1e7iv$2@dont-email.me>
 <vp6qjb$2ousc$1@dont-email.me> <vpb1le$3jct4$13@dont-email.me>
 <vpc4iq$3snkm$1@dont-email.me> <vpd28k$irt$9@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2025 03:56:39 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1346175"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vpd28k$irt$9@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3571
Lines: 50

On 2/22/25 12:41 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 2/22/2025 3:15 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2025-02-21 23:19:10 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>>> On 2/20/2025 2:54 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2025-02-18 03:59:08 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>
> 
>>>
>>> Tarski anchored his whole proof in the Liar Paradox.
>>
>> More specifically, to the idea that the Liar Paradox does not have a
>> truth value. Do you reject that idea?
>>
> 
> This was not what Tarski was saying.
> Tarski got totally confused by the fact that:
> 
> This sentence is not true: "this sentence is not true"
> is true (in his meta-language).

So, which step in the PROOF of that did he make a mistake?


> 
> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/tarski-truth/#ObjLanMet
> 
> The above true sentence is true in the meta-language because
> it eliminates the pathological self-reference of the inner
> sentence. This PSR makes the inner sentence not a truth-bearer.

But it was established by his earlier proof.

> 
> Even the current greatest experts in the field of truth bearer
> maximalism do not quite fully get this key point.
> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truthmakers/#Max
> 
> Part of the issue with them not getting this key point
> is that they do not carefully divide empirical truth
> from truth on the basis of meaning expressed using language
> analytical(Olcott) truth.
> 

So, your idea is that all of logic is just broken so nothing makes sense.

Sorry, we prefer to use working logic, understanding that somethings 
will be unknown to logic that lies to us.

The fact that you prefer logic that lies just shows that you are just a 
pathologocal liar.