Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: The Foundation of Linguistic truth is NOT stipulated relations
 between finite strings
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 18:26:12 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <vcaibb$351a8$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 02:26:19 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="a7cf10c8ead0e5cf1dc8243679bf3bcd";
	logging-data="3310920"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+zcz/FUJCzc2hJpuQf8y/rRaaByK88zaU="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:XeiFuTwjvg+iMDhdcSKmCKRM/8g=
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 240916-12, 9/16/2024), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Bytes: 3276

The amount of utter nonsense one might discover in USENET is typified by 
a thread titled "The Foundation of Linguistic truth is stipulated 
relations between finite strings". It's even doubtful there is an agreed 
upon meaning of "linguistic truth". Is it something to do with truths 
expressed in language, truths about language, or something else?

In fact "truth" isn't so easy to define either. Is it a time independent 
fact, something believed by a corespondent, or something else?

This is a trivial example of what happens when unqualified folks want to 
define things that have been considered for millennia by some of the 
finest human minds that we know of without resolution as yet. 
Occasionally one of the hoi polloi will solve one of the "big ones" and 
be elevated to the Parthenon of the Greats but don't hold your breath.

I remember reading a book by Karl von Frisch about bees and how they 
communicate the location of pollen sources through ritualized dances. 
(He received a Nobel Prize for his works.) Since any, and I repeat any, 
communication mechanism, involves a language we can conclude that only a 
shit-for-brain moron would look for a stipulation in the evolution of 
bees and their ancestors over geological time periods. Oh! And by the 
way, what language did bees and their ancestors use to make these 
stipulations? And what are the finite strings within dances that are 
stipulated? By whom? How?

And of course there is the communications of flowers to bees. First off, 
did you know that bees can see in color but that there color receptors 
are for different wave lengths than ours? Bee color vision is not our 
RGB; rather it is based on R G BP, where BP stands for bee purple, and 
is in the ultraviolet spectrum where we and most animals cannot detect 
it. It turns out that many flowers color pathways on their petal insides 
with lines that are paths that show a bee where the pollen is. (Just 
stay on the yellow brick road.) And that children is how flowers tell 
bees how to cross pollinate them while also shouting there's food there. 
Once again I ask what finite strings and how were they stipulated?
-- 
Jeff Barnett