Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v2t9ne$2vna0$5@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
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,comp.theory Subject: Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 13:13:02 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 409 Message-ID: <v2t9ne$2vna0$5@dont-email.me> References: <v1mljr$1q5ee$4@dont-email.me> <v2ae6h$1ct7p$5@i2pn2.org> <v2am4p$2sdl6$1@dont-email.me> <v2amkc$1ct7p$13@i2pn2.org> <v2aobj$2sdma$5@dont-email.me> <v2ap1t$1ct7o$9@i2pn2.org> <v2b0jd$2u8oi$1@dont-email.me> <v2b17b$1ct7p$16@i2pn2.org> <v2b1dr$2u8oi$3@dont-email.me> <v2b9mo$1ecj9$2@i2pn2.org> <v2bb6d$308qd$2@dont-email.me> <v2bc5o$1ecj9$3@i2pn2.org> <v2bsog$36vvc$1@dont-email.me> <v2cpb1$1g2n8$1@i2pn2.org> <v2cvj6$3ddo5$1@dont-email.me> <v2d0qp$3dlkm$1@dont-email.me> <v2d1io$3dplm$1@dont-email.me> <v2evl5$3snmj$1@dont-email.me> <v2g2dp$3ugq$1@dont-email.me> <v2hkkl$ggq9$1@dont-email.me> <v2ibhe$ksut$1@dont-email.me> <v2k8go$1363g$1@dont-email.me> <v2l4hr$188bi$3@dont-email.me> <v2l87m$19619$1@dont-email.me> <v2lies$1b4kp$1@dont-email.me> <v2ltgl$1nrfv$2@i2pn2.org> <v2m0m5$1dcof$2@dont-email.me> <v2m4lg$1qo0t$1@i2pn2.org> <v2mtkj$1ln2l$1@dont-email.me> <v2ngi3$1or9h$8@dont-email.me> <v2pig4$28a91$1@dont-email.me> <v2qp30$2f6v4$1@dont-email.me> <v2s5td$2psu4$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 20:13:03 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="010db72b80f31f696ef17c51994f71bb"; logging-data="3136832"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+KmYpnIYz65r2fGRDra7xO" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:N35sK2Q4Sfjs4UblgnRFfa1Bn4U= In-Reply-To: <v2s5td$2psu4$1@dont-email.me> Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 20713 On 5/25/2024 3:01 AM, Mikko wrote: > On 2024-05-24 19:16:47 +0000, olcott said: > >> On 5/24/2024 3:18 AM, Mikko wrote: >>> On 2024-05-23 13:32:51 +0000, olcott said: >>> >>>> On 5/23/2024 3:09 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>> On 2024-05-23 01:03:44 +0000, Richard Damon said: >>>>> >>>>>> On 5/22/24 7:55 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/22/2024 6:01 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>> On 5/22/24 3:52 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 5/22/2024 11:58 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-22 15:55:39 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 5/22/2024 2:57 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-21 14:36:29 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/21/2024 3:05 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-20 17:48:40 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/20/2024 2:55 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-19 14:15:51 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2024 9:03 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-19 13:41:56 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2024 6:55 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 11:47 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 6:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 6:47 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 5:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 4:00 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 2:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 3:46 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 12:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 1:26 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 11:56 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 12:48 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 9:32 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 10:15 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 7:43 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, your system contradicts itself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have never shown this. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The most you have shown is a lack of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Truth Teller Paradox. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, I have, but you don't understand the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proof, it seems because you don't know >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what a "Truth Predicate" has been >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defined to be. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My True(L,x) predicate is defined to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return true or false for every >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finite string x on the basis of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> existence of a sequence of truth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preserving operations that derive x from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And thus, When True(L, p) established a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sequence of truth preserving operations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eminationg from ~True(L, p) by returning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> false, it contradicts itself. The problem >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is that True, in making an answer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> false, has asserted that such a sequence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exists. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/13/2024 9:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > On 5/13/24 10:03 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> On 5/13/2024 7:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> Remember, p defined as ~True(L, p) ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Can a sequence of true preserving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operations applied >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> to expressions that are stipulated to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be true derive p? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > No, so True(L, p) is false >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Can a sequence of true preserving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operations applied >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> to expressions that are stipulated to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be true derive ~p? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > No, so False(L, p) is false, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *To help you concentrate I repeated this* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Liar Paradox and your formalized Liar >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paradox both >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contradict themselves that is why they must >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be screened >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out as type mismatch error >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-truth-bearers *BEFORE THAT OCCURS* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And the Truth Predicate isn't allowed to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "filter" out expressions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT IT DOESN'T >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WE HAVE BEEN OVER THIS AGAIN AND AGAIN >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE FORMAL SYSTEM USES THE TRUE AND FALSE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PREDICATE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TO FILTER OUT TYPE MISMATCH ERROR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The first thing that the formal system does >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> arbitrary finite string input is see if it is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a Truth-bearer: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x)) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, we can ask True(L, x) for any expression x >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and get an answer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The system is designed so you can ask this, yet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-truth-bearers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are rejected before True(L, x) is allowed to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> called. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My True(L,x) predicate is defined to return true >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or false for every >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finite string x on the basis of the existence of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a sequence of truth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preserving operations that derive x from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A set of finite string semantic meanings that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> form an accurate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> verbal model of the general knowledge of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actual world that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> form a finite set of finite strings that are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stipulated to have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the semantic value of Boolean true. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is computable* Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x)) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is computable* Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x)) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is computable* Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x)) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is computable* Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x)) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is computable* Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x)) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, for a statement x to be false, it says that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there must be a sequence of truth perserving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operations that derive ~x from, right? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes we must build from mutual agreement, good. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========