Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: How a True(X) predicate can be defined for the set of analytic
 knowledge
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 16:49:16 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 69
Message-ID: <vs9pss$27rl4$10@dont-email.me>
References: <vrfvbd$256og$2@dont-email.me> <vrh432$39r47$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrhami$3fbja$2@dont-email.me> <vrj9lu$1791p$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrjn82$1ilbe$2@dont-email.me> <vrmpc1$bnp3$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrmteo$cvat$6@dont-email.me> <vru000$33rof$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrug71$3gia2$6@dont-email.me> <vs0e9v$1cg8n$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs1fda$296sp$3@dont-email.me> <vs3b1d$3aoq$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs3iap$9lob$1@dont-email.me>
 <4def165aebe9e5753eeb66673c705370b247a7e3@i2pn2.org>
 <vs4utt$1c1ja$12@dont-email.me>
 <82344d9130ea950af2f0ff091a19265242b9608a@i2pn2.org>
 <vs6u85$39556$16@dont-email.me>
 <567c32439deb84febf4111f4bd0792a9538c1ba1@i2pn2.org>
 <vs902d$1fccq$4@dont-email.me>
 <6342c8b0b10d92685bfd44aac47e70a2615946e1@i2pn2.org>
 <vs9lsc$27rl4$2@dont-email.me>
 <cedc7a5de2528f966f35f4cee99c2e094dea8aec@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 22:49:17 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="25098614a506fec9a884b9c00c7b5ec8";
	logging-data="2354852"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19tcEcgUeLLgV0e9WV+Xb+1"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:iyGxnoY1Ej1nNrzgulv5sRnsTJw=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250329-4, 3/29/2025), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <cedc7a5de2528f966f35f4cee99c2e094dea8aec@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4560

On 3/29/2025 3:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 3/29/25 4:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 3/29/2025 3:14 PM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Sat, 29 Mar 2025 09:28:29 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 3/28/2025 4:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 3/28/25 3:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/28/2025 5:33 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>> Am Thu, 27 Mar 2025 20:44:28 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>
>>>>>>>> The set of all general knowledge that can be expressed in language
>>>>>>>> is a subset of all truth and only excludes unknown and unknowable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Exactly, it doesn't include the unknown truths and ought to be 
>>>>>>> called
>>>>>>> Known(X). It is also contradictory since it gives NO both for
>>>>>>> unknowns and their negation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> *The key defining aspect of knowledge is that it is true*
>>> One of a sentence and its negation must be true.
>>>
>>>>> Which has been the eternal debate, how can we tell if some "fact" we
>>>>> have discovered is true.
>>>>> In FORMAL LOGIC (which you just dismissed) truth has a solid
>>>>> definition, and we can formally PROVE some statements to be true and
>>>>> formally PROVE that some statements are just false, and thus such
>>>>> statements CAN become truely established knowledge. There may also be
>>>>> some statements we have not established yet (and maybe can never
>>>>> establish in the system) which will remain as "unknown". That doesn't
>>>>> mean the statements might not be true or false, just that we don't 
>>>>> know
>>>>> the answer yet.
>>>>>
>>>> This can be incoherent unless complete semantics is fully integrated
>>>> into the formal system. There is no way that applying ONLY truth
>>>> preserving operations to basic facts can possibly result in
>>>> undecidability.
>>>> Only a valid concrete counter-example counts as a rebuttal, everything
>>>> else counts as some sort of deception.
>>
>>> See Gödel 19whenever.
>>>
>>
>> Does not meet my spec. All math proofs make sure to
>> always ignore semantics. Not all inference steps
>> are truth preserving operations.
>>
>> X <is a necessary consequence> of Y.
> 
> No, you just don't understand what that means, but are too stupid to 
> understand that,
> 

It is not that I am stupid. It has always been
that you are dishonest. If you were not dishonest
you could and would point out specific mistakes.
Since I made no mistakes all that you have left
is calling me stupid.

>>
>>> [LLM bullshit]
>>
>>
>>
> 


-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer