Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: I just fixed the loophole of the Gettier cases with mt new notion of {linguistic truth}
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 12:11:43 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 94
Message-ID: <vbme4f$2bu08$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vb0lkb$1c1kh$2@dont-email.me> <vb1hdi$1feme$1@dont-email.me> <vb4erg$2s0uc$1@dont-email.me> <vb6hv7$39dvq$1@dont-email.me> <vb71fn$3b4ub$5@dont-email.me> <vbbm40$8k2u$1@dont-email.me> <vbc9t5$bdtb$1@dont-email.me> <vbem5f$pont$1@dont-email.me> <vbeod1$punj$1@dont-email.me> <vbh1n7$19hd9$1@dont-email.me> <vbhlv7$1c7u5$10@dont-email.me> <vbjq33$1shau$1@dont-email.me> <vbk8j9$1u1js$4@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2024 11:11:44 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e9f5808af9c260f72bd2daf060bda873";
	logging-data="2488328"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18/P+Es/lm2eBmINNLYk2Xq"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:KPtAQxqIBZhNccCws0cZhxECTVA=
Bytes: 4774

On 2024-09-08 13:24:56 +0000, olcott said:

> On 9/8/2024 4:17 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-09-07 13:54:47 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 9/7/2024 3:09 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-09-06 11:17:53 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 9/6/2024 5:39 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-09-05 12:58:13 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 9/5/2024 2:20 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-09-03 13:03:51 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 9/3/2024 3:39 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-09-02 13:33:36 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/1/2024 5:58 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-09-01 03:04:43 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *I just fixed the loophole of the Gettier cases*
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge is a justified true belief such that the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> justification is sufficient reason to accept the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> truth of the belief.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettier_problem
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> The remaining loophole is the lack of an exact definition
>>>>>>>>>>>> of "sufficient reason".
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Ultimately sufficient reason is correct semantic
>>>>>>>>>>> entailment from verified facts.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The problem is "verified" facts: what is sufficient verification?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Stipulated to be true is always sufficient:
>>>>>>>>> Cats are a know if animal.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Insufficient for practtical purposes. You may stipulate that
>>>>>>>> nitroglycerine is not poison but it can kill you anyway.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The point is that <is> the way the linguistic truth actually works.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I've never seen or heard any linguist say so. The term has been used
>>>>>> by DG Schwartz in 1985.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is similar to the analytic/synthetic distinction
>>>>> yet unequivocal.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I am redefining the term analytic truth to have a
>>>>> similar definition and calling this {linguistic truth}.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Expression of X of language L is proved true entirely
>>>>> based on its meaning expressed in language L. Empirical
>>>>> truth requires sense data from the sense organs to be
>>>>> verified as true.
>>>> 
>>>> Seems that you don't know about any linguist that has used the term.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I INVENTED A BRAND NEW FREAKING TERM
>> 
>> Is it really a new term if someone else (DG Schwartz) has used it before?
>> Is it a term for a new concept or a new term for an old concept?
>> 
> 
> A stipulative definition is a type of definition in which a
> new or currently existing term is given a new specific meaning
> for the purposes of argument or discussion in a given context.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stipulative_definition

A stipulative definition is a temporary hack when it is not clear
what the definition should be or when a need for a good definitino
is not expected. A stipluative definition is not valid outside the
opus or discussion where it is presented.

> *LINGUISTIC TRUTH IS STIPULATED TO MEAN*
> When expression X of language L is connected to its semantic
> meaning M by a sequence of truth preserving operations P in
> language L then and only then is X true in L. That was the
> True(L,X) that Tarski "proved" cannot possibly exist.
> Copyright 2024 Olcott

With that definition Tarski proved that linguistic truth is not
identifiable.

-- 
Mikko