Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: How a True(X) predicate can be defined for the set of analytic knowledge
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 18:32:23 +0200
Organization: -
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <vrmomn$b31e$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vrfvbd$256og$2@dont-email.me> <3cf0a34d9382774fd8275a118d1af8b0841c8eb1@i2pn2.org> <vrhacd$3fbja$1@dont-email.me> <vrj8nr$16c78$1@dont-email.me> <vrjmtr$1ilbe$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 17:32:23 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ea947477a15f9f49dccac55b369c1b1d";
	logging-data="363566"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Ld4kEMyL2vKVoQHb/eCxA"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Huq34kFp6PFrMpTyi+uSslo52jo=

On 2025-03-21 12:43:39 +0000, olcott said:

> On 3/21/2025 3:41 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2025-03-20 14:57:16 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 3/20/2025 6:00 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 3/19/25 10:42 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> It is stipulated that analytic knowledge is limited to the
>>>>> set of knowledge that can be expressed using language or
>>>>> derived by applying truth preserving operations to elements
>>>>> of this set.
>>>> 
>>>> Which just means that you have stipulated yourself out of all classical 
>>>> logic, since Truth is different than Knowledge. In a good logic system, 
>>>> Knowledge will be a subset of Truth, but you have defined that in your 
>>>> system, Truth is a subset of Knowledge, so you have it backwards.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> True(X) always returns TRUE for every element in the set
>>> of general knowledge that can be expressed using language.
>>> It never gets confused by paradoxes.
>> 
>> Not useful unless it returns TRUE for no X that contradicts anything
>> that can be inferred from the set of general knowledge.
>> 
> 
> I can't parse that.
>  > (a) Not useful unless
>  > (b) it returns TRUE for
>  > (c) no X that contradicts anything
>  > (d) that can be inferred from the set of general knowledge.

Can you parse "It might be useful if it would return something else that
TRUE for some X, especially if that X contradicts something that can be
inferred from the set of general knowledge." ?

-- 
Mikko