Path: ...!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: This makes all Analytic(Olcott) truth computable
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2024 07:18:02 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 93
Message-ID: <v9sopq$2c67u$9@dont-email.me>
References: <v86olp$5km4$1@dont-email.me> <v8a4vf$uhll$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8aqh7$11ivs$1@dont-email.me> <v8cr4g$1gk19$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8dinp$1kii7$1@dont-email.me> <v8hv72$2mmsq$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8iisj$2qetj$1@dont-email.me> <v8kuhb$3d5q8$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8lc7p$3f6vr$2@dont-email.me> <v8naa8$3uo7s$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8nqo7$1n09$1@dont-email.me> <v8sm9o$1gk42$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8t2fl$1ilg6$2@dont-email.me> <v8v97m$2cofk$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8vusp$32fso$16@dont-email.me> <v91p95$3ppav$1@dont-email.me>
 <v92q4f$37e9$1@dont-email.me> <v94l1p$ldq7$1@dont-email.me>
 <v95c2j$p5rb$4@dont-email.me> <v95cke$p5rb$5@dont-email.me>
 <v977fo$gsru$1@dont-email.me> <v97goj$ielu$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9c93e$35sg6$1@dont-email.me> <v9d3k1$3ajip$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9ffpr$3s45o$1@dont-email.me> <v9fkd4$3se8c$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9kg66$tdvb$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2024 14:18:03 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="126bd7503554732891ee2e704ffb1b5d";
	logging-data="2496766"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+nMqKjA0ywXxmT1/lHTUfh"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:gzDud+SPsdON9emhGhBKMbWkQgk=
In-Reply-To: <v9kg66$tdvb$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5638

On 8/15/2024 4:01 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-08-13 12:43:16 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 8/13/2024 6:24 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-08-12 13:44:33 +0000, olcott said:
>>>
>>>> On 8/12/2024 1:11 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-08-10 10:52:03 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/10/2024 3:13 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-08-09 15:29:18 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 8/9/2024 10:19 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/9/2024 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-08-08 16:01:19 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It does seem that he is all hung up on not understanding
>>>>>>>>>>> how the synonymity of bachelor and unmarried works.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What in the synonymity, other than the synonymity itself,
>>>>>>>>>> would be relevant to Quine's topic?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He mentions it 98 times in his paper
>>>>>>>>> https://www.ditext.com/quine/quine.html
>>>>>>>>> I haven't looked at it in years.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't really give a rat's ass what he said all that matters
>>>>>>>>>>> to me is that I have defined expressions of language that are
>>>>>>>>>>> {true on the basis of their meaning expressed in language}
>>>>>>>>>>> so that I have analytic(Olcott) to make my other points.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That does not justify lying.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I never lie. Sometimes I make mistakes.
>>>>>>>>> It looks like you only want to dodge the actual
>>>>>>>>> topic with any distraction that you can find.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Expressions of language that are {true on the basis of
>>>>>>>>> their meaning expressed in this same language} defines
>>>>>>>>> analytic(Olcott) that overcomes any objections that
>>>>>>>>> anyone can possibly have about the analytic/synthetic
>>>>>>>>> distinction.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Expressions of language that are {true on the basis of
>>>>>>>> their meaning expressed in this same language} defines
>>>>>>>> analytic(Olcott) that overcomes any objections that
>>>>>>>> anyone can possibly have about the analytic/synthetic
>>>>>>>> distinction.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This makes all Analytic(Olcott) truth computable or the
>>>>>>>> expression is simply untrue because it lacks a truthmaker.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, it doesn't. An algrithm or at least a proof of existence of an
>>>>>>> algrithm makes something computable. You  can't compute if you con't
>>>>>>> know how. The truth makeker of computability is an algorithm.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is either a sequence of truth preserving operations from
>>>>>> the set of expressions stipulated to be true (AKA the verbal
>>>>>> model of the actual world) to x or x is simply untrue. This is
>>>>>> how the Liar Paradox is best refuted.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nice to see that you con't disagree.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When the idea that I presented is fully understood
>>>> it abolishes the whole notion of undecidability.
>>>
>>> If you can't prove atl least that you have an interesting idea
>>> nobody is going to stody it enough to understood.
>>
>> In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident proposition
>> is a proposition that is known to be true by understanding its meaning
>> without proof https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence
> 
> Self-evident propositions are uninteresting.
> 

It turns out that self-evident <is> the notion of {analytic truth}
and all of math and logic only deals in {analytic truth}.

Saying that self-evident is not interesting in logic and math
is like saying that numbers are not interesting in arithmetic
or food is not interesting in cooking or car parts are not
interesting in auto mechanics.

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