Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: Undecidability based on epistemological antinomies V2
 --Mendelson--
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 10:49:56 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <v060v4$11f0n$1@dont-email.me>
References: <uvq0sg$21m7a$1@dont-email.me> <uvq359$1doq3$4@i2pn2.org>
 <uvrbvs$2acf7$1@dont-email.me> <uvs70t$1h01f$1@i2pn2.org>
 <uvsgcl$2i80k$1@dont-email.me> <uvsj4v$1h01e$1@i2pn2.org>
 <uvsknc$2mq5c$1@dont-email.me> <uvvrj6$3i152$1@dont-email.me>
 <v00r07$3oqra$1@dont-email.me> <v02ggt$6org$1@dont-email.me>
 <v03866$bitp$1@dont-email.me> <v056us$rmqi$1@dont-email.me>
 <v05qmq$vvml$1@dont-email.me> <v05usg$110vm$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 17:49:56 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="46595afa4d7150812db5f19c9f026b24";
	logging-data="1096727"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18AcpM6ou5VuEAVLM9FSa5k"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MrHrHzZPJMgT/hfTlsdA5TGzhvw=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v05usg$110vm$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3439

On 4/22/2024 10:14 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-04-22 14:03:05 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 4/22/2024 3:26 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-04-21 14:34:44 +0000, olcott said:
>>>
>>>> On 4/21/2024 2:50 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-04-20 16:37:27 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/20/2024 2:41 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-04-19 02:25:48 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/18/2024 8:58 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Godel's proof you are quoting from had NOTHING to do with 
>>>>>>>>> undecidability,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Mendelson (and everyone that knows these things) disagrees*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://sistemas.fciencias.unam.mx/~lokylog/images/Notas/la_aldea_de_la_logica/Libros_notas_varios/L_02_MENDELSON,%20E%20-%20Introduction%20to%20Mathematical%20Logic,%206th%20Ed%20-%20CRC%20Press%20(2015).pdf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On questions whether Gödel said something or not the sumpreme 
>>>>>>> authority
>>>>>>> is not Mendelson but Gödel.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When some authors affirm that undecidability and incompleteness
>>>>>> are the exact same thing then whenever Gödel uses the term
>>>>>> incompleteness then he is also referring to the term undecidability.
>>>>>
>>>>> That does not follow. Besides, a reference to the term 
>>>>> "undecidability"
>>>>> is not a reference to the concept 'undecidability'.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In other words you deny the identity principle thus X=X is false.
>>>
>>> It is not a good idea to lie where the truth can be seen.
>>>
>>
>>  >>>"undecidability" is not a reference to the concept 'undecidability'.
>> That is the best that I could make about the above quote. There is no
>> standard practice of using different kind of quotes that I am aware of.
> 
> Dishonest partial quoting is not a good idea, either.
> 

It is like you are saying "cats" are not 'cats'

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer