Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: True on the basis of meaning
Date: Sun, 12 May 2024 10:42:35 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <v1prtb$2jtsh$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v1mljr$1q5ee$4@dont-email.me> <v1mnuj$lbo5$12@i2pn2.org> <v1mp1l$1qr5e$4@dont-email.me> <v1mpsh$lbo4$6@i2pn2.org> <v1ms2o$1rkit$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 12 May 2024 09:42:36 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="49ecfdb23db14cf90d3eda01e5538458";
	logging-data="2750353"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/cxdjsUhnq3vfaH4OxQ4gG"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mGntI85RdZivPKrPEXqyuHGwARo=
Bytes: 2528

On 2024-05-11 04:27:03 +0000, olcott said:

> On 5/10/2024 10:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/10/24 11:35 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/10/2024 10:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/10/24 10:36 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> The entire body of expressions that are {true on the basis of their
>>>>> meaning} involves nothing more or less than stipulated relations between
>>>>> finite strings.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> You do know that what you are describing when applied to Formal Systems 
>>>> are the axioms of the system and the most primitively provable theorems.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> YES and there are axioms that comprise the verbal model of the
>>> actual world, thus Quine was wrong.
>> 
>> You don't understand what Quite was talking about,
>> 
> 
> I don't need to know anything about what he was talking about
> except that he disagreed with {true on the basis or meaning}.
> I don't care or need to know how he got to an incorrect answer.
> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> You don't seem to understand what "Formal Logic" actually means.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Ultimately it is anchored in stipulated relations between finite
>>> strings (AKA axioms) and expressions derived from applying truth
>>> preserving operations to these axioms.
>> 
>> Which you don't seem to understand what that means.
>> 
> 
> I understand this much more deeply than you do.

In and about formal logic there is no valid deep understanding. Only
a shallow understanding can be valid.

-- 
Mikko