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,comp.theory
Subject: Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic
 method
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 22:07:54 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v23ppq$15g3d$2@i2pn2.org>
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> <v1prtb$2jtsh$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1qjb1$2ouob$2@dont-email.me> <v1qnfv$2q0t7$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1qtnk$2rdui$2@dont-email.me> <v1qvku$qvg3$5@i2pn2.org>
 <v1r0fg$2rva6$1@dont-email.me> <v1r1ci$qvg3$6@i2pn2.org>
 <v1r276$2shtf$1@dont-email.me> <v1r932$qvg3$8@i2pn2.org>
 <v1rdr5$30gkq$1@dont-email.me> <v1rggn$qvg3$11@i2pn2.org>
 <v1rhff$31ege$1@dont-email.me> <v1rhqr$qvg2$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v1rj05$31n8h$2@dont-email.me> <v1rkt4$qvg2$4@i2pn2.org>
 <v1rlj7$324ln$2@dont-email.me> <v1rn85$qvg3$12@i2pn2.org>
 <v1s25g$38fdl$1@dont-email.me> <v1ssv3$qvg3$15@i2pn2.org>
 <v1ta68$3hc9t$1@dont-email.me> <v1ub9v$v37v$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v1ugp1$3tnr6$1@dont-email.me> <v1uie1$v37v$16@i2pn2.org>
 <v23p6n$17u5o$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 02:07:54 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1228909"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v23p6n$17u5o$1@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3762
Lines: 58

On 5/15/24 9:57 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/13/2024 9:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/13/24 10:03 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Remember, p defined as ~True(L, p) is BY DEFINITION a truth bearer, 
>>>> as True must return a Truth Value for all inputs, and ~ a truth 
>>>> valus is always the other truth value.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can a sequence of true preserving operations applied to expressions
>>> that are stipulated to be true derive p? 
> 
> On 5/15/2024 8:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>  > Which has NOTHING to do with the problem with True(L, p)
>  > being true when p is defined in L as ~True(L, p)
> 
> *YOU ALREADY AGREED THAT True(L, p) IS FALSE*

No, I said that because there is not path to p, it would need to be 
false, but that was based on the assumption that it could exist.

>>
>> No, so True(L, p) is false
>> and thus ~True(L, p) is true.
>>
>>>
>>> Can a sequence of true preserving operations applied to expressions
>>> that are stipulated to be true derive ~p?
>>
> 
> On 5/15/2024 7:52 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>  > Which has NOTHING to do with the above,
>  > as we never refered to False(L,p).
> 
> *YOU ALREADY AGREED THAT false(L, p) IS FALSE*

Right, but that has nothing to do with the problem with True(L, p) being 
false, because, since p in L is ~True(L, p) so that make True(L, ~false) 
which is True(L, true) false, which is incorrrect.

>>
>> No, so False(L, p) is false,
>>
> 
> Please try and keep these two thoughts together at the same time
> *I need to make another point that depends on both of them*
> 
> *YOU ALREADY AGREED THAT True(L, p) IS FALSE*
> *YOU ALREADY AGREED THAT false(L, p) IS FALSE*
> 
> 

right, by your definitions, True(L, p) is False, but that means that 
True(L, true) is false, so your system is broken.

That or ~false isn't true, so you system is broken in a different way.

Until you show the problem with that logic, you are just trying to serve 
Herring with Red Sauce.